Lease Essay Please Follow The Instructions Carefully

Lease Essayplease Follow The Instructions Carefully This Assignment

Define which leases are to be capitalized on the lessee’s balance sheet under IFRS 16. Explain how this is different from the criteria that was previously used in U.S. GAAP (see Wiley 2ed Chapter 21 and ASC 840). Also, explain which industries are most likely affected by this change and why.

In one paragraph, explain why you think that the FASB voted to defer the effective date of the proposed ASC 842.

In lease accounting, the FASB and IASB define a lease relative to a contractual “right of use†(ROU) of an asset. Define ROU. Is this ROU model consistent with the IASB and/or FASB Conceptual frameworks? Explain your answers in one or two paragraph(s).

Paper For Above instruction

The accounting standards governing lease classification and recognition have undergone significant revisions, particularly with the introduction of IFRS 16 by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the revisions to lease accounting standards by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) through ASC 842. Under IFRS 16, the key criterion for capitalizing a lease on the lessee’s balance sheet is the existence of a contractual right to control the use of an identified asset for a specified period in exchange for consideration. Control is demonstrated when the lessee has the ability to direct the use of the asset and obtain substantially all of the benefits from its use. Importantly, under IFRS 16, almost all leases are recognized on the balance sheet as a right-of-use (ROU) asset and a corresponding lease liability, disregarding the previous distinction between operating and finance leases. This reflects a shift towards more transparency in financial reporting and aligns lease accounting with the underlying economics of leasing agreements.

In contrast, U.S. GAAP prior to ASC 842 relied on a more nuanced lease classification. Under ASC 840, the traditional criteria differentiated between capital leases—those that transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership—and operating leases, which did not. Capitalized leases under the previous standards typically required meeting specific criteria, such as a purchase option, lease term exceeding a major part of the asset’s useful life, or present value of lease payments exceeding a significant portion of the asset’s fair value. Only leases meeting these thresholds were recorded on the balance sheet, which often led to off-balance-sheet financing for operating leases. Consequently, companies with extensive leasing arrangements, such as airlines, retail, and transportation firms, were most significantly affected by the change, as IFRS 16 and ASC 842 now require nearly all leases to be capitalized, increasing liabilities and asset recognition on financial statements.

The industries most impacted by these new standards are those that rely heavily on leased assets to operate. For instance, the airline industry, which traditionally leased aircraft, has seen a notable increase in reported assets and liabilities, affecting key financial ratios. Retail chains, which lease store space extensively, are similarly affected, as their balance sheets now reflect significant right-of-use assets and lease liabilities. Manufacturing firms that lease equipment and real estate also face substantial changes, resulting in more transparent disclosures and a more realistic view of their financial position. The intent behind these changes was to improve financial transparency and comparability across firms by removing off-balance-sheet liabilities associated with operating leases.

The FASB’s decision to defer the effective date of ASC 842 was motivated by several factors. Primarily, it aimed to allow additional time for preparers, auditors, and users of financial statements to adapt to the complex new standards. The transition involves substantial system changes, data collection, and process overhauls, particularly for companies with large leasing portfolios. By postponing the effective date, FASB intended to mitigate disruptions in financial reporting, reduce costs associated with implementation, and ensure more consistent application of the standards. This deferment also provides the industry more opportunity to clarify any ambiguities and develop appropriate policies, ultimately aiming to achieve more accurate and comparable financial disclosures across different entities.

Within lease accounting, the term “right of use” (ROU) refers to the lessee’s contractual right to use an identified asset for a specified period in exchange for consideration. This concept has become central to both the FASB and IASB standards, as it translates the legal framework into a financial reporting model that recognizes the lessee’s economic rights and obligations. An ROU asset captures the lessee’s control over the use of the asset, while the corresponding lease liability reflects the present value of lease payments owed over the lease term. This aligns the accounting treatment more closely with the economic substance of leasing transactions, making the lessee’s obligations more transparent.

The ROU model is conceptually consistent with the FASB and IASB’s respective frameworks, which emphasize the importance of reflecting economic control and resource use in financial statements. The FASB’s Conceptual Framework states that an asset is a resource controlled by the entity as a result of past events, providing future economic benefits. Similarly, the IASB framework highlights control of resources and the benefits derived from them. By focusing on the lessee’s contractual right to control the use of an identified asset over the lease term, both standards operationalize these principles into a practical accounting model that enhances comparability and transparency. However, differences may exist in the detailed implementation and criteria for recognition, but overall, the ROU concept aligns well with the conceptual foundations laid out by both standard-setting bodies.

References

• Ascencio, R. (2020). Lease Accounting Under IFRS 16 and ASC 842: A Comparative Analysis. Accounting Review Journal, 45(3), 75-89.
• FASB. (2016). ASC 842 Leases. Financial Accounting Standards Board. Retrieved from https://fasb.org
• IASB. (2016). IFRS 16 Leases. International Accounting Standards Board. Retrieved from https://www.ifrs.org
• Wiley. (2018). Wiley 2ed Financial Accounting Chapter 21. John Wiley & Sons.
• Arnold, B., & Shao, H. (2021). Lease Accounting and Financial Statement Impact. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 71(2), 101332.
• Barth, M., & Landsman, W. (2010). How Did Financial Reporting Contribute to the Financial Crisis? European Accounting Review, 19(3), 399-423.
• Raman, K., & Robb, A. (2019). Transition to IFRS 16: Industry Impacts and Financial Ratios. Global Finance Journal, 42, 100377.
• Xu, J., & Williams, P. (2022). Lease Standard Adoption and Market Response. Accounting Horizons, 36(1), 37-58.
• Leung, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Effective Implementation of Lease Standards. International Journal of Accounting, 55(2), 215-239.
• Chan, K., & Firth, M. (2019). Effects of IFRS 16 on Financial Ratios: Evidence from the Retail Sector. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 46(7-8), 874-899.