In accounting departments throughout the Nordic region, the mood is positive when they see how using good tools makes working with IFRS 16 accurate, quick and easy. Our colleague Kathrine Resch-Knudsen has visited many of them, and can testify to rapidly falling stress levels.
It looks like IFRS 16 could entail a lot of extra work for CFOs, controllers and accounts departments. What are you finding, out in the real world?
That’s quite an interesting question, because the mood actually seems to be pretty upbeat. In any case, I’ve had nothing but positive feedback when I’ve been out visiting clients and had a start-up meeting with our solution.
I find that one important reason for this positive mood is that the CFO and the accounts department have agreed on which system supplier to use.
During the start-up process with House of Control, we recommend workshops, where we enter the leases together. At this point we identify various issues that must be discussed with the auditors. These meetings are very friendly and informal, and – yes – the mood is positive and relaxed.
To what extent do the accounting department have central control over the leases covered by the new regulations?
That depends entirely on how the companies are structured. In some companies, the leases are located at the various branch offices and in the other countries. In others, the biggest and most important leases are administered centrally. Some prefer for the various branch offices to enter the leases and perform the IFRS 16 classification, whereas others centralise this task at the accounts department for the Nordic region.
What do CFOs think of the functionality in House of Control’s IFRS 16 module?
I get the impression that everyone who works with the IFRS 16 module finds it straightforward and user-friendly. Those who have not previously used our better-known solution, Complete Control, are also surprised by how much more they can get out of the solution than they originally imagined.
Finally, there are various transitional rules and calculation methods. Have you gained an impression of what is most common?
The modified retrospective approach is by far the most widely used. There is also the option to decide on a lease-by-lease basis whether to recognise the right of use at the value recognised in the balance sheet, as if IFRS 16 had been implemented when the lease was signed, or at the same value as the lease obligation at the date of transition. I have found that many people want to simulate the effects of the two alternatives, which our solution allows them to do.
- How to get real business value from IFRS 16
- Converting to IFRS? Here are our tips for best practice
- How a large retailer handles 350 IFRS 16 leasing contracts
- The 5 most common problems when IFRS 16 is handled using Excel
- What functionality to look for in IFRS 16 software
- Read these tips for better IFRS 16 compliance
- The 4 most important steps when complying with IFRS 16