Share

Charity accounting framework - Common sense required

Nick Brooks, head of not for profit at Kingston Smith LLP
Blogs

Charity accounting framework - Common sense required

Finance | Nick Brooks | 30 Aug 2011

The new charity accounting framework must serve the needs of users, argues Nick Brooks.

Accountants are generally practical and, in many ways, creative people. But there is a danger in our ‘tick-box society’ that their pragmatism and common sense is slowing draining away.

Over the years we have, by and large, translated the substance of transactions and events into transparent, true, and fair disclosures. We must not now create structures which are inflexible and require the substance to be ‘straightjacketed’ into legal form. The new accounting framework must serve the needs of users.

The framework

Before I look at the issues in the draft Financial Reporting Standard for Public Benefit Entities (FRSPBE), there is an important issue in the earlier framework consultation. That is, should there be two or three tiers of accounting, with tier 3 being applicable for smaller organisations, including many charities? The Accounting Standards Board (ASB) has now tentatively proposed that no charity should fall within tier 1, but the debate remains over whether tier 3 should remain or not.

The view of my firm, and that of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW), is that tier 3 – based on the existing UK Financial Reporting Standard for Smaller Entities (FRSE) – is untenable for a number of reasons. Not least that it is not a complete accounting platform, as it relies on UK GAAP when the FRSE is silent, and undoubtedly in a short period of time will need to be replaced. The general feeling is that a third tier might be appropriate but based on a new financial reporting standard for micro entities. This has been discussed in Europe but progress is slow.

Turning now to the FRSPBE, I believe that there are two particular areas of difficulty. The first concerns what the FRSPBE calls “incoming resources from non-exchange transactions”, and what we might term ‘donated goods’. The FRSPBE implies that goods donated for resale are recognised as income at fair value at the date of acquisition and should be included in the balance sheet as stock.

Assuming that there is general agreement that donated goods should not be shown as stock, the argument perhaps should follow the principles enshrined in company law, which effectively says that stock must be shown at the lower of cost or net realisable value. The question then is what value is cost in respect of donated goods? A sensible approach would be to deem cost as nil.

The danger is that without clarity on this issue, different charities may treat their stock of donated goods in different ways.

The second area that concerns me is the valuation of donated services by volunteers. To remind readers, the current position as laid down in the Sorp is that “the contribution of volunteers should be excluded from the Statement of Financial Activities as the value of their contribution to the charity cannot be reasonably quantified in financial terms”. The wording in the draft FRSPBE leaves the reader with the distinct impression that it is permissible to value volunteered services in the accounts. The danger is that, if the FRSPBE maintains its current position, those charities that believe they can quantify the value of their volunteers would be able to show these amounts in the SOFA. This is fraught with difficulties. Not only in ascertaining a basis of valuation acceptable to audit scrutiny, but also allowing comparable organisations to treat volunteer services in different ways, depending on the strength of their argument on quantification.

The right approach

I am generally keen to ensure that interpretation of financial reporting standards is left to the Charities Sorp. But the Sorp will not be able to change any specific rules imposed by either the FRSPBE or the tier-2 standard, the proposed Financial Reporting Standard for Medium-sized Entities (FRSME), so we have got to get their final versions correct.

I believe that the ASB has an open ear, but that does not mean that the sector will get everything that it wants. My plea is that we must not forget the need for common sense. What feels like the right approach often is the right approach, irrespective of what the ‘tick box’ tells us. 

Nick Brooks is head of not for profit at Kingston Smith LLP and chairs the ICAEW charities technical committee

 

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

  • Robust but respectful debate
  • Strongly held opinions
  • Intelligent relevant discussion
  • The sharing of relevant experiences
  • New participants

We will not publish:

  • Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
  • Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
  • The posting of contact details for yourself or others
  • Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
  • Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
  • Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
  • Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
  • The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

  • Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
  • Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
  • You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

  • Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
  • Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.

