Practical guide to IFRS - PwC · 8 | Practical guide to IFRS – Joint arrangements: guidance for the Oil & Gas sector 1. Classification Key change (snapshot) Impact on IFRS financial

2 | Practical guide to IFRS – Joint arrangements: guidance for the Oil & Gas sector

Practical guide to IFRS New guidance on accounting for joint arrangements – a significant issue for the Oil & Gas sector

A new standard on accounting for joint arrangements was issued in May 2011 and was effective from 1 January 2013.

PwC’s practical guide ‘Joint arrangements: a new approach to an age-old businessissue (http://www.pwchk.com/home/eng/ifrs_practical_guide_joint_jan2013.html) provides a comprehensive analysis of the new standard. This document considers issues specific to the Oil & Gas industry.

What is the issue?The Oil & Gas industry is distinguished by being high risk, with most costs incurred before there are proven quantities of natural resources. The value extracted from the resources is vulnerable to broader economic, political and regulatory forces: it is exposed to commodity and currency prices, the insatiable desire of governments for tax revenues and increasingly punitive taxes designed to reduce carbon footprints, among other influences. It is therefore no surprise to find otherwise fierce competitors engaged in a variety of joint working arrangements designed to reduce risk, share capital-intensive infrastructure and reach otherwise protected markets.

The industry will be significantly impacted by IFRS 11, ‘Joint arrangements’. This is the first significant overhaul of accounting for joint activities under IFRS since IAS 31, ‘Interests in joint ventures’, was published in 1990. Much of the practice around accounting for joint arrangements under predecessor GAAPs and then on transition to IFRS was driven by practice under US GAAP or the UK SORP.

Venture partners accounted for an undivided working interest in upstream activities by reflecting their direct interest in assets and liabilities and their share of revenue and costs. The increasing risks and complexity of upstream operations has resulted in more joint arrangements being structured through legal entities. Midstream and downstream joint working arrangements are also often separate legal entities, particularly where the venture partners were seeking to limit their potential liability to prospective creditors and other obligations such as decommissioning. Venturers frequently accounted for their interest in incorporated joint ventures using equity accounting. IAS 31 allowed a policy choice for accounting for incorporated entities. Most Oil & Gas entities on transition to IFRS continued their existing practices, following a form of proportionate consolidation for upstream activities and equity accounting for midstream and downstream incorporated entities.

Determination of the type of joint arrangement is the complex decision under IFRS 11; from that point, there are no accounting options available. There are two types of joint arrangement under IFRS 11: joint operations and joint ventures. A venturer accounts for its interest in a joint operation as its share of assets, liabilities, revenue and costs. A joint venture is accounted for using equity accounting under IAS 28, ‘Investments in associates and joint ventures’.

国际财务报告实务指南——合营安排：石油和天然气行业指南 | 3

国际财务报告准则实务指南关于合营安排会计处理的新指引 —石油和天然气行业的一项重大问题

一项关于合营安排会计处理的新准则已于2011年5月发布，并自2013年1月1日起适用。

普华永道的实务指南《合营安排：处理一项由来已久的业务问题的新方法》（http://www.pwccn.com/home/chi/ifrs_practical_guide_joint_ jan2013_chi.html）提供了对于新准则的综合分析。本指南则考虑了石油和天然气行业的特定问题。

问题所在?石油和天然气行业以高风险著称，且大多数成本发生于自然资源的存量得以证实之前。从这些资源中获取的价值容易受到更为广泛的经济、政治和监管力量的影响，尤其是面临商品和货币价格、政府对税收收入永不满足的需求以及旨在减少碳足迹的越来越具惩罚性的税收等影响。因此，原本好斗的竞争对手共同参与各种用以降低风险、共享资本密集型基础设施以及进入原本受到保护的市场的共同工作安排也变得常见了。

该行业将受《国际财务报告准则第11号—合营安排》（“IFRS11”）的重大影响。这是自《国际会计准则第31号—合营中的权益》（“IAS31”）于1990年公布以来，国际财务报告准则（“IFRS”）下首次对合营活动会计处理做出的重大的大规模修改。根据原公认会计原则及之后向国际财务报告准则转换的过程中对合营安排会计处理的大量实务做法源自美国公认会计原则（“US GAAP”）或英国建议实务公告（“UK SORP”）下的实务做法。

