Exposure Draft

(Revenue from Contracts with Customers)

1.	목적 및 주요내용

2.  주요 변동내용 및 실무영향

3.	향후진행사항

4.	담당자

5.  Summary of questions for respondents

1.	목적 및 주요내용

■ US-GAAP과 IFRS와의 차이를 줄이고 다음과 같은 목적을 달성하기 위함

IASB와 FASB는 고객과의 계약으로 인한 수익인식 공개초안을 발표하였음. 이 제안(proposals)을 채택하게 되면 IAS 11 건설계약과 IAS 18 수익 및 관련 해석서를 대체하게됨.

(1) 기존하는 수익인식 기준과 실무간 불일치성과 단점을 제거하고자함

(2) 수익인식 이슈를 다루기 위해 보다 확고한 개념체계를 제공함

(3) 기업, 산업, 국가, 및 자본시장 간에 수익인식 실무의 비교가능성을 증진시키기 위함

(4) 기업이 적용해야할 요구사항 개수를 줄임으로써 재무제표 작성을 단순화시킴

■ 주요제안사항

(1) 기업이 고객에게 재화와 용역을 공급하기 위한 계약으로 발생하는 수익과 현금흐름의 금액, 시기, 불확실성에 대한 유용한 정보를 보고하기 위해 적용하는 원칙을 명시함

(2) 핵심원칙

이 ED의 핵심적인 원칙은 기업이 재화 또는 용역의 교환으로 수취할 것으로 예상되는 대가를 반영하는 금액으로, 고객에게 재화나 용역을 이전하는 것을 표현(depict)할 수 있게 수익을 인식하는 것을 요구함.

(3) 핵심원칙을 적용하기 위해 다음을 수행함

가. 고객과의 계약을 식별

나. 계약에 포함된 각각의 이행의무를 식별

다. 거래 금액을 결정

라. 각각의 이행의무에 거래가격을 배분

마. 기업이 각 이행의무를 충족할 때 수익을 인식

2.	주요 변동내용 및 실무영향

■ 재화와 용역 이전으로부터의 수익인식

- 자산개발계약(예: 건설, 제조, customized software)은 자산개발이 진행됨에 따라 고객이 해당 자산을 통제하는 경우에 한하여 계속적(continuous) 수익인식을 함

■ 각각의 이행의무의 식별

- 기업은 계약을 구분되는 재화와 용역에 대한 각각의 이행의무로 분할함. 현행 실무에서 식별하는 회계단위와 다른 회계단위로 분할하게 됨

■ 라이선싱과 사용권

- 기업은 기업의 지적자산을 사용할 수 있는 라이선스가 배타적인 기준에서 부여되었는지 그렇지 않은지에 대하여 평가하여야함. 만약 라이선스가  배타적인 기준에서 부여된다면, 기업은 라이선스의 조건에 따라 수익을 인식해야함

■ 신용위험의 효과

- 기존 기준과 달리, 고객의 신용위험(예: 회수가능성)은 기업이 수익을 인식해야하는지 여부가 아닌 얼마의 수익을 인식해야하는지에 영향을 미침

■ 추정의 사용

- 거래가격을 결정(예, 변동대가를 추정할 때)하고 개별 판매가격 기준에 따라 거래가격을 배분하는 데 있어서, 기존 기준보다 광범위하게 추정방법을 사용하게됨

■ 원가의 계상

- 계약원가(contract costs) 중 발생하였을 때 비용으로 인식하여야할 부분과 자산화 시켜야 하는 부분을 명시하고 있음.

■ 공시

- 재무제표 이용자가 금액, 시기, 수익의 불확실성, 고객과의 계약으로부터 발생되는 현금흐름의 이해를 도울 수 있게 명시함. 현 기준에서 요구하는 것보다 고객과의 계약에 대한 더 많은 정보의 공시를 요구함

3.	향후진행사항

■	IASB는 2010년 10월 22일까지 의견을 수렴하여, 2011년 2사분기에 IAS 11 및 IAS 18을 대체하는 새로운 IFRS를 발표할 예정임

4.	담당자

■ KAI:	권성수 (조사연구실장, sskwon@kasb.or.kr)

홍현선 (연구원, honghs@kasb.or.kr)

5.	Summary of questions for respondents

Recognition of revenue(paragraphs 8~33)

Question 1: Paragraphs 12-19 propose a principle(price interdependence) to help an entity determine whether:

(a)	to combine two or more contracts and account for them as a single contract;

(b)	to segment a single contract and account for it as two or more contracts; and

(c)	to account for a contract modification as a separate contract or as part of the original contract

Do you agree with that principle? If not, what principle would you recommend, and why, for determining whether (a) to combine or segment contracts and (b) to account for a contract modification as a separate contract?

Question 2: The boards propose that an entity should identify the performance obligations to be accounted for separately on the basis of whether the promised good or service is distinct. Paragraph 23 proposes a principle for determining when a good or service is distinct. Do you agree with that principle? If not, what principle would you specify for identifying separate performance obligations and why?

Question 3: Do you think that the proposed guidance in paragraph 25-31 and related application guidance are sufficient for determining when control of a promised good or service has been transferred to a customer? If not, why? What additional guidance would you propose and why?

