Analysis of Impairment of Assets in Corporate Financial Reporting

This report provides a detailed analysis of impairment loss in corporate accounting and financial reporting, focusing on the computation of recoverable amounts, fair value less cost of disposal, and value in use as per AASB 136. It explains how impairment loss is determined when the carrying amount of an asset or cash-generating unit (CGU) exceeds its recoverable amount, emphasizing the importance of considering both fair value less cost of disposal and value in use. The report also includes journal entries for impairment loss computation, offering practical insights. Desklib provides access to this and many other solved assignments for students.

Running head: CORPORATE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
Corporate Accounting and Financial Reporting
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1CORPORATE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
Part A
Computation of recoverable amount, fair value less cost of disposal and value
in use
Impairment loss amount is the value by which carrying amount of the asset or
the carrying amount of the cash generating unit (CGU) exceeds the recoverable
amount. While computing the amount of impairment loss various amounts of the
asset like recoverable amount, value in use and fair value reduced by cost of
disposal are taken into consideration. Recoverable amount of CGU or any particular
asset is the higher value among the fair value reduced by cost of disposal and its
value in use (Bond, Govendir and Wells 2016). Value in use is present value of
future cash inflows likely to be generated from the CGU or any particular asset. Fair
value reduced by cost of disposal is obtainable amount from sale of the CGU or
asset at arm’s length transaction price among willing and knowledgeable parties
reduced by the disposal cost.
AASB 136 on Impairment of assets defined the recoverable amount as higher
among the value in use and fair value reduced by cost of disposal. Para 19-57 set
out the out requirement to measure the recoverable amount. The requirement
applies the term ‘an asset’. However, practically it is applied to individual asset or
CGU both equally. This is not necessary always to determine the fair value reduced
by cost of disposal and the value in use. If any of these 2 amounts exceeds the
carrying amount of the asset, the asset will not be impaired rather it will then be
necessary to compute the other estimated amount. Sometimes even if the particular
asset is not dealt in active market, determination of the fair value reduced by cost of
disposal (Guthrie and Pang 2013). However, in some instances it will not be possible

2CORPORATE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
as no basis can be established to make a reliable estimate for projecting the
obtainable amount from selling of the asset. This situation generally arises when the
asset is held for the purpose of disposal. The reason behind this is the value in use
for the asset held for the purpose of disposal consists of the net proceeds from
disposal as future cash flows from asset’s continuous use till disposal is of negligible
value. For the individual asset the recoverable amount is established except where
the asset dies not create any cash inflows that is highly dependent on other asset or
other group of asset (Legislation.gov.au 2018). In this case, the recoverable amount
is established for CGU under which the asset falls. Exception to this situation is (i)
when the fair value reduced by cost of disposal of the asset is higher as compared to
carrying amount or (ii) when the value in use of the asset can be established to be
close to the fair value reduced by cost of disposal and the fair value reduced by cost
of disposal is determinable (Rennekamp, Rupar and Seybert 2014). In some of the
instances, the average, estimates and the computational short cuts provides with
reasonable approximations of detailed computation to determine the value in use or
fair value reduced by cost of disposal.
While measuring the fair value reduced by cost of sell, best evidence for the
amount is the price mentioned in the binding sale agreement as per the arm’s length
price. The amount is arrived at after adjusting for the incremental cost that will be
directly attributable for disposing the asset (Kang and Gray 2013). However, if no
binding agreement for sale is there however, the asset is dealt in the active market;
fair value reduced by cost of disposal will be the market price of the asset less the
disposal cost. Here, the bid price is considered as the market price. However, if the
bid price also is not available price of the most recent transaction will be considered
for estimating the fair value reduced by cost of disposal. However, this amount can

3CORPORATE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
be considered if there is no significant change taken place in the economic
circumstances recently. However, the active market as well as binding agreement
both are not found in that case fair value reduced by cost of disposal is estimated on
the basis of best available information that can be obtained by the company on the
date of reporting. In determination of this amount the entity takes into consideration
the outcome of the similar asset’s recent transaction under same industry. Fair value
reduced by cost of sale does not mean the forced sale unless the management is
required to sell immediately (Christensen and Nikolaev 2013). Disposal or selling
cost includes the stamp duty, legal cost, transaction taxes, cost involved in removing
the asset and direct incremental cost required for bringing the asset in the status of
its sale.
While measuring the amount of value in use the elements those are
considered are – (i) estimation of future cash flows expected by the company to be
obtained from the asset (ii) time value of the money that is represented by risk free
interest rate prevailing in the market at present (iii) expected variation in market
regarding the timing or amount of future cash flows (iv) price contributed to bearing
of the inherent uncertainties of asset and (v) other factors like liquidity that will be
reflected by the market participants for pricing the future cash inflows estimated to be
generated from the asset (Ji 2013). While estimating value in use, steps followed are
– (i) estimating future cash outflows and inflows to be generated from the asset’s
continuous use and eventual disposal and (ii) application of appropriate rate of
discount to the future cash flows (Bond, Govendir and Wells 2016). For estimating
the value in use, basis used for estimating the future cash flows is the projections of
base cash flows on supportable and reasonable assumption that will represent the
best estimate of the management.

4CORPORATE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
Part B
Impairment loss computation
Journal entries in the book of Gali Ltd as on 30th June 2015

5CORPORATE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
Note – while computing the allocation of impairment loss, inventory is excluded as it
is valued at lower among the market price and cost.

6CORPORATE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
References
Bond, D., Govendir, B. and Wells, P., 2016. An evaluation of asset impairments by
Australian firms and whether they were impacted by AASB 136. Accounting &
Finance, 56(1), pp.259-288.
Bond, D., Govendir, B. and Wells, P., 2016. An evaluation of asset impairment
decisions by Australian firms and whether this was impacted by AASB 136.
Christensen, H.B. and Nikolaev, V.V., 2013. Does fair value accounting for non-
financial assets pass the market test?. Review of Accounting Studies, 18(3), pp.734-
775.
Guthrie, J. and Pang, T.T., 2013. Disclosure of Goodwill Impairment under AASB
136 from 2005–2010. Australian Accounting Review, 23(3), pp.216-231.
Ji, K., 2013. Better late than never, the timing of goodwill impairment testing in
Australia. Australian Accounting Review, 23(4), pp.369-379.
Kang, H. and Gray, S.J., 2013. Segment reporting practices in Australia: Has IFRS 8
made a difference?. Australian Accounting Review, 23(3), pp.232-243.
Legislation.gov.au., 2018. AASB 136 - Impairment of Assets - August 2015 . [online]
Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2017C00297/Download
[Accessed 21 Sep. 2018].
Rennekamp, K., Rupar, K.K. and Seybert, N., 2014. Impaired judgment: The effects
of asset impairment reversibility and cognitive dissonance on future investment. The
Accounting Review, 90(2), pp.739-759.