Transition of non-credit financial organizations to a unified chart of accounts

16.09.2016 14:49

The transition to a new chart of accounts is always an event that will be remembered for a long time by everyone who was lucky enough to take part in it. After all, this is not only a change in “account numbers”, reporting forms, and in the case of non-profit organizations, also the supervisory authority. This is largely a change in the accounting paradigm, a shift in emphasis, the abandonment of old ones and the introduction of new methods. Just how large-scale and complex this process is is evidenced by the fact that the Central Bank deliberately extended it over several years, making the implementation gradual and quite gentle at first.

Started at the end of 2015 practical work on the transition in those organizations that, according to the Central Bank's plan, should be the first to implement new accounting. Now, almost a year later, it is already possible to identify the main tasks and problems that everyone else will have to solve. For those who have already participated in similar projects more than once, the list of problems will not be new, but for accountants, methodologists and IT departments of each organization they will be new.

First of all, it is necessary to recall that the Central Bank’s methodologists based the new accounting for NFOs on accounting for IFRS purposes. This is a conscious convergence of Russian accounting with a recognized international standard, as well as the unification of accounting in two related sectors of the economy - banks and non-profit organizations. Thus, NFO accountants have to go through the same path that their banking colleagues once already went through, which already makes the task easier. It makes it easier, but it doesn't solve it. It doesn’t solve the problem because it is impossible to exactly transfer the experience of one business to another, which is seriously different in a number of significant aspects. This, in fact, is where the first problem stems from - attempts to uncritically transfer methods (“let’s do it like in banks, everything has already been invented there a long time ago”) leads to the threat of significant losses in the core business due to the deregulation of well-functioning production processes. After realizing this fact, painful attempts begin to somehow combine conflicting interests - existing business and inappropriate methodology - which ultimately only leads to wasted effort and wasted time.

Therefore, the first task of any team and responsible persons managing the transition process should be to develop their own accounting methodology. The solution to this problem must satisfy two conditions: 1) compliance with new legal requirements 2) compliance with the tasks that business sets for accounting. Analysis of these two conditions gives rise to the following problem - the lack of the necessary experience and knowledge in understanding the accounting principles embedded in the new methodology. This problem should be broken down into two parts. The first part is that although the new accounting is based on IFRS principles, it is still not quite IFRS. If in the first the most important role is played by the professional judgment of the accountant and the possibility of deviations from the rules in the presence of a reasoned justification, then in the second most of the accounting is strictly regulated, and deviations, to put it mildly, are not welcome. After all, we must always remember that our accounting work will be checked by the regulator’s auditors, for whom the argument “I think so” means little. Each accounting policy provision must be justified by reference to specific clauses of the Central Bank Regulations. And only in those cases where the law does not directly say what to do in a particular case, an analogy can be used.

The second part of this problem is the correct imposition of legal requirements on existing processes in the organization. Here it must be said that the straightforward application current standards may lead to dangerous consequences (see above). Perhaps the Central Bank will further take into account the experience of the first stage of introducing the new chart of accounts and change some provisions of the law, but this is only possible. For now, you need to rely only on what is written in the Regulations. It would therefore be advisable to consider a number of the most difficult places that you will encounter.

Operating period. The new methodology incorporates the principle of stricter control financial discipline enterprises, therefore any operations accounting(i.e. changes in account balances and turnover) are allowed only in the open operating period. The time frame for each period is also strictly limited, although for NFOs it is not as strict as for banks. It follows from this rule that approaches to document flow in accounting will have to change. Some transactions that were previously routinely reflected retroactively will have to be transferred to the next operating period. Here you should carefully consider the distribution of such operations across periods so as not to cause damage to the business and not go beyond the law. In addition, now all adjustments and corrections are made only in the current period.

