November 5, 2007

LeaseuropeBrussels

Noreen Whelan

Global Controller – International Financial Reporting

General Electric Company

2

Agenda

• GE in EMEA

• GE and IFRS

• IASB and FASB Joint Leasing Project

• Questions

3

GE Substantial Presence Throughout EMEA• 115, 000 GE employees today

• $41.9 billion sales in 2006 (up from $3 billion in 1987)

• Six businesses: Commercial Finance, Healthcare, Infrastructure, Industrial, GE Money and NBC-U,

• GE’s International headquarters in Brussels…GE Healthcare & GE - Oil & Gas: global headquarters near London & Florence

• Global Research Centre in Munich

GE Locations:

• Infrastructure• Industrial• Global Research• Healthcare• Money• Comm. Finance• NBC Universal

GE and IFRS

6

Promising steps are underway.....global trend is convergence with IFRS• > 100 countries permit or require

IFRS......Australia, China, Canada, EU, Russia

• Expect by 2012 150 countries (including India, Israel, Japan and Korea) using IFRS

• IASB/FASB Convergence Roadmap– Not identical standards…close alignment of

principles and continued co-operation– Goal 2009: eliminate SEC reconciliation for

foreign registrants

7

US issuers - SEC ‘Concept Release’

• Published in Aug 2007, to obtain information about the level of public interest in allowing U.S. issuers, to prepare financial statements in accordance with IFRS or US GAAP

• Comments due on or before Nov.13, 2007

• US issuer choice provides a level playing field for raising capital

• For GE - cost and simplification opportunity

8

Countries converging to IFRS on different time schedules• Today: GE ensuring compliance for statutory

and regulated filings in global jurisdictions

• ‘IFRS as adopted by’……– Benefits to investors, regulators and preparers?? – Consistent application??

• Going forward: IFRS global accounting standards – One set of books…less complexity of reporting

processes, polices, training and IT platforms– Integrity of financial statements

9

Principles bring challenges• Education of all interested parties…internal

and external on accounting policies

• More disclosure of assumptions, judgements and support for careful judgement?

• Greater User sophistication

• Trend is difficulty of Standards keeps rising– Benefits to investor community? (approx. 10% of

comment letters from investor community)– Specialists required (eg preparers, auditors)– Work plan of SEC and CESR should avoid

conflicting regulatory decisions on application IFRS and US GAAP

IASB/FASB Lease Project

11

What is GE Doing?

– Providing industry input & expertise– Discussing the compliance burden– Discussing day 2 impacts

• Joining with worldwide leasing organisations to interact with the IASB and FASB -- International Working Group

12

Objectives• Fundamental review of current accounting

model:– Leased asset either capitalized by lessee or

off-balance sheet (all or nothing)– Lessor recognises a finance lease receivable– US GAAP >50 authoritative pieces of

literature

• Global harmonization of accounting treatments

• Financial Statements reflect the economics of leasing transactions (lessee and lessor)• Allow investors make sound economic

investment decisions

13

Overview • Project added to agenda July 2006

• Develop further a ‘right of use approach’ (ie put rights and obligations on balance sheet at fair value)–Lessee’s right to use = Asset–Lessee’s obligation to pay = Liability

• Principles based approach…. but may be complex to implement in practice

• Critical that changes result in improved quality financial reporting.....what do Users want?

14

• Relationship of leasing project to existing literature and defination of ‘Right to Use’?

• Measurement asset and liability– Fair value (consider interaction IFRS Fair

Value DP…next slide)

• Questions– Does the asset equal the liability?

– Is there a day one gain or loss?

• Right to terminate may define lease term– Effect of renewal options, variable lease

payments, residual guarantees?

Lessee - Open Items Include

15

Fair Value Measurement - IASB DP• Defines fair value and establishes a framework

for measuring fair value – three-tier hierarchy

• Expands fair value disclosure requirements

• FASB issued SFAS 157….Effective Date and Transition:–“Effective for financial statements issued for

fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and interim periods within those fiscal years”

• GE established FAS 157 implementation committee–Significant impact on M&A and Financial Services

16

Lessor Accounting Not Yet Discussed• Derecognition of the “hard” asset and recognition of a

“financial asset”….recognition and measurement approach?

• Revenue Recognition project exploring ‘performance obligations’ model (eg. obligations to: deliver goods, warranties, accept returns)– Likely two models exposed: (1) fair value model (lay off

notion) (2) customer consideration model (total contract price allocated to performance obligations)

• Necessary and before final lease standard issued– Thorough consideration of interaction of FVM, Revenue

Recognition and Lease projects– Request: Don’t over-engineer!

Questions?

Appendix

19

FAS 157: Summary of Significant Changes

Issue Current SFAS 157

Fair Value Amount at which an asset or liability could be bought or sold in a current transaction between willing parties, that is, other than in a forced or liquidation sale ENTRY OR EXIT PRICE

Price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability between market participants at the measurement date EXIT PRICE

Market participants Current guidance on market participants in unclear. Buyer-specific intent may be considered

Buyer-specific attributes and intent should be dismissed if different from other multiple market participants

Transaction Entry Price Presumed equal to fair value May not be representative of fair value, provides indicators of when the transaction price may not be fair value

Highest and best use Current practice is to value assets in continued use unless identified for disposition

Independent of the reporting entity’s intent; considered from market participant perspective

Use of market data in valuations

Use of market data encouraged. In some circumstances entity intent permitted to be considered in valuations

Valuation techniques must maximize use of market observable data and minimize use of unobservable data

Hierarchy No current mandated hierarchy Three levels distinguishing between observable and unobservable inputs:

Level 1: Active markets;Level 2: Observable other than quoted prices;Level 3: Unobservable inputs;

Principal/Most Advantageous Market

-- Principal market: Entity sells assets/transfers liabilities with the greatest volume and level of activity. Most advantageous market is used when there is no principal market.