Impact of the new joint arrangements and … Mining and metals Applying IFRS — impact of new joint arrangements and consolidation standards b) Rights held by others The operator

12011 Europe, Middle East, India and Africa tax policy outlook

Applying IFRS

Impact of the new joint arrangements and consolidation standardsAugust 2011

Final joint arrangements and consolidation standards

Mining & Metals

22

What you need to know• IFRS 10 hasanewdefinitionofcontrolandhas

additional requirements that could impact any previous assessmentofcontrolandjointcontrol

• IFRS 11describestheaccountingforarrangementsinwhich there is joint control; proportionate consolidation isnotpermittedforjointventures(asnewlydefined)

• IFRS 12requiresnewandexpandeddisclosuresforjointarrangements,aswellasforsubsidiaries,associates and structured entities, which will impact processes and systems

IntroductionWhat’s happened?The International Accounting Standards Board(IASB)recentlyissued a new standard — IFRS 11 Joint Arrangements. They also issued two other new standards — IFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements and IFRS 12 Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities. Thesenewstandardsareeffectiveforannualperiodsbeginningonorafter1January2013,andmustbeappliedretrospectively.

Inthispublication,weconcentrateonsomeoftheimplicationsofIFRS10andIFRS11thatarespecifictotheminingandmetalssector.Foramorecompletesummaryofthesenewstandardsandtheimpactsonyourbusiness,refertoourpublication,IFRS Developments — IASB issues three new standards: Consolidated Financial Statements, Joint Arrangements, and Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities,Issue1(May2011)and our publication IFRS Practical matters — What do the new consolidation, joint arrangements and disclosures accounting standards mean to you? (May2011).Thesepublicationsareavailableatwww.ey.com/IFRS.

What’s the impact?• Aconfusingpartofthechangesistheuseofterminologythatis

common in practice versus that within the new accounting standards.Thewayinwhichanumberofcommontermsarenowbeingdefinedmaynotbeobvious

• Someproportionatelyconsolidatedjointlycontrolledentities(JCEs)maynowbeclassifiedasjointventuresandwillhavetobeaccountedforusingtheequitymethod

• Conversely,someequityaccountedJCEsmaynowbeclassifiedas joint operations and an entity will need to recognise its assets, liabilities,revenuesandexpensesand/oritsrelativesharethereof

• Thesechangeswillimpactthepresentationoffinancialstatements, and in some instances, there may also be measurementdifferenceswhichwillaffectprofitorlossand/ornet assets

• Accountingandconsolidationsystems,businessprocessesandcontrols may need to be updated, and there may be impacts on otherareasofthebusiness,suchascovenants,remunerationstructures, etc.

Thesearchforgrowthisleadingminingandmetalsentitiestoincreasetheirappetiteforrisk.Thisismanifestingitselfbybringing in partners to source new projects, improve utilisationofexpensiveinfrastructure,helpmanagetechnicalorpoliticalrisk,orcomplywithlocalregulations.Tothisend,joint arrangements have always been, and continue to be, a common structure in the mining and metals sector. The majorityofminingandmetalsentitiesarepartytoatleastonejointarrangement.Infact,inthefive-monthperiodendingMay2011,49%ofallM&Atransactionswithinthesector involved projects with multiple parties.

However,forsomejointarrangements,theaccountingisabouttochangesignificantly,andnotallarrangementscommonly described as ‘joint ventures’ or ‘jointarrangements’willcontinuetobeaccountedforas inthepast,socarefulassessmentwillberequired.

3Mining and metalsApplyingIFRS—impactofnewjointarrangementsandconsolidationstandards

Contents1. Overview

2. Clarifying the confusion ... new terms, new concepts

3. Newdefinitionofjointcontrol

3.1 Determinationofcontrol—impactofchangestotheconsolidationstandard

3.2 Whatarerelevantactivities?

3.3 ‘Unanimousconsent’—whatdoesthismean?

4. Differences between joint ventures and joint operations

4.1 Jointoperations

4.2 Jointventures

4.3 Clarifyingtheaccounting…whatisproportionateconsolidation?

4.4 Theimpactofachangeinclassificationupontransition

5. Gross vs net — what should I recognise?

5.1 Operatorsofjointarrangements

5.2 Non-operators

5.3 Jointandseveralliability

6. So what if I don’t have joint control or control?

6.1 Identifyingandassessingtherightsandobligations

7. New disclosures … more information; impact on processes and systems

8. Final thoughts

04

04

05

05

07

08

09

09

09

10

10

11

11

11

12

12

12

13

13

4 Mining and metalsApplyingIFRS—impactofnewjointarrangementsandconsolidationstandards

Many read the headline “Proportionate consolidation is no longer permitted for joint ventures” and interpret this to mean that all interests in joint arrangements must now be accounted for using the equity method — this is not correct.

1. OverviewIFRS11prescribestheaccountingfora‘jointarrangement’,whichisdefinedasacontractualarrangementoverwhichtwoormoreparties have joint control, as illustrated in diagram 1. It is important thatentitiesunderstandtheimplicationsandinterplayofboth IFRS10andIFRS11toensuretheproperassessmentof,andaccountingfor,currentandfuturejointarrangements.