合营合伙人对在上游活动中的不可分割经营权益采用了反映其在资产和负债中的直接权益及其在收入和成本中的份额的会计处理。上游业务日益上升的风险和复杂程度已导致更多的合营安排通过法律主体构建。中游和下游的共同工作安排通常也是通过单独法律主体进行，特别是在合营合伙人力求限定其对预计债权人的潜在债务以及其他义务（例如复原义务）的情况下。合营方常采用权益法核算其在具有法人资格的合营企业中的权益。IAS 31为对具有法人资格的主体的会计处理提供了会计政策选择。正转换至国际财务报告准则的大多数石油和天然气主体延续了其现行做法，即继续以比例合并的形式核算上游活动及以权益法核算具有法人资格的中游和下游主体。

确定合营安排的类型是IFRS 11下的复杂决定；一旦确定，不再有会计政策选择。IFRS 11下存在两种类型的合营安排：共同经营和合营企业。合营方以其在资产、负债、收入和成本中的份额核算其在共同经营中的权益。对合营企业则按照《国际会计

准则第28号—对联营企业和合营企业的投资》（“IAS 28”）中的“权益法”进行会计处理。


Notes to flowchart

1. There are many different types of vehicle used for joint arrangements in the Oil & Gas sector, including partnerships, unincorporated entities, limited companies and unlimited liability companies. Venturers will have to assess all their joint arrangements and identify those that are operated through vehicles. Joint arrangements that are not operated through a separate vehicle are joint operations.

2. The legal structure of the vehicle or the contractual terms between the venturers may not provide for legal separation of the venture from the venture partners – that is, the venturers remain exposed to direct interest in the assets and liabilities of the venture. General partnerships, for example, may not create separation from the partners because the contractual terms provide direct rights to assets and expose the partners to direct obligations for liabilities of the partnership in the normal course of business. Similarly, unlimited liability entities provide direct rights and obligations to the venture partners. Joint arrangements conducted in vehicles that do not create separation are joint operations.

3. The parties’ rights and obligations arising from the arrangement are assessed as they exist in the ‘normal course of business’ (IFRS 11 para B14). Legal rights and obligations arising in circumstances that are other than in the ‘normal course of business’, such as liquidation and bankruptcy, are therefore much less relevant. A separate vehicle may give the venture partners rights to assets and obligations to liabilities as per the terms of their agreement. However, in case of liquidation of the vehicle, secured creditors have the first right to the assets and the venture partners only have rights in the net assets remaining after settling all third-party obligations. The vehicle could still be classified as a joint operation as, in the ‘normal course of business’, the venture partners have direct interest in assets and liabilities. The impact of the concept of ‘normal course of business’ is not fully understood yet. For example, if the ‘ratchet’ terms form part of the contractual agreement and the parties’ share of the output of assets varies over the period of the arrangement, it is not clear how the venturers would account for this. Separate vehicles that give venture partners direct rights to assets and obligation for liabilities of the vehicle are joint operations.

4. Separate vehicles structured such that all of their outputs must be purchased or used by the venture partners may also be joint operations. However, the contractual terms and legal structure of the vehicle need to be carefully assessed. There must be a contractual agreement or commitment between the venture parties that requires the parties to purchase or use their share of the output or capacity in the venture. If the venture can sell the output to third parties at market prices, this criteria is unlikely to be met.

The views expressed above are as a result of our initial reading of the standard. Practice may evolve and change as the standard is applied and accounting regulators make their views known.


流程图注释

1. 石油和天然气行业中的合营安排使用许多不同类型的载体，包括合伙企业、无法人资格的主体、有限公司和无限责任公司。合营方将须评估其所有合营安排，并识别出通过载体运作的安排。不通过单独载体运作的合营安排均属于共同经营。

2. 载体的法律架构或合营方之间的合同条款可能不能在法律上将合营企业与合营合伙人进行分隔—即合营方仍对合营企业的资产和负债有直接权益。例如，普通合伙企业可能不能与合伙人建立起分隔，因为合同条款在正常经营过程中提供对资产的直接权利，并使合伙人对该合伙企业的负债承担直接义务。类似地，无限责任主体向合营合伙人提供直接权利和义务。通过不建立分隔载体运作的合营安排属于共同经营。