Ian Allsop (63) John Tate (56) David Davison (49) Robert Ashton (41) Tania Mason (24) Andrew Hind CB (19) Gordon Hunter (17) Daniel Phelan (14) David Ainsworth (13) Vibeka Mair (12)
David Philpott (10) Celina Ribeiro (8) Niki May Young (8) Rui Domingues (8) Andrew Chaggar (5) James Brooke Turner (4) Sir Stuart Etherington (4) Kate Sayer (3) Jeremy Swain (3) Garreth Spillane (3) Alistair Gibbons (3) Ian Clark (3) Claris D'cruz (2) Stephen Lloyd (2) Richard Maitland (2) Adrian Beney (2) Iain Pritchard (2) Pauline Broomhead (2) Martin Brookes (2) Tesse Akpeki (2) Nick Brooks (2) Stephen Hammersley (2) June O'Sullivan (2) Dan Corry (2) Peter Holbrook (2) Belinda Pratten (2) Simon Steeden (2) Jonathan Bruck (2) Dan Gregory (2) Mark Astarita (1) Don Bawtree (1) Sir Stephen Bubb (1) Victoria Cook (1) Lindsay Gray (1) Rachel Holmes (1) Nick Ivey (1) Iona Joy (1) John Kelly (1) Michael King (1) Heather Lamont (1) Lucy McLynn (1) Chris Oulton (1) Julian Rathbone (1) Socrates Socratous (1) Richard Weaver (1) Karl Wilding (1) Richard Williams (1) Roger Chester (1) Matthew Bowcock (1) Joe Saxton (1) Reuben Turner (1) Martin Farrell (1) Paul Gibson (1) Jonathon Grapsas (1) Andrew Scadding (1) Simon Hebditch (1) Su Sayer (1) Debra Allcock Tyler (1) Martin Birch (1) Mark Hallam (1) Jonathan Lewis (1) Sara Llewellin (1) John Low (1) Dame Mary Marsh (1) Ruth Murphy (1) Colin Nee (1) Julia Unwin (1) Kate Rogers (1) Malcolm Hayday (1) Filippo Addarii (1) Kimberley Scharf (1) Jakes Ferguson (1) Jessica Sklair (1) Joe Turner (1) John May (1) Julian Blake (1) Rosie Chapman (1) Andy Williamson (1) Malcolm Hurlston (1) Andrew Samuel (1) Chester Mojay-Sinclare (1) Paul Amadi (1) Kirsty Weakley (1) Luke Fletcher (1) Peter Mitchell (1) Billy Dove (1) Andrew Ketteringham (1) Jackie Turpin (1) Lynne Robb (1) Jonathan Crown (1) Paul Emery (1) Ruchir Shah (1) Pesh Framjee (1) Sukhvinder Kaur-Stubbs (1) Moira Protani (1) Vicki Prout (1) Michael O'Toole (1) Dawn Austwick (1) Lisa Clavering (1) Paul Farmer (1) Neelam Makhijani (1) Logan Anderson (1) Andy Rich (1) Sharon Martin (1) Asheem Singh (1) Leigh Daynes (1) Abdurahman Sharif (1) Lynne McMahon (1) Richard Caulfield (1) Carolyn Sims (1) Making Good: The Future of the Voluntary Sector (1) Ashley Horsey (1)
Less +++ More +++

Charity Technology Conference 2014: Top tweets

27 Nov 2014

The ninth successful year of the Charity Technology Conference, organised by Civil Society Media, took...

Charities must not let the backlash against the Samaritans Radar app put them off new technologies

4 Nov 2014

Kirsty Weakley thinks the backlash to the Samaritans’ web application is unfair and worries it might...

Fiery rocket or damp squib?

4 Nov 2014

As bonfire night approaches, John Tate is cautious about the pace of the new developments setting the...

Society Diary: The best loo joke, the typical charity fan, and the Guide Dogs fundraiser sacked for sight problems

21 Nov 2014

Our weekly round-up of outlandish and interesting information collected from the corners of the charity...

How to avoid over-reliance on the chief executive

20 Nov 2014

Tesse Akpeki has some top tips for trustees on how not to become dependent on one member of staff.

It is time for voluntary sector leaders to set a new direction

10 Nov 2014

The charity sector needs to "get off the back foot", says Caroline Slocock, editor Making Good: the Future...