2. Clarifying the confusion ... new terms, new conceptsIFRS11hastakensomecommonlyusedtermsandgiventhemdifferentmeanings.Thisisalreadycausingconsiderableconfusion.Forexample,whatmanyinthesectorwouldrefertoasjointventuresarenowcollectivelyreferredtoas‘jointarrangements’;theterm‘jointventure’isnownarrowlydefinedinIFRS11.

Likewise,theterm‘proportionateconsolidation’hasbeen(andstillis)usedtocasuallydescribeallmethodsofjointventureaccountingwhereanentityrecognisesitsshareoftheassetsandliabilitiesofthejointventure.However,fromanaccountingperspective,thistermmeanssomethingquitespecificandisnotreflectiveoftheaccounting treatment that currently applies to jointly controlled assets(JCAs)andjointlycontrolledoperations(JCOs)under IAS31,andthatwhichwillapplytojointoperationsunderIFRS11.

DuetothechangeindefinitionsandthemisunderstandingofwhatproportionateconsolidationandJCA/JCOaccountingis,itmaynotbeclearwhattheimpactofthisnewstandardis.

*The reference to “a group of the parties” refers to a situation in which there is joint control between two or more parties, but other parties to the joint arrangement are passive investors (i.e., there are other parties in the arrangement who do not have joint control). While such investors are technically within the scope of IFRS 11, they account for their investment in accordance with the relevant standards.

Diagram 1

Is it a joint arrangement?

Outside the scopeofIFRS11

(notajointarrangement)

Jointarrangement

No

No

Yes

Yes

Dothedecisionsabouttherelevantactivities require the unanimous consentofallthepartiesthat

collectivelycontrolthearrangement?

Doesthecontractualarrangementgivealltheparties(oragroupofthe

parties)*controlofthejointarrangementcollectively?

Althoughthetitleofthestandardhaschanged(i.e.,from ‘jointventures’to‘jointarrangements’)andmightindicateotherwise,IFRS11doesnotbroadenthescopeofthestandardwhencomparedwithIAS31.Itstillonlyappliestojointarrangements where there is joint control. However, the changes introducedbyIFRS10andIFRS11mayleadtoadifferentconclusion as to which arrangements are considered to be under joint control and those which are not.


3. New definition of joint controlJointcontrolisdefinedas“…thecontractuallyagreedsharingofcontrolofanarrangementwhichexistsonlywhenthedecisionsabouttherelevantactivitiesrequiretheunanimousconsentofthepartiessharingcontrol”.IFRS11describesthekeyaspectsofjointcontrolasfollows:

• Contractually agreed — contractual arrangements are usually, but notalways,written,andsetoutthetermsofthearrangements

• Control and relevant activities — IFRS 10 describes how to assess whetherapartyhascontrol,andhowtoidentifytherelevantactivities

• Unanimous consent — exists when the parties to an arrangement have collective control over the arrangement, but no single party has control

Thenewrequirementswithinthisdefinitionrelatetotheassessmentofcontrolandrelevantactivities.Unanimousconsentisnotnew,however,additionalguidancehasbeenaddedtoclarifywhen it exists.

3.1 Determination of control — impact of changes to the consolidation standard

Itiscommonintheminingandmetalssectorforoneofthepartiestobeappointedastheoperatorormanagerofthejointarrangement(‘theoperator’),towhomsomeofthedecision-makingpowersmightbedelegated.Currently,manyconsiderthattheoperator does not control a joint arrangement, but simply carries outthedecisionsofthepartiesunderthejointventure(oroperating)agreement(JOA),i.e.,actsasanagent.Underthenewstandards, it may be concluded that the operator actually controls thearrangement.Thisisbecausewhendecision-makingrightshavebeen delegated, IFRS 10 now provides new requirements on how to assess whether an entity is acting as principal or agent, which is then used to determine which party has control.

Carefulconsiderationwillberequiredtoassesswhetheranoperatoractsasaprincipal(and,therefore,maypotentiallycontrolthearrangement)orasanagent.Inthelattersituation,theoperatoronlyrecognisesitsinterestsinthejointarrangement(theaccountingforwhichwilldependuponwhetheritisajointoperationorjointventure)anditsoperator/managementfee.

Thefactorstobeconsideredinmakingthisassessmentinclude:

• Scopeoftheoperator’sdecision-makingauthority

• Rightsheldbyothers(e.g.,protective,removalrights)

• Exposuretovariabilityinreturnsthroughtheremunerationof the operator

• Variablereturnsheldthroughotherinterests(e.g.,directinvestmentsbytheoperatorinthejointarrangement)

Below,weconsidereachofthesefactors.Itisimportanttonotethat assessing whether an entity is a principal or an agent will requireconsiderationofallfactorscollectively.

a) Scope of decision-making authority

Thescopeofanoperator’sdecision-makingauthorityisevaluatedbyconsideringtherangeofactivitiesitispermittedtodirectandthediscretionithaswhenmakingdecisionsaboutthoseactivities.

