FASB decides to defer revenue recognition

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

FASB decides to defer revenue recognition

fotolia-77736023-subscription-monthly-m-accountingstandards.jpg

Taxpayers which use US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) in their financial reporting will get an extra year to implement the new revenue recognition standard after the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) decided at its meeting on April 1 to defer its effective date.

Those entities which follow US GAAP will now have to apply the standard (Accounting Standards Update 2014-09) to their annual and interim reporting for periods after December 15 2017, rather than a year earlier. Private companies will have another year after this to incorporate the standard into their annual reporting and another year after that, that is, December 15 2019, to use it for their interim reporting.

All companies, both public and private, will be allowed to adopt the standard earlier than December 15 2017 if they want to, but not before December 15 2016, the original effective date for public entities.

FASB’s board has directed staff to draft a proposed Accounting Standards Update, with a 30-day comment period, to reflect these decisions.

FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board, which oversees the development of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), issued a converged standard on revenue recognition in May 2014.

At the time, a joint statement from the two organisations said:

“The core principle of the new standard is for companies to recognise revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration (that is, payment) to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The new standard also will result in enhanced disclosures about revenue, provide guidance for transactions that were not previously addressed comprehensively (for example, service revenue and contract modifications) and improve guidance for multiple-element arrangements.”





more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

PwC Australia’s response to its tax leaks scandal could give KPMG a useful case study, but so far there’s little sign of positive lessons learned
Tom Goldstein’s attempt to overturn his tax conviction was shot down; in other news, Deloitte promoted several tax partners in Italy
The tax advisory firm becomes the latest member of the Andersen Global network, which has more than 50,000 professionals worldwide
A revised Chapter VII signals a move away from mechanical TP approaches, stressing transaction understanding, functional analysis and context-driven documentation requirements
HMRC’s growing focus on evidencing tax decisions is shifting attention from technical accuracy to governance, requiring businesses to demonstrate how positions were reached and documented
Australia’s Department of Finance will also commission an independent review of KPMG’s governance, culture, ethics and integrity frameworks, it has revealed
In the second instalment of this two-part series, Jayne Stokes takes a practical approach to navigating the capital v revenue question for UK R&D claims for software development, and shares pointers for businesses
ITR's latest podcast considers how transformational the buyout could be in Ryan's quest for global advisory reach and analyses a recent boom in demand for private client advisory services
The event comes at an important moment for professionals dealing with practical realities related to this practice area
Germany’s dogmatic restriction of third-party investment in tax advisory firms will only serve to slow down innovation and access to justice
Gift this article