3. 各方因安排而产生的权利和义务以其在“正常经营过程”（IFRS 11第B14段）中的存在被予以评估。因此，除“正常经营过程”外的情形（例如清算和破产）下产生的法定权利和义务没有那么相关。单独载体可能给予合营合伙人如协议条款所载的对资产的权利和对负债的义务。但若该载体被清算，有担保的债权人对资产享有优先受偿权，而合营合伙人仅对结算所有第三方义务后剩余的净资产具有权利。该载体仍可被分类为共同经营，因为在“正常经营过程”中，合营合伙人对资产和负债有直接权益。“正常经营过程”这一概念的影响尚未被完全理解。例如，如果“对赌”条款构成合同协议的一部分且各方在资产产出中的份额在安排的存续期间有变动，那么合营方将如何对此进行会计处理尚不明确。给予合营合伙人对载体资产的直接权利和对载体负债的直接义务的单独载体属于共同经营。

4. 若单独载体被架构为其所有产出必须由合营合伙人购买或使用，则其也可能属于共同经营。但须仔细评估该载体的合同条款和法律架构。合营方之间必须存在要求各方购买或使用其在合营企业产出或产能中份额的合同协议或承诺。如果合营企业可以按市价向第三方出售产出，则不太可能满足这一标准。

上述观点是我们初读准则的结果。实务可能随着准则的应用和会计监管机构观点的公布而发展和变化。


1. Classification

Key change (snapshot) Impact on IFRS financial statement

The accounting will no longer be driven solely by the legal form of the arrangement. Instead, entities have to assess their rights and obligations under the joint arrangement to determine the appropriate classification as either a ‘joint operation’ or ‘joint venture’. Classification now determines the accounting.

A joint operation gives parties to thearrangement direct rights to benefit from theassets and obligations for the liabilities. A jointoperator will recognise its interest based on itsinvolvement in the joint operation (that is,based on its direct rights and obligations)rather than on the participation interest it has inthe joint arrangement.

A joint venture, in contrast, gives the partiesrights to the net assets or outcome of thearrangement. A joint venturer does not haverights to individual assets or obligations forindividual liabilities of the joint venture. Jointventures are accounted for using the equitymethod in accordance with IAS 28.

Industry impact

Upstream joint working arrangements use both forms of joint arrangement but do not commonly operate through separate vehicles. Such arrangements are generally classified as jointly controlled assets or jointly controlled operations under the current IAS 31 and would be joint operations under IFRS 11. In most cases, investors would continue to account for their share of assets and liabilities and would not be impacted by IFRS 11. Midstream and downstream joint working arrangements generally operate through separate vehicles and incorporated entities. Assessing whether such arrangements are joint ventures or joint operations will pose challenges to the venturers. This challenge will also be true for those upstream joint arrangements that operate through separate vehicles.

2. No proportionate consolidation


The standard requires joint ventures to beaccounted for using the equity method.

Previously, a venturer could choose to proportionately consolidate their ownership interest in the joint controlled entity.

Equity accounting will apply to all joint ventures. A single line item will be shown in the consolidated income statement to reflect the share of profit or loss in the joint venture; a single line item would be shown in the consolidated balance sheet to reflect the share of net assets in the joint venture.

Industry impact

Arrangements that were previously jointly controlled assets or jointly controlled operations and are now classified as joint operations will not be impacted by this change. Many upstream joint arrangements are unlikely to see a major change in their accounting. However, midstream and downstream activities conducted through a jointly controlled entity where the participants chose proportionate consolidation under IAS 31 will see a major change if the arrangement is assessed as a joint venture under IFRS 11. As assets, liabilities, income and expenses would no longer be proportionately consolidated, it will have a fundamental impact on the landscape of each party’s financial statements and may even impact loan covenants such as those based on asset ratios and EBITDA, depending on how they are defined by the party. Staff of the IFRS Foundation have issued an ‘effect analysis’ which commented ‘…energy is one of the industries where we found more examples of arrangements structured in separate vehicles that can be considered in their own right that will, however, be classified as joint operations.’

