Skip to content

ACCA Strategic Professional · Strategic Business Reporting (International) · Analysis and interpretation of financial and non-financial information and measurement of performance

Vantor plc's finance director is under pressure from the CEO, whose bonus depends on earnings per share, to reclassify $12m of ongoing development spend that does not meet the IAS 38 capitalisation criteria as an intangible asset. Profit before this adjustment is $60m with 100m shares. Ignoring tax, what is the effect on EPS if capitalised, and what is the correct professional response?

Capitalising the $12m would lift profit from $60m to $72m and EPS from $0.60 to $0.72, but this would be improper because the costs fail IAS 38 criteria. The accountant should refuse and escalate, since bonus-driven pressure threatens integrity under the IESBA Code.

  1. AEPS would rise from $0.60 to $0.72, which would be an unjustified overstatement; the accountant should refuse and escalate if needed under the IESBA CodeCorrect
  2. BEPS would rise from $0.60 to $0.72, which is acceptable as a judgement within management's discretion
  3. CEPS would rise from $0.60 to $0.48; the accountant should proceed because it is prudent
  4. DEPS would be unchanged because capitalised costs do not affect profit

Explanation

Capitalising $12m cuts expenses, so profit becomes $72m and EPS $0.72 versus $0.60. Costs that fail IAS 38 criteria must be expensed, so this is manipulation driven by self-interest, creating a threat to integrity. The accountant should refuse, and escalate to those charged with governance if pressure continues.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Analysis and interpretation of financial and non-financial information and measurement of performance shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

More Analysis and interpretation of financial and non-financial information and measurement of performance questions