Anoperatordoesnotusuallyhavediscretiontomakechangeseither to the activities it is permitted to direct, or to the decisions it ispermittedtomakewithoutthepriorapprovalofthenon-operatorparties. However, consideration must be given as to how broad or narrowitsdiscretioniswithinthedecision-makingrightsthathavebeen delegated. In addition, consideration must also be given to the levelofinvolvementtheoperatorhadindeterminingthescopeofits authority. That involvement may indicate the operator had the opportunity and incentive to obtain the ability to direct the relevant activities, which could indicate the operator is acting as a principal.

Forexample,iftheoperatorwasthemainpartyinvolvedinsettingup the joint arrangement and also the primary party in determining whatdecision-makingrightsitwouldhaveasoperator,andthesewere designed to be quite broad, it may indicate that the operator is a principal.


b) Rights held by others

The operator also has to consider whether other parties hold rights thatwouldaffectanypowersdelegatedtoit.Forexample,aremovalrightheldbynon-operatorpartiesmightaffecttheoperator’sdecision-makingability.

Ifanon-operatorpartyholdsaremovalright(thatis,asinglenon-operatorpartycandecidetoremovetheoperator),andthatrightissubstantive(e.g.,withoutcause),thentheoperatorwouldbeanagent.However,iftheexerciseofthatremovalrightrequiresagreementbymorethanoneofthenon-operatorparties,thenitisnot conclusive as to whether the operator is a principal or an agent. The more parties that would have to agree to remove the operator (andthemorerestrictivetheconditionsforremoval),thelessimportantthatremovalrightiswhendeterminingiftheoperatorisa principal.

c) Remuneration of the operator

IFRS 10 describes how to evaluate remuneration arrangements (includingillustrativeexamples),butdoesnotincludeanybrightlineindicators.Thefeereceivedbytheoperatormustbecommensuratewiththeservicesprovided,andincludeonly‘market’terms,fortheoperator to be considered an agent. However, the magnitude and variabilityofremunerationcouldstillresultintheoperatorbeingaprincipal,evenifthesetwocriteriaaremet.Thegreaterthefee,andexposuretovariability,relativetotheexpectedreturnsfromthe joint arrangement, the more indicative it is that the operator is a principal.

However,thepresenceofavariablereturndoesnotautomaticallyleadtoaconclusionofanoperatorbeingaprincipal.Anoperatorcanreceiveavariablefeeforprovidingservicesandstillbeconsideredanagent,soitmaybedifficulttodistinguishanagencyrelationshipfromthatofaprincipal.Forexample,anoperatorneedstoevaluatewhetheritsexposuretovariabilityofreturnsisdifferentfromthatoftheotherinvestors,andifso,whetherthismightinfluenceitsactions.

d) Variable returns held through other interests

Whenanoperatorholdsotherinterestsinajointarrangementoverandabovetheremunerationitreceivesforbeingtheoperator,thismay indicate it is not an agent. It is common in the mining and metalssectorforoperatorstoalsohaveadirectfinancialinterestinthejointarrangement.Byvirtueofholdingthisotherinterest,thestandardindicatesthatdecisionsmadebytheoperatormaydifferfromthoseitwouldhavemadeifitdidnotholdtheotherinterest.

Inevaluatingitsexposuretovariabilityofreturnsfromotherinterests,IFRS10requiresanoperatortoconsiderthefollowing:

(a)Thegreaterthemagnitudeof,andvariabilityassociatedwith,itseconomicinterests,consideringitsremuneration(asdiscussedabove)andotherinterests,inaggregate,themorelikelytheoperator is a principal

(b)Themorethattheoperator’sexposuretovariabilityofreturnsdiffersfromthatoftheotherinvestors,themorelikelythatthismightinfluenceitsactions,andthemorelikelythattheoperatoris a principal

Whilethisevaluationismadeprimarilyonthebasisofreturnsexpectedfromtheactivitiesofthejointarrangement,theoperatormustalsoconsideritsmaximumexposuretovariabilityofreturns,takingintoaccountremunerationandotherintereststhatitholds.


WhilecertainaspectsofjointcontrolareunchangedfromIAS31,care is required in determining whether the arrangement is still considered to be under joint control under IFRS 11. This is becausethereferenceto‘control’inthenewdefinitionof‘jointcontrol’isbasedonthenewdefinitionofcontrolinIFRS10.

UnderIAS31,manyconsideranoperatortobeactingasanagent, a view which is based on the way these roles are generally perceived,andreferredto,inthesector.However,entitieswillneedtocarefullyassessthenatureoftheirarrangementsanddetermine whether this conclusion remains true, based on how guidance in IFRS 10 helps to delineate principal versus agent.

How we see it

3.2 What are relevant activities?

Relevantactivitiesarethoseactivitiesofthearrangementwhichsignificantlyaffectthereturnsofthearrangement.Determiningwhattheseareforeacharrangementwillrequiresignificantjudgement.