Which entities in the Oil & Gas sector might be most impacted?Entities in the Oil & Gas sector that are likely to be most significantly impacted include those that:

• participate in a significant number of joint arrangements;

• enter into new joint arrangements;

• currently apply proportionate consolidation for jointly controlled entities;

• currently apply the equity method to jointly controlled entities that are assessed to be joint operations under IFRS 11; and

• have old joint arrangements with limited documentation detailing the terms of the arrangement.

Three key areas of focus under the new standard


石油和天然气行业中的哪些主体可能受到最大影响？

可能受到最大影响的石油和天然气行业主体包括：

• 参与大量合营安排的主体；

• 订立新合营安排的主体；

• 目前对共同控制主体应用比例合并法的主体；

• 目前对IFRS 11下被评估为共同经营的共同控制主体应用权益法的主体；及

• 拥有仅存在描述安排条款的有限记录的旧合营安排的主体

1. 分类

关键变化（概览）对采用IFRS编制的财务报表的影响

会计处理将不再仅由安排的法律形式决定。相反，主体必须评估其在合营安排下的权利和义务，以确定其应适当分类为“共同经营”还是“合营企业”。此分类决定了会计处理。

共同经营给予参与方从资产获益的直接权利和对负债的直接义务。共同经营方将基于其在共同经营中的参与（即基于其直接权利和义务）而非其在合营安排中的参与权益确认其权益。

相较而言，合营企业给予参与方对该安排净资产或成果的权利。合营企业参与方没有对合营企业的各项资产的权利，也没有对各项负债的义务。对合营企业按照IAS 28采用权益法进行会计处理。

行业影响

上游共同工作安排均有使用合营安排的两种形式，但通常不通过单独载体运作。此类安排根据现行IAS 31一般被分类为共同控制资产或共同控制经营，而根据IFRS 11将属于共同经营。大多数情况下，投资方将继续对其在资产和负债中的份额进行会计处理，而不会受到IFRS 11的影响。中游和下游共同工作安排通常通过单独载体和具有法人资格的主体运作。评估此类安排属于合营企业还是共同经营将给合营方带来挑战。通过单独载体运作的上游合营安排也将面临这一挑战。

2. 比例合并法不再适用


该准则要求采用权益法对合营企业进行会计处理。

之前，合营方可选择按比例合并其在共同控制主体中的所有权权益。

权益法核算将适用于所有合营企业。合并利润表中将显示一个单独项目以反映在合营企业损益中的份额；合并资产负债表中将显示一个单独项目以反映在合营企业净资产中的份额。

行业影响

之前属于共同控制资产或共同控制经营而如今被分类为共同经营的安排不会受到这一变化影响。许多上游合营安排的会计处理可能不会发生重大变化。但通过共同控制主体开展且参与方选择IAS 31下的比例合并法的中游和下游活动，如果根据IFRS 11该安排被评估为合营企业，则会发生重大变化。

由于资产、负债、收益和费用将不再按比例合并，这对各方财务报表的格局产生根本性的影响，甚至可能影响贷款契约条件，例如一些基于资产比率和扣除利息、税项、折旧和摊销之前的盈利（“EBITDA”）的贷款契约条件，具体取决于各方的约定。国际财务报告准则基金会工作人员已发布了一份“影响分析”，其中评论道“⋯⋯在众多行业中，能源业是我们发现更多通过单独载体构建却可被视为为其自身所有的安排的实例的行业之一，此类安排被分类为共同经营。”

新准则中的三个关键关注领域


3. Transition – may not be easy


Entities should re-evaluate the terms of their existing contractual arrangement to ensure that their involvements in joint arrangements are correctly accounted for under the new standard.

Joint arrangements that were previously accounted for as joint operations may need to be treated as joint ventures, or vice versa, on transition to the new standard.

When transitioning from the proportionate consolidation method to the equity method, entities should recognise their initial investment in the joint venture as the aggregate of the carrying amounts that were previously proportionately consolidated.

To transition from the equity method to proportionate consolidation, entities will derecognise their investment in the jointly controlled entity and recognise their rights and obligations to the assets and liabilities of the joint operation. Their interest in those assets and liabilities may be different from their equity method investment.

These transition provisions would be applied as at the beginning of the immediately preceding period.