Paired accounts. This is a completely new principle for NFOs, which lies in the fact that for receivables and payables of each type (counterparties, individuals, bonuses, commissions, payments, etc.) two identical accounts are opened, one of which is passive and the other active. The accounting method requires that at the end of each operating period the debt is collapsed and reflected in one of two accounts in accordance with its characteristics (active or passive). This procedure should be carried out automatically, without any additional conditions. This may result in some potential loss of relevant information (i.e. expanded balances) that could additionally be stored elsewhere - but not in the ledger accounts. You also need to take into account that a number of accounts that seem identical in economic sense are not paired (for example, 60301 and 60302). Therefore, it is impossible to automatically reduce the balance on them; here you need to take into account the restrictions imposed on these accounts by the Regulations of the Central Bank.

Events after the reporting date (APD). The essence of this requirement is that in the annual financial statements (i.e. balance sheet and other forms) two things must be separated from each other: the financial result as it was formed at the end of the year (balance sheet as of January 1) and events (entries) that changed it during the period while the annual reporting was being prepared. Simply put, PDS are the primary documents for last year, received by the accounting department between the New Year and the signing of the annual report. The usual method of reflecting everything retroactively here comes into serious conflict with the requirements of the law. This may concern both significant things, for example, offsetting the debt of counterparties or the accrual of reserves, as well as minor ones - changes in balances of business materials, etc. It is also necessary to take into account that the annual reporting, in fact, consists of three parts: as of January 1, as of the date of the report and their difference - a set of transactions. Formally, there is no such requirement for non-profit organizations (it exists for banks), but in fact the requirements here are the same.

Generation of financial reports on balances or turnover. Some of the reports, for example, balance, are generated only on account balances. Others can be formed both by balances and by turnover. For example, the financial results report for the year is formed according to balances, and for the interim period - according to turnover for this period. The requirement to provide interim reporting implicitly prohibits corrections during a closed operating period.

Of course this is not full list questions that arise before the working group developing the methodology. However, it will allow you to navigate the main question - what changes and how fundamental will have to be made to the accounting organization of the work of the accounting department and related departments.

The development of the methodology should be carried out simultaneously and in conjunction with planning for the replacement of used IT products with new ones. New methods require new tools; the old ones cannot be used. Therefore, already at the initial stage, you need to seriously think about introducing new IT systems with support for EPS and OSBU.
Both processes - developing a methodology and implementing an IT solution - mutually influence each other. On the one hand, the methodology predetermines the IT architecture, and on the other hand, IT limitations lead to changes in the methodology. When choosing a new solution, you need to ask the following basic questions: can the proposed software satisfy the main requirements of the methodology, and whether it will be able to adapt to its changes in the future. If you solve both problems in isolation, then significant and useless expenditures of time, effort and money are inevitable.

Most common mistake for those starting out, the transition to EPS consists of trying to skip the most important stage - the methodology, and find all the answers in a completely ready-made IT system. This is a dead end path, since it is impossible to find a ready-made IT system that is pre-configured for the characteristics of a particular organization. At this initial stage, there is a reluctance to dive into the details and subtleties of the ENP and OSBU. Typically, at this stage, the accountant expects that there is a simple, quick, and, as a result, inexpensive transition to the EPS in the form of a ready-made IT system. A common reason that prevents you from delving into details is the accountant’s high level of involvement in the current activities of the company.

Then the second problem arises - how to choose the optimal IT system. An accountant is a priori not an IT specialist, and tries to figure it out like a user. Software evaluation criteria are subjective and superficial. Important criteria are not always taken into account; minor ones can be considered under the guise of major ones. As a rule, the financial director is responsible for allocating the budget, and the choice of system is entrusted to accountants who are afraid to take responsibility for the high cost, so the first criterion is the minimum price. IT specialists on staff are either absent or often completely unfamiliar with the issues of transition to the UPS, and apply their own criteria, which prevents them from making an objective choice. In our opinion, the decision should be made jointly with the general and financial directors companies. This will achieve two goals - immersing top managers in the problems and difficulties of transition to the ENP, and the second - sharing responsibility for the choice.