Examplesofdecisionsaboutrelevantactivitiesinclude,butarenotlimitedto:

• Establishingoperatingandcapitaldecisionsofthearrangementincludingbudgets—forexample,foraminingandmetalsarrangement,approvingthecapitalexpenditureprogrammeforthe next year

And

• Appointingandremuneratingajointarrangement’skeymanagement personnel or service providers and terminating theirservicesoremployment—forexample,appointingacontractminertoundertakeminingoperations.

3.1.1 So what happens if you have control?

Theimpactofcontrollinganarrangementdependsonanumber offactors.

Themostimportantofthesewillbeidentifyingandassessing the rights and obligations the contractual arrangement provides the parties, as well as assessing whether the arrangement is a business.

a) Identifying and assessing rights and obligations

• Rights to the underlying assets and obligations for the underlying liabilities of the arrangement:Whiletheprincipal/agentassessment may lead to a conclusion that an operator has control,thefactthateachpartyhasspecificrightsto,andobligationsfor,theunderlyingassetsandliabilities,meanstheoperator does not control anything over and above its own direct interestinthoseassetsandliabilities.Therefore,itstillonlyrecognises its interest in those assets and liabilities. This accountingappliesregardlessofwhetherthearrangementisinaseparate vehicle1 or not, as the contractual terms are the primary determinantoftheaccounting.

• Rights to the net assets of the arrangement: This only occurs where, at a minimum, the arrangement is structured through a separate vehicle. In this instance, the operator consolidates the entityandrecognisesanynon-controllinginterest.

b) Is the arrangement a business?

Theotherrelevantfactoriswhetherthearrangementisabusiness,as this determines whether, upon obtaining control, the requirementsofIFRS3Business Combinationsapply.AlloftherequirementsofIFRS3applyiftheentitycontrolsthearrangementwhere it has rights to the net assets, and that arrangement is a business.However,ifthatcontrolledarrangementisnotabusiness,theentityidentifiesandrecognisestheindividualassetsacquiredandliabilitiesassumedbasedontheirrelativefairvalue,anddoesnot recognise any goodwill.

For arrangements where there are rights to the assets and obligationsfortheliabilities,itisnotclearwhetherIFRS3appliesandwhethergoodwillcouldberecognised(evenifoutsidethescopeofIFRS3).ThisissuehasrecentlybeenreferredtotheIFRSInterpretationsCommittee.Wediscussthisfurtherinsection4.1.1ofthispublication.

1IFRS11definesaseparatevehicleas“Aseparatelyidentifiablefinancialstructure,includingseparatelegal

entitiesorentitiesrecognisedbystatute,regardlessofwhetherthoseentitieshavealegalpersonality.”


2IFRS10definesprotectiverightsasthosedesignedtoprotecttheinterestsofthepartyholdingthose

rights without giving that party power over the entity to which those rights relate and that relate to fundamentalchangestotheactivitiesofaninvesteeorapplyinexceptionalcircumstances.

3.3 ‘Unanimous consent’ — what does this mean?

Whiletherequirementforunanimousconsentisnotnew,IFRS11doesprovideadditionalguidancethatclarifieswhenunanimousconsentexists,andoverwhichactivitiesitisrequired.Unanimousconsentmeansthatanypartywithjointcontrolcanpreventanyoftheotherparties,oragroupofparties,frommakingunilateraldecisions about relevant activities.

Sometimesthedecision-makingprocessagreedbetweenthepartiesintheJOAimplicitlyleadstojointcontrol.Forexample,ina50%/50%jointarrangement,theJOAspecifiesthatatleast51%ofthevotingrightsarerequiredtomakeadecisionaboutrelevantactivities.Therefore,thepartieshaveimplicitlyagreedthattheyhave joint control because decisions about relevant activities cannot be made without both parties agreeing.

However,inotherinstances,theJOAmayrequireaminimumproportionofthevotingrightstomakedecisions.Unlessitisobvioushowthisminimummustbeachieved,ortheJOAspecifieswhich parties are required to unanimously agree, then there would not be joint control.

IFRS11providessomeexamplestoillustratethispoint:

3.3.1 Unanimous consent over which decisions?

Tohavejointcontrol,unanimousconsentisrequiredfordecisionsabout the relevant activities.Ifunanimousconsentrelatesonlytodecisions that give a party protective rights2, or over administrative matters only, and not to decisions about the relevant activities, that party does not have joint control. For example, a veto right that preventsajointarrangementfromceasingbusinesswouldlikelybea protective right, and not a right that creates joint control. However,ifthevetorightsrelatetorelevantactivitiessuchasapproving the capital expenditure budget, then those rights may create joint control.

Forsomeminingandmetalsoperations,decision-makingmayvaryoverthelifeoftheprojecte.g.,duringtheexplorationandevaluationphase,thedevelopmentphaseand/ortheproductionphase. For example, during the exploration and evaluation phase, onepartytothearrangementmaybeabletomakeallofthedecisions, whereas once the project enters the development phase, decisions may then require unanimous consent. To determine whether the arrangement is jointly controlled, it will be necessary todecidewhichoftheseactivitiese.g.,explorationandevaluationand/ordevelopment,mostsignificantlyaffectthereturnsofthearrangement. This is because the arrangement will only be consideredtobeajointarrangementifthoseactivitieswhichrequireunanimousconsentaretheonesthatmostsignificantlyaffectthereturns.Thiswillbeahighlyjudgementalassessment.