Industry impact

Moving from the equity method to share of assets and liabilities will not always be a simple process. For example, parties may have contributed specific assets to a joint arrangement. When evaluating interest based on share of assets and liabilities, parties will account for their interest in the arrangement based on the share of assets contributed by them. The interest calculated based on assets contributed will not necessarily result in the same interest that the party may have in the equity of that entity. For example, the party may have a 30% interest in the equity of an entity but may have a right to 100% of a particular asset. On transition, any difference arising between the net amount of assets and liabilities (including goodwill) recognised and the investment previously equity accounted is adjusted against the retained earnings at the beginning of the immediately preceding period. Where the net amount of assets and liabilities are higher than the investment value, the difference is first offset against any goodwill relating to the investment, and any remaining difference is adjusted against retained earnings.

Similarly, moving from proportionate consolidation to equity method could pose challenges. For example, the liabilities of a joint arrangement assessed to be a joint venture may exceed the assets. Netting these may result in the venturers’ investment becoming negative. The venturers will then have to assess whether they need to record a liability in respect of that negative balance. This will depend on whether the venturer has an obligation to fund the liabilities of the joint arrangement. If it does, it might raise a question on whether the arrangement was correctly assessed to be a joint venture instead of a joint operation.

Transition provisions on adoption of IFRS 11 are not expected to have any impact on the income statement of entities.

Following transition, if there is a change in the contractual terms or any other facts and circumstances between venturers, the venture partners should reassess whether the type of joint arrangement in which they are involved has changed.


3. 转换—可能并不容易


主体应重新评估其现有合同安排的条款，以确保其在合营安排中的参与在新准则下被予以正确的会计处理。

在向新准则转换时，之前作为共同经营进行会计处理的合营安排可能需作为合营企业处理，反之亦然。

由比例合并法转换为权益法时，主体应以之前按比例合并的账面价值的总额确认其对合营企业的初始投资。

当由权益法转换为比例合并法，主体将终止确认其对共同控制主体的投资，并确认其对共同经营资产和负债的权利和义务。主体在这些资产和负债中的权益可能不同于其采用权益法核算的投资。

这些转换条款将适用于所列报前一期的期初。

行业影响

由权益法转换为资产和负债份额法不会总是一个简单的过程。例如，参与方可能向某一合营安排投入了特定资产。在评估基于资产和负债份额的权益时，参与方将基于其在所投入资产中的份额核算其在该安排中的权益。基于所投入资产计算的权益未必会等于参与方可能在主体资产净值中拥有的权益。例如，参与方可能在某主体的资产净值中拥有30%的权益，但可能对某项特定资产的全部拥有权利。在转换时，所确认资产和负债（包括商誉）的净额与之前采用权益法核算的投资之间产生的任何差额均调减所列报前一期期初的留存收益。当资产和负债的净额高于投资价值时，差额首先冲减任何与投资相关的商誉，任何剩余差额均调减留存收益。

类似地，由比例合并法转换为权益法也可能带来挑战。例如，某项被评估为合营企业的合营安排的负债可能超出资产。这些负债和资产的互抵可能导致合营方的投资变为负数。合营方随后将须评估其是否需对该负值记录一项负债。这将取决于合营方是否有义务为该合营安排的负债注资。如果其有义务，则可能产生另一个问题：该安排是否被正确地评估为合营企业，而不是共同经营？

应用IFRS 11的转换条款预期不会对主体的利润表产生任何影响。

转换后，如果合营方之间的合同条款或任何其他事实和情况发生了变化，则合营合伙人应重新评估其所参与的合营安排的类型是否已发生改变。


Examples: an illustration of the key impacts in the Oil & Gas sector

Example 1 – Joint control

Two companies, A and B, set up a partnership and sign a joint operating agreement. The board contains three directors from each company and is the main decision-making body of the company. Decisions are made by simple majority. Each party has a 50% interest in the net profit generated. Is there joint control?

Preliminary conclusion: More information and analysis needed.

It may appear that A and B have joint control because each party has a 50% interest in net profit and both have a right to appoint three directors, but this cannot be automatically assumed. As decision-making is by simple majority, it is possible that one director of shareholder A agrees with three directors of shareholder B and takes a decision that is against the interest of shareholder A. In such a case, there would not be joint control, as decisions are made without unanimous consent. However, if the three directors representing a single shareholder are required to vote as a group per the directions of the shareholder, unanimous consent would be required for decision-making − this would represent joint control. All relevant facts and circumstances have to be considered before reaching a conclusion.