The third problem is to properly organize the project for implementing a new IT system. A project is a comprehensive and complete set of actions that takes into account all the necessary stages and will lead to the desired result. Typically, the customer perceives implementation only as the initial transfer of data from the current IT system to the new one. At the same time, such important actions as:

• Development of a new accounting methodology for the specifics of the organization (see above)
• Setting up an IT system for the chosen methodology
• Choosing the optimal IT architecture - how exactly to fit a new IT system into an existing set of systems
• Improvements to the new IT system to suit the company's specific needs
• Integration with other company IT systems
• The need for parallel accounting during the indicative period

Let's take a closer look at the latter. As you know, the Central Bank has defined an indicative period during which it is necessary to continue to maintain accounting according to RAS in the current IT system, and at the same time maintain accounting in the new IT system. There are two main misconceptions. First, many companies expect that they can avoid the transition to the EPS, continue to work only in the old system and transfer RAS transactions to the new chart of accounts. This is practically impossible, since the current and new accounting differ significantly. If it were possible to implement such a full-fledged converter-translator, then no one would switch to EPS, but would simply translate RAS transactions using the converter.

The second misconception is how to avoid parallel accounting in two systems - supposedly you can immediately stop working in the current system, and conduct parallel accounting during the indicative period only in the new one. But in our opinion, this option will require unnecessary expenditure of time, effort and money to transfer accounting according to RAS to new system, which is intended for a completely different mode - for working on EPS. And in a year, this effort and money will have to be thrown away, because parallel accounting is needed only for the duration of the indicative period,

In accordance with current legislation, “a financial organization is an economic entity providing financial services.” The most significant of them are credit organizations, professional participants in the securities market, insurance organizations, non-state pension funds, investment fund management companies, mutual funds, etc. The main types of financial services are “banking services, securities market services, insurance services, service under a leasing agreement, as well as a service provided by a financial organization and related to the attraction and (or) placement of funds from legal and individuals» .

The approval of industry accounting standards, the Chart of Accounts and the procedure for its application for credit and non-credit financial organizations is entrusted to the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

The current Chart of Accounts and accounting rules for credit institutions take into account the IFRS methodology and reflect the specifics banking. At the same time, non-credit financial organizations keep records according to the general Chart of Accounts for accounting the financial and economic activities of organizations, which does not reflect the specifics financial activities. The main objects of accounting in financial organizations are financial assets and financial liabilities, and accounting and reporting regulators require detailed information for the relevant objects, which is not provided general plan accounts.

From January 1, 2017, a new Chart of Accounts and industry accounting standards for non-credit financial organizations will come into effect.

The new Chart of Accounts consists of chapters, sections and subsections. It should be noted that the number of synthetic accounting accounts is growing sharply. Synthetic accounting accounts are five-digit, with first-order accounts containing three characters and indicating the section and subsection of the Plan. Second-order accounts contain two characters and reflect more detailed information on first-order accounts.

The peculiarity of the new Chart of Accounts is that there are no active-passive accounts in it, all accounts are only active or passive. To reflect the status of calculations, the results of adjustments, revaluations of accounting items, etc., a system of paired accounts is being introduced. In this case, the balance can only be on one of the paired accounts; If there is a credit balance on the active account, it is transferred to the paired passive account. For example, accounts receivable in settlements with currency and stock exchanges is reflected in the active account 47404 “Settlements with currency and stock exchanges”, accounts payable in the passive account 47403 “Settlements with currency and stock exchanges”.

The main balance sheet accounts are given in Chapter A “Balance Sheet Accounts”, which consists of 7 sections. Section 1. Capital and targeted financing.

Section 2. Cash And precious metals.

Section 3. Requirements and obligations under agreements that have industry specifics, as well as for intra-business settlements.

Section 4. Settlements with clients and other settlements.

Section 5. Transactions with securities and derivative financial instruments. Section 6. Funds and property.

Section 7. Financial results.