Thenew(andclarified)requirementsforassessingwhetherunanimous consent is required over relevant activities may mean some arrangements that have previously been assessed as havingjointcontrolnownolongersatisfytherequirements,andhence, will not be considered joint arrangements.

How we see it

Example A Example B Example CRequirement 75%votetodirect

relevant activities75%votetodirectrelevant activities

Majorityvotetodirect relevant

activitiesParty A 50% 50% 35%Party B 30% 25% 35%Party C 20% 25% n/aOther n/a n/a WidelydispersedConclusion EventhoughA

canblockanydecision, A does not control the arrangement,

because A needs B to agree —

thereforejoint control between

A and B.

No control (or joint control)

because multiple combinations

could be used to reach agreement

No control (or joint control)

because multiple combinations could be used

to reach agreement


It is important to note that not all current JCEs will automatically be considered

joint ventures under IFRS 11 — detailed analysis will be required.

4. Differences between joint ventures and joint operationsOnce it has been established there is joint control, joint arrangementsarethenclassifiedaseither:jointoperationsor joint ventures.

4.1 Joint operations

JCAs and JCOs:Thesearenowcalled‘jointoperations’under IFRS11.TheaccountingforthesearrangementswillgenerallybethesameasunderIAS31.Thatis,thejointoperator(nowdefinedasapartythathasjointcontrolofajointoperationandnottobeconfusedwiththeoperatorofthejointarrangement)continuestorecogniseitsassets,liabilities,revenuesandexpenses,and/oritsrelativesharesthereof,ifany.Asmentionedpreviously,peopleoftenincorrectlyrefertothisaccountingasproportionateconsolidation,wheninfactitisnot.Weconsiderthisissuelaterinthis publication.

JCEs — rights to assets and obligations for liabilities:ItisalsopossiblethatcurrentJCEsmaybeclassifiedasjointoperationsunderIFRS11.Regardlessoflegalstructure,wherethepartyhasrightstotheassetsandobligationsfortheliabilitiesoftheunderlyingjointarrangement,itwillbeclassifiedandaccountedforasajointoperation,andaccountedforasabove.

4.1.1 Does IFRS 3 apply to joint operations?

OneareawherethereiscurrentlyalackofclaritywhenaccountingforacquisitionsofinterestsinJCAsandJCOs,andunlessresolved,willpresentsimilarissuesforjointoperations,iswhethertheprinciplesofIFRS3apply.

• OneviewisthatIFRS3doesnotapply.ThisisonthebasisthateventhoughtheactivityoftheJCA/JCOorjointoperationmayconstituteabusiness,theventurer/jointoperatordoesnotcontrol that business — they only have joint control.

• TheotherviewisthatIFRS3isapplicable.Thisisonthebasisthattheunitofaccountforassessingcontrolistheventurer’s/jointoperator’sowninterestinthebusinessoftheJCA/JCOorjoint operation, and the entity controls this.

Thislackofclarityhasleadtodiversityinpractice.ThisissuewasrecentlyreferredtotheIFRSInterpretationsCommittee(theCommittee)andconsideredattheirJuly2011meeting(agendapaper9).Atthedateofthispublication,thisissuewasstillbeingconsideredbytheCommittee.

4.2 Joint ventures

JCEs — rights to net assets:Inthisinstance,thearrangementwillbeclassifiedandaccountedforasajointventure.Thejointventurer(nowdefinedasapartywhohasjointcontrolofajointventure)willthenberequiredtoapplyequityaccountingtoaccountforthisinvestment. This is because proportionate consolidation is no longerpermittedforjointventures.

Join

t Arr

ange

men

tsJo

int V

entu

res

Joint ventures

Equitymethod

Parties with joint control have rightstothenetassetsofthe

arrangement

Recognise its assets, liabilities, revenue, and expenses,and/orits

relativesharesthereof

Jointly controlled assets

Equitymethodorproportionate consolidation

Jointly controlled entities

IAS

31IF

RS

11

Jointly controlled operations

Recognise its assets, liabilities, expenses, and

itsshareofincome

Joint operations

Recognise its assets, liabilities, revenue,andexpenses,and/or

itsrelativesharesthereof

The parties with joint control have rights to the assets and obligationsfortheliabilitiesof

the arrangement

Diagram 2

Our experience shows that practice in this area is indeed diverse andtherearevaryingviewsastowhetherIFRS3shouldorshould not apply. It will not be a simple exercise to resolve and significantresearchandoutreachwillberequired.

How we see it


The removal of proportionate consolidation will not affect the accounting currently applied to JCAs/JCOs.

4.3 Clarifying the accounting … what is proportionate consolidation?

As mentioned earlier, there is some misunderstanding as to what proportionate consolidation is under IFRS, and how this compares toJCA/JCOaccountingunderIAS31,andtheaccountingforjointoperationsunderIFRS11.Thisconfusionispartlyduetothetwoapproachesbeingtechnicallydifferent,fromanaccountingperspective, and also partly due to the way the term ‘proportionate consolidation’isusedunderUSGAAP.UnderUSGAAP,proportionateconsolidationisusedtodescribeamethodofaccountingthatwouldbetheequivalentofIFRS’sJCA/JCO(andnowjointoperation)accounting.

