Measurement after recognition (AASB140_08-15_COMPmar20_07-21)

With the exception noted in paragraph 32A, an entity shall choose as its accounting policy either the fair value model in paragraphs 33–55 or the cost model in paragraph 56 and shall apply that policy to all of its investment property.

AASB 108 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors states that a voluntary change in accounting policy shall be made only if the change results in the financial statements providing reliable and more relevant information about the effects of transactions, other events or conditions on the entity’s financial position, financial performance or cash flows. It is highly unlikely that a change from the fair value model to the cost model will result in a more relevant presentation.

This Standard requires all entities to measure the fair value of investment property, for the purpose of either measurement (if the entity uses the fair value model) or disclosure (if it uses the cost model). An entity is encouraged, but not required, to measure the fair value of investment property on the basis of a valuation by an independent valuer who holds a recognised and relevant professional qualification and has recent experience in the location and category of the investment property being valued.

An entity may:

(a) choose either the fair value model or the cost model for all investment property backing liabilities that pay a return linked directly to the fair value of, or returns from, specified assets including that investment property; and

(b) choose either the fair value model or the cost model for all other investment property, regardless of the choice made in (a).

Some insurers and other entities operate an internal property fund that issues notional units, with some units held by investors in linked contracts and others held by the entity. Paragraph 32A does not permit an entity to measure the property held by the fund partly at cost and partly at fair value.

If an entity chooses different models for the two categories described in paragraph 32A, sales of investment property between pools of assets measured using different models shall be recognised at fair value and the cumulative change in fair value shall be recognised in profit or loss. Accordingly, if an investment property is sold from a pool in which the fair value model is used into a pool in which the cost model is used, the property’s fair value at the date of the sale becomes its deemed cost.

After initial recognition, an entity that chooses the fair value model shall measure all of its investment property at fair value, except in the cases described in paragraph 53.

[Deleted]

A gain or loss arising from a change in the fair value of investment property shall be recognised in profit or loss for the period in which it arises.

[Deleted]

When measuring the fair value of investment property in accordance with AASB 13, an entity shall ensure that the fair value reflects, among other things, rental income from current leases and other assumptions that market participants would use when pricing investment property under current market conditions.

When a lessee uses the fair value model to measure an investment property that is held as a right-of-use asset, it shall measure the right-of-use asset, and not the underlying property, at fair value.

AASB 16 specifies the basis for initial recognition of the cost of an investment property held by a lessee as a right-of-use asset. Paragraph 33 requires the investment property held by a lessee as a right-of-use asset to be remeasured, if necessary, to fair value if the entity chooses the fair value model. When lease payments are at market rates, the fair value of an investment property held by a lessee as a right-of-use asset at acquisition, net of all expected lease payments (including those relating to recognised lease liabilities), should be zero. Thus, remeasuring a right-of-use asset from cost in accordance with AASB 16 to fair value in accordance with paragraph 33 (taking into account the requirements in paragraph 50) should not give rise to any initial gain or loss, unless fair value is measured at different times. This could occur when an election to apply the fair value model is made after initial recognition.

[Deleted]

In exceptional cases, there is clear evidence when an entity first acquires an investment property (or when an existing property first becomes investment property after a change in use) that the variability in the range of reasonable fair value measurements will be so great, and the probabilities of the various outcomes so difficult to assess, that the usefulness of a single measure of fair value is negated. This may indicate that the fair value of the property will not be reliably measurable on a continuing basis (see paragraph 53).

[Deleted]

In determining the carrying amount of investment property under the fair value model, an entity does not double-count assets or liabilities that are recognised as separate assets or liabilities. For example:

(a) equipment such as lifts or air-conditioning is often an integral part of a building and is generally included in the fair value of the investment property, rather than recognised separately as property, plant and equipment.

(b) if an office is leased on a furnished basis, the fair value of the office generally includes the fair value of the furniture, because the rental income relates to the furnished office. When furniture is included in the fair value of investment property, an entity does not recognise that furniture as a separate asset.

(c) the fair value of investment property excludes prepaid or accrued operating lease income, because the entity recognises it as a separate liability or asset.

(d) the fair value of investment property held by a lessee as a right-of-use asset reflects expected cash flows (including variable lease payments that are expected to become payable). Accordingly, if a valuation obtained for a property is net of all payments expected to be made, it will be necessary to add back any recognised lease liability, to arrive at the carrying amount of the investment property using the fair value model.

[Deleted]

In some cases, an entity expects that the present value of its payments relating to an investment property (other than payments relating to recognised liabilities) will exceed the present value of the related cash receipts. An entity applies AASB 137 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets to determine whether to recognise a liability and, if so, how to measure it.

There is a rebuttable presumption that an entity can reliably measure the fair value of an investment property on a continuing basis. However, in exceptional cases, there is clear evidence when an entity first acquires an investment property (or when an existing property first becomes investment property after a change in use) that the fair value of the investment property is not reliably measurable on a continuing basis. This arises when, and only when, the market for comparable properties is inactive (eg there are few recent transactions, price quotations are not current or observed transaction prices indicate that the seller was forced to sell) and alternative reliable measurements of fair value (for example, based on discounted cash flow projections) are not available. If an entity determines that the fair value of an investment property under construction is not reliably measurable but expects the fair value of the property to be reliably measurable when construction is complete, it shall measure that investment property under construction at cost until either its fair value becomes reliably measurable or construction is completed (whichever is earlier). If an entity determines that the fair value of an investment property (other than an investment property under construction) is not reliably measurable on a continuing basis, the entity shall measure that investment property using the cost model in AASB 116 for owned investment property or in accordance with AASB 16 for investment property held by a lessee as a right-of-use asset. The residual value of the investment property shall be assumed to be zero. The entity shall continue to apply AASB 116 or AASB 16 until disposal of the investment property.

Once an entity becomes able to measure reliably the fair value of an investment property under construction that has previously been measured at cost, it shall measure that property at its fair value. Once construction of that property is complete, it is presumed that fair value can be measured reliably. If this is not the case, in accordance with paragraph 53, the property shall be accounted for using the cost model in accordance with AASB 116 for owned assets or AASB 16 for investment property held by a lessee as a right-of-use asset.

The presumption that the fair value of investment property under construction can be measured reliably can be rebutted only on initial recognition. An entity that has measured an item of investment property under construction at fair value may not conclude that the fair value of the completed investment property cannot be measured reliably.

In the exceptional cases when an entity is compelled, for the reason given in paragraph 53, to measure an investment property using the cost model in accordance with AASB 116 or AASB 16, it measures at fair value all its other investment property, including investment property under construction. In these cases, although an entity may use the cost model for one investment property, the entity shall continue to account for each of the remaining properties using the fair value model.

If an entity has previously measured an investment property at fair value, it shall continue to measure the property at fair value until disposal (or until the property becomes owner-occupied property or the entity begins to develop the property for subsequent sale in the ordinary course of business) even if comparable market transactions become less frequent or market prices become less readily available.

After initial recognition, an entity that chooses the cost model shall measure investment property:

(a) in accordance with AASB 5 Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations if it meets the criteria to be classified as held for sale (or is included in a disposal group that is classified as held for sale);

(b) in accordance with AASB 16 if it is held by a lessee as a right-of-use asset and is not held for sale in accordance with AASB 5; and

(c) in accordance with the requirements in AASB 116 for the cost model in all other cases.