Note that the general Chart of Accounts was built along the lines of material flow at the enterprise and largely reflects the structure of tangible and intangible assets of production and trading enterprises, which corresponds to the structure of their balance sheet. Analysis of the structure of the new Chart of Accounts shows that information about property (things and intellectual property), is contained in only one section 6, which corresponds to the structure of the balance sheet of financial organizations, where tangible and intangible assets are shown, as a rule, in total under one balance sheet item.

It should be noted that there are no special currency accounts. Transactions with currency are reflected in the same balance sheet accounts, but in analytical accounting the currency code is indicated.

In section 1, in the first order accounts, accounting is carried out by type of capital commercial organizations(statutory, additional, reserve, retained earnings or uncovered loss), and also reflects the targeted financing of non-profit organizations. Second order accounts reflect organizational and legal the form of the financial institution or the reason for the adjustment of additional capital.

Section 2 includes accounts of cash and non-cash funds of a financial organization, as well as precious metals. The first-order accounts indicate the type of funds (cash, settlement, deposit and special accounts), while the second-order accounts primarily reflect the organizations in which the funds are placed.

In sections 3 and 4, the accounts reflect the status of settlements with external and internal entities. In section 3, first-order accounts are grouped by type of activity of financial organizations: insurance, pension, investment. In section 4, first-order accounts carry out settlements for raising funds from legal entities and individuals, providing other funds to legal entities and individuals, as well as settlements with other debtors and creditors. In the second order accounts of sections 3 and 4, accounting is mainly kept for the subjects of settlements.

The new Chart of Accounts introduces significant changes to the accounting of securities and derivatives financial instruments(section 5). The methodology for accounting for financial assets, financial liabilities and financial instruments included in the new Chart of Accounts complies with the requirements of IFRS. In section 5, in first-tier accounts, equity and debt securities are classified in accordance with the requirements of IFRS 39 as securities measured at fair value through profit or loss; debt securities held to maturity and available-for-sale securities. This classification influences issues of their revaluation. Securities held to maturity are not revalued and are recorded at amortized cost, less provisions for impairment. The results of the revaluation of other securities are recognized immediately in the financial results or capital accounts. To reflect adjustments, revaluations and provisions for impairment, a significant number of first-order accounts are introduced. In the second order accounts of this section, records are kept, as a rule, by issuer.

Accounting for income, expenses and financial results is kept in the accounts of section 7. The new Chart of Accounts has changed the classification of income and expenses compared to the general Chart of Accounts. Income and expenses are divided by type of activity of the financial organization (insurance, pension) and type of operations (transactions with securities, derivative financial instruments, related to supporting activities, etc.). During the year, accounting for income and expenses is carried out on first-order accounts 710 - 719. In connection with the change in the balance sheet reformation procedure, accounts for accounting for income, expenses and financial results of the previous year 720 - 729 with similar names are introduced. After drawing up the balance sheet, the balances as of January 1 of the new year on the income and expense accounts of the current year 710 - 719 are transferred to the income and expense accounts of the previous year 720 - 729. On the date of signing the annual accounting (financial) statements, accounts 720 - 729 are closed to first-order accounts 708 “Profit (loss) of last year”, where the final financial result of last year is revealed (profit of last year or loss of last year).

In accordance with the new Chart of Accounts, analytical accounting is carried out on 20-digit or 25-digit personal accounts. The first 5 digits of the personal account determine the synthetic account number, the next three numbers determine the currency code, and the last digits determine the personal account number. In the appendices to the Chart of Accounts, schemes for the formation of personal accounts for the main balance sheet accounts are proposed.

Accounting for assets and liabilities held in trust management, and income and expenses on trust management operations is carried out in Chapter B “Trust Management Accounts”,

A significant difference in the new Chart of Accounts is the organization of off-balance sheet accounting, which is maintained on accounts in special chapters.

Chapter B. “Off-balance sheet accounts.”

Chapter D. “Accounts for accounting for claims and obligations under derivative financial instruments and other agreements (transactions) for which settlements and delivery are carried out no earlier than next day after the day of conclusion of the agreement (transaction).”

