CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING FOR BUSINESS COMBINATIONS

Article by Dr. Ciaran Connolly, Phd, BSSC, MBA, FCA, Examiner in Professional 2
Advanced Corporate Reporting
INTRODUCTION
With respect to the preparation of consolidated financial statements, the key accounting
standards are: IAS 27 Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements; IFRS 3 Business
Combinations; IAS 28 Investments in Associates; and IAS 31 Interests in Joint Ventures.
This article focuses upon the recent changes to IAS 27 and IFRS 3, both of which were
revised in January 2008, marking the culmination of a joint project between the International
Accounting Standards Board and the Financial Accounting Standards Board designed to
improve financial reporting and international convergence. The requirements of IFRS 3
(2008) come into effect for those business combinations for which the acquisition date is on
or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after 1 st July 2009
(early adoption is permitted).
IAS 27(2008) WHAT HAS CHANGED?
1. Acquisitions and disposals that do not result in a change of control
Changes in a parents ownership interest in a subsidiary that do not result in a loss of control
are accounted for within shareholders equity as transactions with owners acting in their
capacity as owners. No gain or loss is recognised on such transactions and goodwill is not
re-measured. Any difference between the change in the non-controlling interest (previously
referred to as minority interest see IFRS 3 (2008) below) and the fair value of the
consideration paid or received is recognised directly in equity and attributed to the owners of
the parent.
2. Loss of control
A parent can lose control of a subsidiary through a sale or distribution. When control is lost,
the parent derecognises all assets, liabilities and non-controlling interest at their carrying
amount. Any retained interest in the former subsidiary is recognised at its fair value at the
date control is lost. If the loss of control of the former subsidiary involves the distribution of
equity interests to owners of the parent acting in their capacity as owners, that distribution is
recognised at the date control is lost. A gain or loss on loss of control is recognised as the
net of the proceeds, if any, and these transactions. Any such gain or loss is recognised in
profit or loss.
3. Loss of significant influence or joint control
When an investor loses significant influence over an associate, it derecognises that
associate and recognises in profit or loss the difference between the sum of the proceeds
received and any retained interest, and the carrying amount of the investment in the
associate at the date significant influence is lost. A similar treatment is required when an
investor loses joint control over a jointly controlled entity.

Page 1 of 6

4. Attribution of profit or loss to non-controlling interests

The share of total comprehensive income should be attributed to the non-controlling interest
even if this results in the non-controlling interest having a deficit balance.

IFRS 3 (2008) WHAT HAS CHANGED?

1. Acquisition-related costs
Costs incurred in an acquisition (e.g. finders fees; advisory, legal, accounting, valuation, and
other professional or consulting fees; and general administrative costs) are expensed in the
period incurred. Costs incurred to issue debt or equity securities are recognised in
accordance with IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement. (Under IFRS
3 (2004) directly related acquisition costs could be included as part of the cost of acquisition.)
2. Step acquisitions
A business combination leading to acquisition accounting applies only at the point where
control is achieved. Where the acquirer has a pre-existing equity interest in the entity
acquired: that equity interest may be accounted for as a financial instrument in accordance
with IAS 39, as an associate or a joint venture using the equity method in accordance with
IAS 28 or IAS 31, or as a jointly controlled entity using the proportionate consolidation
method in accordance with IAS 31. If the acquirer increases its equity interest sufficiently to
achieve control (described in IFRS 3 (2008) as a business combination achieved in stages),
it must remeasure its previously-held equity interest in the acquiree at acquisition-date fair
value and recognise the resulting gain or loss, if any, in profit or loss. Once control is
achieved, all other increases and decreases in ownership interests are treated as
transactions among equity holders and reported within equity. Goodwill does not arise on any
increase, and no gain or loss is recognised on any decrease.
3. Goodwill
Goodwill represents future economic benefits that are not capable of being individually
identified and separately recognised. It is essentially the residual cost after allocating fair
value to identifiable net assets taken over. Goodwill is measured as the difference between:
the aggregate of:
(i) the acquisition-date fair value of the consideration transferred;
(ii) the amount of any non-controlling interest in the entity acquired (see point 4. for two
measurement options); and
(iii) in a business combination achieved in stages, the acquisition-date fair value of the
acquirers previously-held equity interest in the entity acquired; and
the net of the acquisition-date amounts of the identifiable assets acquired and the
liabilities assumed, both measured in accordance with IFRS 3.
If the difference above is positive, the acquirer should recognise the goodwill as an asset.
If the difference above is negative, the resulting gain is recognised as a bargain purchase in
profit or loss.
After initial recognition, the acquirer should measure goodwill at cost less accumulated
impairment losses. It should not be amortised but instead tested annually for impairment, or
more frequently, if events indicate that it might be impaired, in accordance with IAS 36
Impairment of Assets.
Page 2 of 6