Example 2 – Classification

Two parties, A and B, form a limited company to build and use a pipeline to transport gas. Each party holds a 50% interest in the company. As per their contractual terms, A must use 45% of the pipeline capacity, and B must use the remaining pipeline capacity of 55%. Neither A or B can sell their share of the capacity to a third party without prior consent of other party. The price paid by A or B for the gas transport is determined in a manner to ensure recovery of all costs incurred by the company. Is the limited company a joint operation or a joint venture?

Preliminary conclusion: Joint operation.

The joint arrangement is structured through a separate vehicle, and both parties have a 50% interest in the company. However, the contractual terms require a specific level of usage by each party, and because of the pricing structure, the entities have a deemed obligation for the company’s liabilities. The entity may be a joint operation despite the legal form of the

arrangement.

Secured and other creditors will have the first right on the assets of the company in case of liquidation or bankruptcy. A and B will only have a share in the residual net assets remaining after all claims have been settled. However, as this will not arise in the ordinary course of business, this aspect is less relevant when determining the classification of the joint arrangement.

Example 3 – Classification

Entities A and B form a partnership vehicle to own and operate a crude oil refinery. The output of the refinery is sold to third parties at market prices. Neither party has an obligation to buy the output from the refinery. Each party has a 50% interest in the net profits of the partnership. Is this a joint operation or a joint venture?

Preliminary conclusion: More information and analysis needed.

The joint arrangement is structured through a vehicle, and the venture parties have 50% interest in the net profits of the partnership; so this appears to be a joint venture. However, an evaluation is required as to whether the partnership creates separation. Sometimes general partnerships do not create separation; that is, parties to the partnership may have a direct interest in the assets and liabilities of the partnership. The terms of the partnership agreement must therefore be evaluated to assess the rights and obligations of each party.

If there is separation, it is likely that this will be a joint venture. There is no obligation for the parties to take the output of the refinery and they do not have an obligation to fund the settlement for its liabilities.

Example 4 – Presentation

Entities A and B formed a jointly controlled entity. This represents a significant portion of A’s business. Under IAS 31, entity A adopted a policy of proportionate consolidation. Approximately 70% of A’s revenue arises from the joint arrangement. The arrangement is concluded to be a joint venture under IFRS 11. Entity A will have to apply equity accounting. Can A include its share of profit/loss of the joint venture under equity accounting within its operating profit?

Preliminary conclusion: Yes, in circumstances where a significant part of the investor’s business is performed through a joint venture, it can present the share of profit/loss from joint venture before the operating profit.


示例：对石油和天然气行业关键影响的阐释

示例1—共同控制

A和B两家公司设立了一家合伙企业并签订了一份共同经营协议。各家公司派出三名董事组成董事会，董事会是公司的主要决策制定机构。决策由简单多数作出。各方在产生的净利润中享有50%的权益。是否存在共同控制？

初步结论：需要更多信息和分析。

A和B可能看似具有共同控制，因为各方在净利润中拥有50%的权益且均有权任命三名董事，但这一假设不能自动作出。由于决策由简单多数做出，因而股东A的一名董事可能与股东B的三名董事意见一致，并作出与股东A的利益相悖的决定。此类情况下，应该不存在共同控制，因为决定在未经一致同意的情况下做出。但若代表一方股东的三名董事须作为一个团体按照股东的指示表决，因而决策须经一致同意—这将代表共同控制。在得出结论前须考虑所有相关事实和情况。

示例2—分类

A和B两方成立了一家有限公司以建造和使用管道运输天然气。各方持有公司50%的权益。根据其合同条款，A须使用管道容量的45%，而B须使用剩余的55%的管道容量。在未经另一方事先同意的情况下，A和B均不得向第三方出售其容量份额。A或B为天然气运输所支付的价格以确保能收回公司发生的所有成本的方式确定。该有限公司属于共同经营还是合营企业？