As a consequence, there is some unwarranted concern that all interests in joint arrangements will require equity accounting — whichisnotthecase.AndforJCEsthatareclassifiedasjointoperations under IFRS 11, it may not be clear whether the adoption ofIFRS11willimpactthefinancialstatements.

Toillustratethis:

• Whereajointoperatorhasrightstoaspecifiedpercentageof allassets(e.g.50%)andobligationsforthesamespecifiedpercentage(50%)ofallliabilities,therewouldlikelybenodifferencebetweentheaccountingforajointoperationandproportionate consolidation.

• However,wherethejointoperatorhasrightstoaspecifiedpercentageofcertainassetsanddifferingrights(andpercentages)tootherassets,and/ordifferentobligationsforvariousliabilities,thefinancialstatementswouldlookdifferentwhenaccountingforthoseindividualrightsandobligations,ascompared with proportionately consolidating the same percentageofallassetsandliabilities.

4.4 The impact of a change in classification upon transition

JCE (proportionate consolidation) to joint venture: WhereproportionateconsolidationwaspreviouslyusedforJCEsunder IAS31,andsucharrangementsarenowclassifiedasjointventures,the transition to equity accounting under IFRS 11 will result in substantialchangestothefinancialstatementsofthejointventurer.

JCE (proportionate consolidation) to joint operation: As explained above(andillustratedinexample1),itisalsopossiblethatforproportionatelyconsolidatedJCEswhicharenowclassifiedasjointoperations, the accounting may not be identical — particularly whereanentitydoesnothaveauniformpercentageinterestinallassets and liabilities.

4.4.1 Presentation impacts

Thesechangeswillimpactthepresentationofthefinancialstatementsofaffectedentities.Forexample,goingfromproportionate consolidation to equity accounting will cause the investmentinthejointarrangementtogofrombeingpresentedasmultiplelineitemsthroughouttheStatementsofFinancialPositionandPerformance,tosingleequityaccountedlineitems.TherewillalsobeimpactsonkeymetricssuchasEBITDA.Thisisbecause,underproportionateconsolidation,ajointventurer’sshareofanyinterestortaxofthejointarrangementwouldhavebeenpresentedoutsideofEBITDA,whereasunderequityaccounting,such amountswillnowbeincludedinthesinglelineitemwhichformspartofEBITDA.

Example 1: 50% / 50% joint arrangement

* Party A has rights to 100% of the truck ** Party B has obligations for 100% of the debt

Proportionate consolidation

IAS 31 — JCA/JCO accounting | IFRS 11

— JO accountingItem 100%

amountParty A Party B Party A Party B

Truck* 200 100 100 200 -EE&D 1,000 500 500 500 500Debt** (100) (50) (50) - (100)Other liabilities (80) (40) (40) (40) (40)


5. Gross versus net — what should I recognise?It is clear that a participant in a joint operation is required to recogniseitsrightstotheassets,anditsobligationsfortheliabilities(orsharethereof)ifany,ofthejointarrangement.Thereforeitisimportantthatanentityfullyunderstandswhattheserightsandobligationsareandhowthesemaydifferbetween the parties.

5.1 Operators of joint arrangements

Operatorsofjointarrangementsmayhaveadirectlegalliabilityinrespectoftheentirebalanceofcertainobligationsarisingfromtransactions related to the joint arrangement. These may include, but are not limited to, third party creditors, leases, employee liabilities,etc.Theymayalsohavearightofreimbursement(byvirtueoftheJOA)fromthenon-operatorparties.Theoperatorwouldberequiredtorecognise100%ofsuchliabilitiesandwouldrecogniseareceivablefromthenon-operatorpartiesfortheirshareofsuchliabilities.IFRSprohibitstheoffsettingoftheseliabilitiesagainstthesereceivablesintheStatementofFinancialPosition.Intheprofitorloss,however,wherethesecostsarebeingincurredonbehalfofthenon-operatorparties,i.e.,theoperatorisactingasagent, and such costs are directly recharged, this is considered a reimbursement.Therefore,thereisnoeffectonprofitorlossastherechargeisoffsetagainsttherelatedexpense.

While,inmostcircumstances,theabilityofthenon-operatorpartiestopaytheirshareofthecostsincurredbytheoperatorwillnotbeindoubt, particularly where cash calls are paid in advance, there may be instances where they are unable to pay. Here the operator might not be able to recognise a corresponding receivable and reimbursement, and consequently, this would negatively impact its financialstatements.

5.2 Non-operators

Non-operatorswouldrecogniseapayabletotheoperator,whichwouldbeaccountedforasafinancialinstrumentunderIAS32Financial Instruments: Presentation/IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement or IFRS 9 Financial Instruments and notunderthestandardwhichrelatestothetypeofcostbeingreimbursed.Thiswouldmeandifferentmeasurementand/ordisclosurerequirementswouldapply.Forexample,thenon-operator’sshareofemployeeentitlementsrelatingtotheoperator’semployeeswhoworkonthejointprojectwouldnotbeaccountedforunderIAS19Employee Benefits.

