<붙임2>

Exposure Draft

(Offsetting Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities)

- 목 차 -

1.	개요

2.  현행 실무에의 주요 영향

3.	향후진행사항

4.	담당자

5.  공개초안에 대한 질문

1.	개요

□ 개정의 목적

◦ IFRS 적용 재무제표와 US GAAP 적용 재무제표 간 가장 큰 양적 차이를 초래하고 있는 금융자산·금융부채 상계처리기준 차이를 해소함으로써 국제적인 비교가능성을 증진

-	IASB와 FASB는 회계기준 정합성 달성의 일환으로 상계처리기준 일원화를 위한 공동 프로젝트를 진행하였고 그 논의결과를 바탕으로 개정안을 발표

□ 공개초안 주요내용

◦ (상계기준) 법적으로 실행가능하고 무조건적인 상계권리를 보유하고 있으며, 순액으로 결제하거나 자산의 실현과 동시에 부채를 결제할 의도를 가지고 있을 때 금융자산과 금융부채를 상계하여 순액으로 표시하도록 함

-	양자간 상계협약 뿐만 아니라 다자간 상계협약에도 상계처리 가능

-	상계처리 가능한 상계권한은 상대방의 부도나 파산시를 포함한 모든 경우에 법적으로 실행가능해야 함 (실행가능성이 미래사건과 무관)

2.	현행 실무에의 주요 영향

□ 기존의 상계기준과 비교하여 개정안의 큰 변화가 없어 실무에 미치는 영향은 크지 않을 것으로 판단됨

3.	향후진행사항

□ IASB는 2011년 4월 28일까지 의견을 수렴하고, 이를 반영하여 2011년 2분기 중 최종 기준을 확정할 예정

4.	담당자

□ IASB:	Christian Kusi-Yeboah (Senior Technical Manager, ckusiyeboah@ifrs.org)

Barbara Davidson (Senior Technical Manager, bdavidson@ifrs.org)

Keiji Fukuzawa (Visiting Fellow, kfukuzawa@ifrs.org)

□ KAI:	박세환 (수석연구원, shpark@kasb.or.kr)

이건재 (선임연구원, gjlee@kasb.or.kr)

5.	공개초안에 대한 질문

□ Question 1—Offsetting criteria: unconditional right and intention to settle net or simultaneously

◦ The proposals would require an entity to offset a recognised financial asset and a recognised financial liability when the entity has an unconditional and legally enforceable right to set off the financial asset and financial liability and intends either:

(a)	to settle the financial asset and financial liability on a net basis or

(b)	to realise the financial asset and settle the financial liability simultaneously.

◦ Do you agree with this proposed requirement? If not, why? What criteria would you propose instead, and why?

□ Question 2—Unconditional right of set-off must be enforceable in all circumstances

◦ It is proposed that financial assets and financial liabilities must be offset if, and only if, they are subject to an unconditional and legally enforceable right of set-off. The proposals specify that an unconditional and legally enforceable right of set-off is enforceable in all circumstances (ie it is enforceable in the normal course of business and on the default, insolvency or bankruptcy of a counterparty) and its exercisability is not contingent on a future event. Do you agree with this proposed requirement? If not, why? What would you propose instead, and why?

□ Question 3—Multilateral set-off arrangements

◦ The proposals would require offsetting for both bilateral and multilateral set-off arrangements that meet the offsetting criteria. Do you agree that the offsetting criteria should be applied to both bilateral and multilateral set-off arrangements? If not, why? What would you propose instead, and why? What are some of the common situations in which a multilateral right of set-off may be present?

□ Question 4—Disclosures

◦ Do you agree with the proposed disclosure requirements in paragraphs 11–15? If not, why? How would you propose to amend those requirements, and why?

□ Question 5—Effective date and transition

(a)	Do you agree with the proposed transition requirements in Appendix A? If not, why? How would you propose to amend those requirements, and why?

(a)	Please provide an estimate of how long an entity would reasonably require to implement the proposed requirements.