OUR THOUGHTS ON:

Revenue Recognition Changes - Update

Construction

By Trevor Warren

Revenue is a critical component of an organization’s financial statements and is a very important number to users of those financial statements and in most cases plays an important role in how users assess the financial statements. Currently, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles allows for very broad revenue recognition principles that can very significantly among different industries.

On June 24, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, published an Exposure Draft – Revenue from Contracts with Customers. This proposed pronouncement was intended to provide a single/common revenue recognition model that can be applied to a wide range of industries and transaction types. This proposed pronouncement would supersede most existing guidance relating to revenue recognition.

This proposed change in the revenue recognition guidance will have a significant impact on the construction industry and will result in major changes to the way the revenue is currently accounted for in the construction industry. The proposed guidance calls for a performance obligation approach, which will require the contract to be broken down into smaller components and recognize revenue based on a value for each component. This may result in material differences in revenue recognition throughout the life of the contract as compared to the current percentage of completion method.

When the initial exposure draft was released there was a 120 comment period. This proposed revenue recognition pronouncement received significant negative feedback from folks within the construction industry. This criticism prompted the FASB to re-expose their revised proposals for a common revenue recognition standard in June. The FASB was expected to release a revised revenue recognition proposal in the third quarter of 2011, which did not happen. The new proposal is still expected to be issued during 2011 after which, another 120 day comment period will follow.

The construction industry played a key role in the FASB’s decision to put a hold on and revise the initial exposure draft. The revised guidance is still expected to be significantly different from the current percentage of completion method, but as mentioned above there will be another comment period to follow.

© 2011 Schneider Downs. All rights-reserved. All content on this site is property of Schneider Downs unless otherwise noted and should not be used without written permission.

This advice is not intended or written to be used for, and it cannot be used for, the purpose of avoiding any federal tax penalties that may be imposed, or for promoting, marketing or recommending to another person, any tax related matter.

You’ve heard our thoughts… We’d like to hear yours

The Schneider Downs Our Thoughts On blog exists to create a dialogue on issues that are important to organizations and individuals. While we enjoy sharing our ideas and insights, we’re especially interested in what you may have to say. If you have a question or a comment about this article – or any article from the Our Thoughts On blog – we hope you’ll share it with us. After all, a dialogue is an exchange of ideas, and we’d like to hear from you. Email us at contactSD@schneiderdowns.com.

Material discussed is meant for informational purposes only, and it is not to be construed as investment, tax, or legal advice. Please note that individual situations can vary. Therefore, this information should be relied upon when coordinated with individual professional advice.

© 2018 Schneider Downs. All rights-reserved. All content on this site is property of Schneider Downs unless otherwise noted and should not be used without written permission.

comments