A peculiarity of accounting on off-balance sheet accounts is that, according to their economic content, they are also divided into active and passive, and transactions are reflected using the double entry method. For this purpose, paired accounts 99999 are provided for correspondence with active accounts and 99998 for correspondence with passive accounts. Records of correspondence directly between active accounts or passive accounts are allowed.

The accounts of chapter B keep records of settlement transactions, documents, financial lease transactions, loans issued, contingent liabilities and contingent claims, as well as debts taken off the balance sheet. When certain events occur, the corresponding liabilities are transferred to the balance sheet.

In the accounts of Chapter D, records are kept of claims and obligations on derivative financial instruments (derivatives): forwards, futures, options, swaps, etc. When concluding a contract, derivative financial instruments are reflected at fair value in the balance sheet accounts of Chapter A, and claims and obligations on the underlying asset in the accounts of chapter D. When the deadline for the transaction on the underlying asset arrives, the corresponding claims and obligations are transferred to the balance sheet. In addition, the accounts of this chapter reflect the requirements and obligations for fixed-term contracts purchase and sale of foreign currency, precious metals, securities that are not derivative financial instruments.

In general, the transition to the new Chart of Accounts will require significant efforts by accounting services and will take place in stages for various categories of non-credit financial organizations. It is necessary to develop a working Chart of Accounts, change accounting policies, develop methods for forming the fair value of financial instruments, financial assets and liabilities, create a system of personal accounts, and replace accounting software.

Bibliography

1. International financial reporting standard IFRS (IAS) 39 “Financial instruments: recognition and measurement” // order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated April 18, 2013 No. 36n.

2. Regulations on the Chart of Accounts for accounting in non-credit financial institutions and the procedure for its application (approved by the Bank of Russia on September 2, 2015 N 486-P) (Registered with the Ministry of Justice of Russia on October 7, 2015 N 39197).

We expect that in a number of cases, when switching to the New Chart of Accounts
ProgramBank will solve not only automation problems,
but also training, consulting and even accounting.
By the way, in the early 90s we did all this when implementing it in banks.
At that time there was no training at all,
and most of the bank specialists were new to accounting themselves.

Dmitry Pavlin
Director of the Production Center

"ProgramBank.FrontOffice"

Could you briefly describe the changes that microfinance organizations expect when moving to a unified chart of accounts?

As my colleague Vitaly Zanin wrote above, the general changes are the same for all non-financial organizations; there will be no separate industry standard specifically for microfinance organizations.

The main difference with other organizations is the transition of MFOs to a new chart of accounts from January 1, 2018, and not from January 1, 2017. But this does not mean that you can relax - there is, everyone knows, a plan for the transition to the UPS for MFOs, and to the ones prescribed there deadlines must be met.

What changes in accounting should microfinance organizations pay special attention to?

First of all, to the introduction effective rate interest and amortized cost . Fortunately, if the loan term is less than a year, the law provides for the possibility of using the linear method. Clause 1.8 of Regulation No. 493-P states:
“For loan agreements and bank deposit agreements, the validity of which is less than one year at their initial recognition, including loans and bank deposits, the repayment date of which falls in another reporting year, discounting (the ESP method) may not be applied if the difference between the amortized cost calculated using the ESP method and amortized cost calculated using the straight-line method of interest income recognition are not significant. Materiality criteria are approved in the accounting policies of a non-credit financial organization.”

Most loans from microfinance organizations are provided for a period of less than a year. And we expect that most MFIs will use the straight-line depreciation method. However, to check the materiality criterion, the calculation of amortized cost must in any case be done programmatically.

It is important to remember that to use the straight-line depreciation method, the difference between the depreciated cost calculated using this method and the depreciated cost calculated using the ESP method should not be significant. That is, if an MFO plans to use the straight-line depreciation method, it is worth correctly specifying the materiality criteria in the accounting policy. Unfortunately, materiality criteria are not explicitly described in any of the international reporting standards: we recommend that those interested refer to the International Standards on Auditing (ISA).