WhereinvestmentsinJCEsthatwereproportionatelyconsolidated are material, and such arrangements are now classifiedasjointventures,therewillbeasignificantimpactonthepresentationofthefinancialstatementsofaffectedentities.Insomecases,theremayalsobemeasurementdifferenceswhichwillaffectprofitorlossand/ornetassets.SignificantchangeswillalsooccurwhereanequityaccountedJCEisnowconsidered to be a joint operation as the joint operator would now recognise its assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and/oritsrelativesharesofthoseitems,ifany.

AsaresultofthechangesintroducedbyIFRS11toclassifyajoint arrangement, we would caution entities against voluntarily changingfromproportionateconsolidationtotheequitymethod,whilestillunderIAS31,untiltheyhavefullyanalysedtheclassificationunderthenewstandard.

How we see it

4.4.2 Measurement impacts

Insomecases,theremayalsobemeasurementdifferenceswhichwillaffectprofitorlossand/ornetassets.Forexample,underproportionateconsolidation,anylossesfromajointarrangementwould have been recognised as incurred. However under equity accounting,theconceptof‘waterlineaccounting’wouldonlyseesuch losses continue to be recognised up until the point at which the investment in the joint arrangement is reduced to nil.

Formoreinformationonthepracticalimplicationsofthesechangesforyourbusinesse.g.,onaccountingsystemsandprocesses,managementinformationandkeyperformanceindicators,etc.,refertoourIFRS Practical matterspaperreferencedatthestartofthis publication.


5.3 Joint and several liability

It is also possible that there may be liabilities in the arrangement where the obligation is joint and several. That is, an entity is not onlyresponsibleforitsproportionateshare,butitisalsoliableforthe other party‘s share should they be unable to pay. A common exampleofthisintheminingandmetalssectorisrehabilitationobligations.

Intheseinstances,eachpartynotonlytakesupitsproportionateshareoftherehabilitationobligation,itisalsorequiredtoassessthelikelihoodthattheotherpartywillnotbeabletomeettheirshare.Whereitisonlypossible(orremote)thattheotherpartywillnot be able to pay, the entity is not required to do anything in addition.Wherethereisapossibleobligationthattheentitywillhavetocovertheobligationsoftheotherparty,orthereissomeindication that they may not be able to pay, but it is not probable (i.e.,morelikelythannot)thattheycannotpay,thentheentitywould have to disclose this possible obligation as a contingent liability. However, where it is probable that the other party cannot meetsomeof,ortheentire,obligation,theentitywouldneedtoassess what additional amount they would have to recognise.

ItwillbecriticalforpartiestojointarrangementstoundertakeadetailedreviewoftheirJOAs,includinganysubsequentamendmentsoraddendums,toensuretheyfullyunderstandtherights and obligations therein, and how these are shared amongst the parties.

Inmanyinstances,therequirementfortheoperatortorecognise100%ofcertainliabilities,andthenaseparatereceivablefromthenon-operatorparties,andsimilarlytheaccountingforjointandseveralliabilities,willnotnegativelyimpacttheoperator’s(orentity’s)netassetpositionornetprofitorloss.However,recenteventsillustratethatnon-operator/otherpartiesmaynotalwaysbeabletomeettheirshareofobligationsofthejointarrangement.

How we see it

6. So what if I don’t have joint control or control?Theaccountingimpactofdeterminingthataninterestinanarrangement does not provide the party with joint control or control dependsonanumberoffactors.Again,themostimportantofthesefactorswillbetherightsandobligationsthecontractualarrangement provides the parties.

6.1 Identifying and assessing the rights and obligations

• Rights to the underlying assets and obligations for the underlying liabilities of the arrangement:Despitenothavingjointcontrol(orcontrol)thepartystillhasrightsto,andobligationsfor,theunderlyingassetsandobligations.Therefore,itwouldcontinuetorecognise its interest in those assets and liabilities. This accountingwouldapplyregardlessofwhetherthearrangementisin a separate vehicle or not, as the contractual terms are the primarydeterminantoftheaccounting.

• Rights to the net assets of the arrangement:Thisonlyoccurswhere, at a minimum, the arrangement is structured through a separatevehicle.Inthisinstance,ifthepartyisconsideredtohavesignificantinfluenceoverthearrangement,itaccountsforits interest in accordance with IAS 28 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures (asamendedin2011)—equityaccounting;otherwiseitaccountsforitsinterestunderIAS32/IAS39/IFRS9—fairvaluethroughprofitorlossorothercomprehensiveincome(unlesstheinvestmentwasheldfortrading).

Giventhattheaccountingforthesecontractualarrangementsdepends on the rights and obligations provided to the parties, it isessentialforanentitytoobtainathoroughunderstandingandcompleteadetailedanalysisoftheirrightsandobligations.