初步结论：共同经营。

该合营安排通过单独载体构建，且双方在公司中均具有50%的权益。但合同条款要求各方保证特定的使用水平，并且由于定价结构，主体被视为对

公司的负债负有义务。尽管其法律形式为有限公司，该主体可能属于共同经营。

在公司清算或破产的情况下，有担保的债权人及其他债权人将对公司资产享有优先受偿权。A和B仅在所有索赔得以结算后所剩余的净资产中享有份额。然而，由于这不会在日常经营过程中发生，因而在确定合营安排的分类时没有那么相关。

示例3—分类

主体A和B设立了一家合伙企业以拥有和经营一家原油炼厂。该炼厂的产出以市价售予第三方。A和B双方均无义务购买该炼厂的产出。各方在该合伙企业的净利润中享有50%的权益。这属于共同经营还是合营企业？

初步结论：需要更多信息和分析。

该合营安排通过载体构建，且合营方在合伙企业的净利润中享有50%的权益；因而这看似属于合营企业。但须评估该合伙企业是否建立了分隔。有时普通合伙企业并不建立分隔，即合伙方可能对合伙企业的资产和负债拥有直接权益。因此，必须评估合伙协议的条款以评估各方的权利和义务。

如果存在分隔，则这可能属于合营企业。参与方并无义务消费炼厂的产出，也无义务为炼厂负债的结算注资。

示例4—列报

主体A和B设立了一家共同控制主体。A的业务大部分来源于此主体。在IAS 31下主体A采用了比例合并的政策。A约70%的收入由该合营安排产生。在IFRS 11下该安排被分类为合营企业。主体A将必须采用权益法核算。A可否将其采用权益法核算的在合营企业损益中的份额计入其经营利润？

初步结论：可以，在投资方业务的很大一部分通过合营企业执行的情况下，可将其在合营企业损益中的份额列报于经营利润之前。


IAS 1, ‘Presentation of financial statements’, specifies the line items that, as a minimum, should be presented in the income statement. In this list, investors’ share of profits or losses from joint ventures comes after the line item for finance costs but before the line item for tax expense. The share of profits/losses of a joint venture is therefore usually presented between finance costs and income tax expense.

However, where joint ventures are so significant that they are regarded as a primary vehicle for the conduct of the group’s operations, it may be appropriate in some circumstances to include the share of profits/losses in arriving at operating profit.

What are the potential business impacts for the Oil & Gas sector?Changes to the classification of joint arrangements may result in significant financial changes. This could impact the recognised amounts in profit and loss (for example, revenues and expenses), the balance sheet presentation and the supplemental information presented in the financial statements (for example, disclosure of reserves). Leverage, capital ratios, management incentives, covenants and financing agreements may be affected as a result of these changes. Many entities in the Oil & Gas sector focus on EBITDA measures and revenue. The changes will impact these measures, and some entities may choose to adjust their reporting.

Entities should consider how to communicate the impacts of the accounting changes to their shareholders and other stakeholders. There could be important changes to the manner in which the entity’s interest in the joint arrangement is reported and understood by users of the financial statements.

Structuring of future deals should be considered with the new rules in mind. For example, a joint arrangement involving the establishment of a new entity would not necessarily give rise to a joint venture, but the specific terms of the arrangement would still need to be analysed in order to understand the entity’s rights and obligations under the agreement.

Entities may need to request more detailed financial reporting information from an operator of a joint operation if they move from equity

accounting to the share of assets and liabilities approach. Similarly, they may need to provide more detailed information to other parties if they are the operator of a joint operation. For example, an operator may need to provide information concerning the maturity profile of financial liabilities to allow appropriate classification on the balance sheet of the venturer or to understand the assumptions utilised in measuring decommissioning cost estimates. Operators may also be required to provide this information at numerous points during a reporting cycle, as venturers may have different reporting dates. Entities that operate significant business through joint arrangements may consider renegotiating the existing arrangements and restructuring the operations to be able to meet the definition of a joint operation. This will allow them to account for a share of assets, liabilities, income and expenses rather than a share of profit/loss.

In some countries, non-domestic operators are obliged to have a local partner. It can be challenging to obtain detailed financial information on a timely basis from these businesses, and moving from equity accounting to share of assets and liabilities could be difficult. Similarly, entities may have production-sharing agreements with governments. If these are assessed as joint operations and the entities have to record their share of production, assets and liabilities, it may be a challenge to access all the financial information from the government agencies on a timely basis.