In addition, many changes are being introduced regarding fundraising operations (Regulation No. 501-P). It is also worth paying significant attention to industry standard 487-P, which governs the accounting of profits and losses in the new chart of accounts. One of the points worth paying attention to in 487-P is accounting by symbols, which NFOs did not previously maintain.

You are part of subgroup 4 “Microfinance Market” of the industry working group of the Bank of Russia to prepare for the transition to the NPS. What does the industry working group mainly do?

The MFO working group, organized by the Bank of Russia, resolves the entire range of issues related to the transition of MFOs to new standards. First of all, these are legislative and methodological issues. The group includes representatives of the Bank of Russia, microfinance organizations, SROs, and IT companies. Technically, the work of the group is as follows: group members send questions to the Bank of Russia for each meeting. Representatives of the Central Bank at the meeting voice their answers and recommendations, and, if necessary, make adjustments and clarifications to the standards.

The ProgramBank company actively participates in the work of the working group because it considers this work very important. Since we are implementing all the requirements of the new chart of accounts in our solution “ProgramBank.CreditMicro”, we see many problems in advance - bottlenecks directly in business processes or in accounting according to new standards.
As a result, we not only improve overall quality legislative framework(I would like to hope), but we also sharpen the “ProgramBank.CreditMicro” solution to the maximum, both in terms of completeness, coverage of all possible business processes and possible situations, and in terms of the readiness of the solution - “sit down and go.”

Could you give the “problems and solutions” in the working group's experience?

Here's an example. According to the new standards, accounting in microfinance organizations, as in other non-profit organizations, is brought as close as possible to banking accounting. Therefore, problem areas arise where it is planned to use banking accounting standards, but MFOs do not have the right to use banking schemes.
For example, the question arises in which account to account for advances received by an MFO to repay a loan before the next payment is due. The bank does not have any problems here, since banks can maintain current accounts for individuals and, when an advance payment is received to repay the loan, the bank opens such an account and then debits amounts from it in accordance with the repayment schedule.

An MFO cannot use this method, since it does not have the right to open current accounts. The question was put to working group, representatives of the Bank of Russia reviewed it and expressed the opinion that these advance payments should be accounted for in account 47422 “Liabilities for other financial transactions.”
It seems like a small thing, but any microfinance organization would face such a problem with 100% probability. In general, the group’s work consists of exactly these issues. The more problematic issues we eliminate now, the easier it will be for MFOs to transition to the standards of the Central Bank.

Does the MFO working group consider automation issues?

Yes. The Central Bank is concerned about the timing of software readiness for accounting in the UPS, for which it periodically requires progress reports from representatives of software development companies. The Central Bank also asks questions about the cost of the solution. We have already released our solution and will present it at various events.
MFOs also ask questions about where it is necessary to organize analytical accounting in cases where the legislation provides for such accounting (for example, for borrowers).

Position of the Central Bank on this issue: It is possible to maintain analytical accounting in separate programs, but subject to the requirements for numbering personal accounts: “...Personal accounts maintained in separate programs must be opened and numbered in accordance with the Scheme for designating personal accounts and their numbering, installed by the application 3 to Regulation No. 486-P.” If we talk about our position, then in most cases it is optimal to organize analytical accounting on 20-digit accounts.

What, in your opinion, are the main problems associated with the transition of microfinance organizations to a new chart of accounts?

To formulate it very briefly, there are two general problems in the transition to the ENP: time and money.
We all know very well what the minimum IT budget is required for even the smallest bank. For most microfinance organizations, this amount is prohibitive. It is clear that the question of a simplified accounting option for small microfinance organizations arises constantly. Position of the Bank of Russia on currently is simple: he is ready to consider specific proposals for a simplified accounting option. We are expecting activity from SRO representatives here,
however, there are no proposals in this regard yet. From my point of view, simplifying accounting methods would be a step back in terms of moving closer to IFRS standards.