Measurement of revenue (paragraphs 34-53)

Question 4: The boards propose that if the amount of consideration is variable, an entity should recognise revenue from satisfying a performance obligation only if the transaction price can be reasonably estimated. Paragraph 38 proposes criteria than entity should meet to be able to reasonably estimate the transaction price.

Do you agree that an entity should recognize revenue on the basis of an estimated transaction price? If so, do you agree with the proposed criteria in paragraph 38? If not, what approach do you suggest for recognizing revenue when the transaction price is variable and why?

Question 5: Paragraph 43 proposes that the transaction price should reflect the customer’s credit risk if its effects on the transaction price can be reasonably estimated. Do you agree that the customer’s credit risk should affect how much revenue an entity recognizes when it satisfies a performance obligation rather than whether the entity recognizes revenue? If not, why?

Question 6: Paragraphs 44 and 45 propose that an entity should adjust the amount of promised consideration to reflect the time value of money if the contract includes a material financing component(whether explicit or implicit). Do you agree? If not, why?

Question 7: Paragraph 50 proposes that an entity should allocate the transaction price to all separate performance obligations in a contract in proportion to the stand-alone selling price(estimated if necessary) of the good or service underlying each of those performance obligations. Do you agree? If not, when and why would that approach not be appropriate, and how should the transaction price be allocated in such cases?

Contract Costs (paragraphs 57-63)

Question 8: paragraph 57 proposes that if costs incurred in fulfilling a contract do not give rise to an asset eligible for recognition in accordance with other standards(for example, IAS 2 or ASC Topic 330; IAS 16 or ASC Topic 360; and IAS 38 Intangible Assets or ASC Topic 985 on software), n entity should recognize an asset only if those costs meet specified criteria.

Do you Think that the proposed requirements on accounting for the costs of fulfilling a contract are operational and sufficient? If not, why?

Question 9: Paragraph 58 propose the costs that relate directly to a contract for the purposes of (a) recognizing an asset for resources that the entity would use to satisfy performance obligations in a contract and (b) any additional liability recognized for an onerous performance obligation.

Do you agree with the costs specified? If not, what costs would you include or exclude and why?

Disclosure(paragraphs 69-83)

Question 10: The objective of the boards’ proposed disclosure requirements is to help users of financial statements understand the amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. Do you Think the proposed disclosure requirements will meet that objective? If not, why?

Question 11: The boards propose that an entity should disclose the amount of its remaining performance obligations and the expected timing of their satisfaction for contracts with an original duration expected to exceed one year

Do you agree with that proposed disclosure requirement? If not, what, if any, information do you think an entity should disclose about its remaining performance obligations?

Question 12: Do you agree that an entity should disaggregate revenue into the categories that best depict how the amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows re affected by economic factors? If not, why?

Effective date and transition (paragraphs 84 and 85)

Question 13: Do you agree that an entity should apply the proposed requirements retrospectively (i.e as if the entity had always applied the proposed requirements to all contracts in existence during any reporting periods presented)? If not, why?

Is there an alternative transition method that would preserve trend information about revenue but at a lower cost? If so, please explain the alternative and why you think it is better.

Application guidance (paragraphs B1-B96)

Question 14: The proposed application guidance is intended to assist an entity in applying the principles in the proposed requirements. Do you Think that the application guidance is sufficient to make the proposals operational? If not, what additional guidance do you suggest?

Question 15: The boards propose that an entity should distinguish between the following types of product warranties:

(a)	a warranty that provides a customer with coverage for latent defects in the product. This does not give rise to a performance obligation but requires an evaluation of whether the entity has satisfied its performance obligation to transfer the product specified in the contract.

(b)	a warranty that provides a customer with coverage for faults that arise after the product is transferred to he customer. This gives rise to a performance obligation in addition to the performance obligation to transfer the product specified in the contract.

Do you agree with the proposed distinction between the types of product warranties? Do you agree with the proposed accounting for each type of product warranty? If not, how do you think an entity should account for product warranties and why?

Question 16: The boards propose the following if a licence is not considered to be a sale of intellectual property:

(a)	if an entity grants a customer an exclusive licence to use its intellectual property, it has a performance obligation to permit the use of its intellectual property and it satisfies that obligation over the term of the licence; and it satisfies that obligation over the term of the licence; and

(b)	if an entity grants a customer a non-exclusive licence to use its intellectual property, it has a performance obligation to transfer the licence and it satisfies that obligation when the customer is able to use and benefit from the licence.

Do you agree that the pattern of revenue recognition should depend on whether the licence is exclusive? Do you agree with the patterns of revenue recognition proposed by the boards> why or why not?

Consequential amendments

Question 17: The boards propose that in accounting for the gain or loss on the sale of some non-financial assets(for example, intangible assets and property, plant and equipment), an entity should apply the recognition and measurement principles of the proposed revenue model.

Do you agree? In not, why?

Non-public entities

Question 18 [FASB only]: Should any of the proposed requirements be different for non-public entities (private companies and not-for-profit organizations)? If so, which requirement(s) and why?