4. Non-controlling interests (previously referred to as minority interests)

IFRS 3 has an explicit option, available on a transaction-by-transaction basis, to measure
any non-controlling interest in the entity acquired either at: (i) the non-controlling interests
proportionate share of the net identifiable assets of the entity acquired (old method); or (ii)
fair value, in which case the consolidated goodwill represents that of both the parent and the
non-controlling interest (new method). The former treatment corresponds to the
measurement basis in IFRS 3 (2004). For the purpose of measuring non-controlling interest
at fair value, it may be possible to determine the acquisition-date fair value on the basis of
market prices for the equity shares not held by the acquirer. When a market price for the
equity shares is not available because the shares are not publicly-traded, the acquirer must
measure the fair value of the non-controlling interest using other valuation techniques. It is
important to realise that the new approach only applies at the date of acquisition.
Subsequent to acquisition, both the non-controlling interest and the fair value of the
subsidiarys net assets will have changed.
Example (Old Method)
P pays 200m for 75% of S which has net assets with a fair value of 150m. Goodwill of
87.5m (200m - (75% x 150m)) would be recognised, and the non-controlling interests
would be 37.5m (25% x 150m). Hypothetically, if we assume that purchasing 100% of S
would have cost proportionately more, the consideration would have been 266.67m
(200m/75%) and goodwill would then be 116.67m (266.67m - 150m) and there would be
no non-controlling interests. This demonstrates that, where a non-controlling interest exists,
the traditional consolidation method only records the parents share of the goodwill, and the
non-controlling interest is carried at its proportionate share of the fair value of the subsidiarys
net assets (which excludes any attributable goodwill). The argument goes that as we
consolidate the whole of a subsidiarys other assets (and liabilities), why should goodwill be
any different? After all, it is an asset!
Example (New Method)
Progressing the above example, assuming that the value of the goodwill of the noncontrolling interest is proportionate to that of the parent, consolidated goodwill of 116.67m
would be recognised (this includes both the controlling (87.5m) and the non-controlling
interest (29.17m) in goodwill) and the non-controlling interest would be 66.67m (29.17m +
37.5m attributed goodwill). In effect, consolidated goodwill and the non-controlling interest
are grossed up by the non-controlling interests share of goodwill (29.17m, in this case).
Although this may seem new, it is in fact an extension of the methodology in IAS 36 when
calculating the impairment of goodwill of a cash generating unit where there is a noncontrolling interest.
Example (Both Methods)
P pays 400m to purchase 75% of the shares of S. The fair value of 100% of Ss identifiable
net assets is 300m.
If P elects to measure non-controlling interests at their proportionate interest in net assets of
S of 75m (25% x 300m), the consolidated financial statements show goodwill of 175m
(400m + 75m - 300m).
If P elects to measure non-controlling interests at fair value and determines that fair value to
be 100m, then goodwill of 200m is recognised (400m + 100m - 300m). The fair value
of the 25% non-controlling interest in S will not necessarily be proportionate to the price paid
by P for its 75%, primarily due to control premium or discount.
Page 3 of 6

5. Contingent consideration
IFRS 3 requires the acquisition consideration to be measured at fair value at the acquisition
date, including the fair value of any contingent consideration payable. IFRS 3 permits very
few subsequent changes to this measurement and only as a result of additional information
about facts and circumstances that existed at the acquisition date. All other changes (e.g.
changes resulting from events after the acquisition date such as the acquiree meeting an
earnings target, reaching a specified share price, or meeting a milestone on a project) are
recognised in profit or loss. While this fair value approach is consistent with the way other
forms of consideration are valued, it is not easy to apply in practice as the definition is largely
hypothetical. It is highly unlikely that the acquisition date liability for contingent consideration
could be or would be settled by willing parties in an arms length transaction. In an exam
question, the acquisition date fair value (or how to calculate it) of any contingent
consideration would be given. The payment of contingent consideration may be in the form of
equity or a liability (issuing a debt instrument or cash) and should be recorded as such in
accordance with IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation, or other applicable standard.
The previous version of IFRS 3 required contingent consideration to be accounted for only if
it was probable that it would become payable.
6. Re-acquired rights
Where the acquirer and acquiree were parties to a pre-existing relationship (e.g. the acquirer
had granted the acquiree a right to use its intellectual property), there are two implications for
acquisition accounting: firstly, where the terms of any contract are not market terms, a gain
or loss is recognised and the purchase consideration adjusted to reflect a payment or receipt
for the non-market terms; and secondly, an intangible asset (being the rights re-acquired) is
recognised at fair value and amortised over the contract term.
7. Reassessments
IFRS 3 clarifies that an entity must classify and designate all contractual arrangements at the
acquisition date with two exceptions: (i) leases, and (ii) insurance contracts. In other words,
the acquirer applies its accounting policies and makes the choices available to it as if it had
acquired those contractual relationships outside of the business combination. The existing
treatment applied by the acquiree for classification of leases and insurance is applied by the
acquirer and therefore is not reassessed. Reassessing assets and liabilities is particularly
relevant when acquiring financial assets and financial liabilities in a business combination.
COMPREHENSIVE EXAMPLE
On 1st January 2009 Rooney plc (Rooney) acquired 3,000,000 equity shares in Ferguson
Limited (Ferguson) by an exchange of one share in Rooney for every two shares in
Ferguson, plus 1.25 per acquired Ferguson share in cash. The market price of each
Rooney share at the date of acquisition was 6, and the market price of each Ferguson
share at the date of acquisition was 3.25.
Rooney has a policy of valuing non-controlling interests at fair value at the date of
acquisition. For this purpose, the share price of Ferguson at this date should be used.
An extract from the draft statement of financial position of Ferguson at 31st December 2009
showed:

1 Equity shares
4,000,000
Retained earnings
at 31st December 2008
6,000,000
for year ended 31st December 2009
2,900,000
12,900,000
Page 4 of 6

Requirement:
Based upon the information provided, calculate the:
(i) goodwill arising on the acquisition of Ferguson; and
(ii) non-controlling interests to be included in Rooneys consolidated statement of financial
position at 31st December 2009.
Solution
Rooney purchased 3,000,000/4,000,000 shares in Ferguson (i.e. 75%), paying 12,750,000
((1,500,000 shares x 6) + (3,000,000 shares x 1.25)).
(i)

Goodwill in Ferguson
000

Investment at cost:
Shares issued (3,000,000/2 x 6)
Cash (3,000,000 x 1.25)
Total consideration
Equity shares of Ferguson
Pre-acquisition reserves

000
9,000
3,750
12,750

4,000
6,000
75% x 10,000

Rooneys share of goodwill

Fair value of non-controlling interest at date of acquisition 1,000,000 shares at
3.25
Non-controlling interests share of Fergusons net assets at date of acquisition
(10,000,000 x 25%)
Non-controlling interests share of goodwill
Total goodwill is therefore (5,250,000 + 750,000)

(7,500)
5,250

3,250
(2,500)
750
6,000

This applies the old methodology for calculating the goodwill with the non-controlling
interests goodwill calculated separately. Applying the new method of calculating goodwill
gives the same total figure, but it is a little simpler:

Consideration paid by the parent (as before)

Fair value of the non-controlling interest (as before)
Fair value of subsidiarys net assets (based on equity as before)
Total goodwill

000
12,750
3,250
16,000
(10,000)
6,000

(ii) Non-controlling interest

Equity at 31st December 2009
The non-controlling interests share of net identifiable assets (x 25%)
Non-controlling interest share of goodwill (see (i))

000
12,900
3,225
750
3,975

Note that subsequent to the date of acquisition, a non-controlling interest is valued at its
proportionate share of the carrying value of the subsidiarys net identifiable assets (equal to
Page 5 of 6

its equity) plus its attributed goodwill (less any impairment). The non-controlling interest is
only valued at fair value at the date of acquisition.
Tutorial Notes
(a) There are a number of ways of presenting the information to test the new method for
calculating the non-controlling interest at the date of acquisition. As above, the
subsidiarys share price just before the acquisition could be given and then used to value
the non-controlling interest. It is then a matter of multiplying the share price by the
number of shares held by the non-controlling interest:
e.g. 1,000,000 x 3.25 = 3,250,000 (see (i) above).
In practice the parent is likely to have paid more than the subsidiarys pre-acquisition
share price in order to gain control.
The question could simply state that the directors valued the non-controlling interest at
the date of acquisition at 3,250,000.
An alternative approach would be to give in a question the value of the goodwill
attributable to the non-controlling interest. In this case, the non-controlling interests
goodwill would be added to the parents goodwill (calculated by the old method) and to
the carrying amount of the non-controlling interest itself (e.g. 750,000 (see (i) above)).
(b) The consideration given by Rooney for the shares of Ferguson works out at 4.25 per
share, i.e. consideration of 12,750,000 for 3,000,000 shares. This is considerably
higher than the market price of Fergusons shares (3.25) before the acquisition. This
probably reflects the cost of gaining control of Ferguson. This is also why it is probably
appropriate to value the non-controlling interest in Ferguson shares at 3.25 each,
because (by definition) the non-controlling interest does not have any control. This also
explains why Rooneys share of Fergusons goodwill at 87.5% (i.e.
5,250,000/6,000,000) is much higher than its proportionate shareholding in Ferguson
(which is 75%).
(c) The 1,500,000 shares issued by Rooney in the share exchange, at a value of 6 each,
would be recorded as 1 per share as capital and 5 per share as premium, giving an
increase in share capital of 1,500,000 and a share premium of 7,500,000.
(d) If goodwill had been impaired by 1,000,000. IAS 36 requires a subsidiarys goodwill
impairment to be allocated between the parent and the non-controlling interest on the
same basis as the subsidiarys profits and losses are allocated. Thus, of the impairment
of 1,000,000, 750,000 would be allocated to the parent and 250,000 would be
allocated to the non-controlling interest, writing it down to 3,725,000 (3,975,000 250,000). It could be argued that this requirement represents an anomaly: of the
recognised goodwill (before the impairment) of 6,000,000 only 750,000 (i.e. 12%)
relates to the non-controlling interest, but it suffers 25% (its proportionate shareholding
in Ferguson) of the goodwill impairment.

Page 6 of 6