How we see it


IFRS contact

Tracey Waring GlobalMining&MetalsIFRSLeader T:+442079800646 E:[email protected]

7. New disclosures … more information; impact on processes and systemsIFRS12introducesarangeofnewandexpandeddisclosures.Thesewillrequirethedisclosureofsignificantjudgementsandassumptionsmadebymanagementindeterminingwhether:thereis joint control; and an arrangement structured through a separate vehicle is a joint venture or a joint operation. For joint ventures, it willalsorequirethecompilationanddisclosureofadditionalinformation,eitherindividuallyformaterialjointventures,orinaggregatefortheimmaterialjointventures—whichwillimpactanentity’s processes and systems.

Formoreinformationonthepracticalimplicationsofthesechangeson your business e.g., on accounting systems and processes, data accumulation,etc.,refertoourIFRS Practical matters paper referencedatthestartofthispublication.

8. Final thoughtsThe rights and obligations provided to a party under these contractualarrangementswilldrivetheaccounting.Therefore,anentitywillhavetoensureithasadetailedunderstandingofthespecificrightsandobligationsofitsarrangementstobeabletodeterminetheimpactofthesenewstandards.

Giventheuniquenatureofthevariousarrangementsthatcurrentlyexist, and are emerging, an entity will need to individually analyse eachcontracttobeabletocompletethisassessment.Thedifficultyofthistaskwillbeimpactedbythenumberandcomplexityofthearrangements an entity has. Robust systems and processes will need to be developed, not only to complete the initial assessment, butalsotoenabletheongoingassessmentofcurrentarrangements(shouldfactsandcircumstanceschange)andtheassessmentofnew arrangements.

Ernst & Young’s Global Mining & Metals Center Withastrongoutlookinthesector,theglobalminingandmetalsindustryisfocusedonfuturegrowththroughexpandedproduction,withoutlosingsightofoperationalefficiencyandcostoptimization.Thesectorisalsofacedwiththeincreasedchallengeofchangingexpectationsinthemaintenanceofitssociallicensetooperateandmeetinggovernmentrevenue expectations.

Ernst&Young’sGlobalMining&MetalsCenterbringstogetheraworldwideteamofprofessionalstohelpyouachieveyourpotential—ateamwithdeeptechnicalexperience in providing assurance, tax, transactions and advisory services to the mining and metals sector.

TheCenteriswherepeopleandideascometogethertohelpminingandmetalscompaniesmeettheissuesoftodayandanticipatethoseoftomorrow.Ultimatelyitenablesustohelpyoumeetyourgoalsandcompetemoreeffectively.It’showErnst&Youngmakes adifference.

Area contactsGlobal Mining & Metals LeaderMike ElliottTel:[email protected] OceaniaScott GrimleyTel:[email protected]

ChinaPeter MarkeyTel:+862122282616 [email protected]

Japan

Kentaro NakamichiTel:[email protected]

Europe, Middle East, India and Africa LeaderMick BardellaTel:[email protected]

AfricaAdrian MacartneyTel:[email protected]

Commonwealth ofIndependent StatesEvgeni KhrustalevTel:[email protected]

France and LuxemburgChristian MionTel:[email protected]

IndiaAnjani AgrawalTel:[email protected]

United Kingdom & IrelandLee DownhamTel:[email protected]

Americas and United States LeaderAndy MillerTel:[email protected]

CanadaTom WhelanTel:[email protected]

South America and Brazil LeaderCarlos AssisTel:[email protected]

Service line contactsGlobal Advisory LeaderPaul MitchellTel:[email protected]

Global Assurance LeaderTom WhelanTel:[email protected]

Global IFRS LeaderTracey WaringTel:[email protected]

Global Tax LeaderAndy MillerTel:[email protected]

Global Transactions LeaderLee DownhamTel:[email protected]

Ernst&Young

Assurance | Tax | Transactions | Advisory

About Ernst & YoungErnst&Youngisagloballeaderinassurance, tax, transaction and advisory services.Worldwide,our141,000peopleare united by our shared values and an unwaveringcommitmenttoquality.Wemakeadifferencebyhelpingourpeople,our clients and our wider communities achieve their potential.

Ernst&Youngreferstotheglobalorganizationofmemberfirmsof Ernst&YoungGlobalLimited,eachofwhichisaseparatelegalentity.Ernst&YoungGlobalLimited,aUKcompanylimitedbyguarantee, does not provide services to clients.Formoreinformationaboutourorganization, please visit www.ey.com

©2011EYGMLimited.All Rights Reserved.

EYGno.AU0922

Thispublicationcontainsinformationinsummaryform andisthereforeintendedforgeneralguidanceonly. Itisnotintendedtobeasubstitutefordetailedresearch ortheexerciseofprofessionaljudgment.Neither EYGMLimitednoranyothermemberoftheglobal Ernst&Youngorganizationcanacceptanyresponsibilityforlossoccasionedtoanypersonactingorrefrainingfromactionasaresultofanymaterialinthispublication.Onanyspecificmatter,referenceshouldbemadetotheappropriate advisor.

www.ey.com/miningmetals

Documents

Impact of the new joint arrangements and … Mining and metals Applying IFRS — impact of new joint arrangements and consolidation standards b) Rights held by others The operator