The standard does not contain the guidance on specific industry issues such as farm-outs and unitisation that was published in the exposure draft. Entities therefore need to consider the requirements of other applicable standards and the Framework when developing accounting policies for these transactions.

Initial transition requirements and annual reassessment of arrangement terms may require changes to existing processes and internal controls. Gathering and analysing the information could take considerable time and effort depending on the number of arrangements in place, the inception dates and the records available. Early assessment and management of all the potential implementation and ongoing business impacts of IFRS 11 will help reduce unexpected business and reporting risks.


《国际会计准则第1号—财务报表的列报》（“IAS 1”）列举了至少应在利润表中列报的项目。在这一列表中，投资方在合营企业损益中的份额列报于融资成本项目之后和所得税费用项目之前。因此，在合营企业损益中的份额通常列报于融资成本和所得税费用之间。

但当合营企业的重要性导致其被视为开展集团经营的首要载体时，在有些情况下将损益份额包含在经营利润中可能是适当的。

对石油和天然气行业有哪些潜在业务影响？

合营安排分类的变化可能导致重大财务变化。这可能影响在损益中确认的金额（例如，收入和费用）、资产负债表的列报以及在财务报表中列报的补充信息（例如，准备的披露）。杠杆、资本比率、管理层激励、契约条件和融资协议可能因这些变化而要改变。许多石油和天然气行业的主体关注EBITDA指标和收入。上述变化将影响这些指标，有些主体可能选择调整其报告。

主体应考虑如何将会计变化的影响告知其股东及其他利益相关方。主体在合营安排中的权益的报告方式及财务报表使用者的理解方式可能发生重要变化。

考虑未来交易结构时应谨记新规定。例如，通过新主体设立的合营安排未必会产生合营企业，但仍需分析该安排的具体条款，以了解主体在协议下的权利和义务。

如果主体由权益法转换为资产和负债份额法，则可能需要要求共同经营的经营方提供更多的详细财务报告信息。类似地，如果其为共同经营的经

营方，则其可能需要向其他参与方提供更多详细信息。例如，经营方可能需提供金融负债到期情况的信息，以协助其在合营方的资产负债表中的适当分类，或了解计量复原成本估计时所使用的假设。因为合营方可能具有不同的报告日期，经营方可能还须在报告周期中的多个时点提供上述信息。通过合营安排经营大量业务的主体可考虑重新协商现有安排以及重组经营，从而使其能够符合共同经营的定义。这将使主体能对其在资产、负债、收益和费用中的份额而非损益份额进行会计处理。

在有些国家，非本国经营方必须拥有当地合伙人。及时从这些企业获取详细的财务信息可能具有挑战性，且由权益法转换为资产和负债份额法可能具有难度。类似地，主体可能与政府订有产品分成协议。如果这些协议被评估为共同经营且主体必须记录其在产出、资产和负债中的份额，则及时从政府机构获取所有财务信息可能是一项挑战。

该准则并不包含征求意见稿中所公布的特定行业问题的指南，例如转出(farm-outs)和联合开发(unitisation)。因此，在制定这些交易的会计政策时，主体需考虑其他适用准则和《概念框架》的要求。

初始转换要求和对安排条款的年度重估可能要求对现有流程和内部控制进行更改。信息的收集和分析可能耗费大量时间和精力，具体取决于已有安排的数量、起始日期以及可获得的记录。对IFRS 11所有的潜在实施影响和持续业务影响的尽早评估和管理将有助于降低意料之外的业务和报告风险。

This content is for general information purposes only, and should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional advisors.

本文仅为提供一般性信息之目的，不应用于替代专业咨询者提供的咨询意见。

© 2013 PricewaterhouseCoopers. All rights reserved. PwC refers to the China member firm, and may sometimes refer to the PwC network. Each member firm is a separate legal entity. Please see www.pwc.com/structure for further details.

© 2013 普华永道。版权所有。普华永道系指普华永道网络及/或普华永道网络中各自独立的成员机构。详情请进入www.pwc.com/structure。

Documents

Practical guide to IFRS - PwC · 8 | Practical guide to IFRS – Joint arrangements: guidance for the Oil & Gas sector 1. Classification Key change (snapshot) Impact on IFRS financial