As for time: the plan for the transition of microfinance organizations to the new chart of accounts is known and, according to my observations, most microfinance organizations do not meet the deadlines specified there. This, like the issue of automation budgets, involves significant differences in size. Some requirements for the preparation of methodological documents require highly qualified personnel, which small MFOs do not have on staff, and the payment for the services of third-party specialists is too high for them.

If we talk about narrower problems, then, in my opinion, the most painful one is training. The Bank of Russia, as you know, organizes training for managers and accountants of all non-profit organizations. For this purpose, an agreement has been concluded with PricewaterhouseCoopers Expert, whose corporate training center provides this training. But in Russia there are currently more than three and a half thousand microfinance organizations registered, so the issue of training for everyone is problematic. Of course, among curricula offered on the Bank of Russia website, there are webinars, but their effectiveness is lower than face-to-face training, and starting from a certain threshold of those present, even lower.

Therefore, the possibility of training for employees of all MFOs is currently questionable. Representatives of various training centers have already contacted us, and in the near future we plan to take part in training events for MFO employees.

What is the strategy of ProgramBank, taking into account the difficulties listed above?

We expect that in a number of cases, when switching to a new chart of accounts, the ProgramBank company will solve not only automation problems, but also training, consulting and even accounting. By the way, in the early 90s we did all this when implementing it in banks. At that time, there was no training at all, and most bank specialists were new to accounting themselves.

We are prepared for all of the above and are currently doing everything we can to accomplish this task as best we can. Participation in the Bank of Russia working group on MFOs is one of the necessary components of this preparation.

“You can’t look at some of the premiere IFRS reports without tears. If gross errors are made in reporting from the beginning of 2017, the Bank of Russia will be forced to revoke licenses from non-credit organizations. I would like to avoid this."

Useful resources:

• Transition of NFO to the chart of accounts and OSBU (section of the Bank of Russia website);
• Transition of non-credit financial organizations to a new chart of accounts;
• Forum Bankir.Ru (suddenly).

Main innovations in accounting:

• a new chart of accounts, close to banking, with significantly big amount synthetic accounts;
• new structure and grouping of symbols in the income statement;
• new principles for recognizing income and expenses, closer to IFRS;
• strict requirements for the order of numbering of personal accounts and maintaining analytical records;
• other banking features accounting: paired accounts instead of active-passive, accounts without an account attribute, division of the Chart of Accounts into chapters and sections, etc.;
• application of the discounting principle to individual accounting objects;
• increasing the role of professional judgment for the purpose of determining the accounting valuation of objects;
• the need to involve specialists from other divisions of the organization, except accounting, as well as management and third parties (organizations) in the assessment of accounting objects;
• new accounting (financial) statements.

In a word - EVERYTHING is new.

Necessary actions

An enlarged action plan for the transition for NFOs has already been invented by the Central Bank, and separately for each type of financial market participant.

For example, professional participants in the securities market in 2016 should:

– by March 31, prepare a draft of a new working chart of accounts in accordance with the ENP and OSBU and a table of correspondence between the current (Ministry of Finance) chart of accounts and the new working chart of accounts;

– by June 30, analyze the Accounting Policy for compliance with the requirements of the Unified Accounting System and OSBU and formulate a project Accounting policy and other methodological documents that meet the new requirements;

– by December 31, develop regulations and methodological instructions for the transition to the EPS and OSBU.

And this is only in terms of accounting; automation, changes in business processes and personnel training are also on the agenda.

As for the little things... there are so many of them that they cannot be presented in the format of an article. Therefore, what follows is just a few useful tips NFO accountant.

Since the EPS and OSBU were compiled by the regulator for all participants in the financial market, among these hundreds of pages there is a lot of unnecessary information from the point of view of each specific organization

First of all, don’t be afraid of volume new information. Since the ENP and OSBU were compiled by the regulator for all participants in the financial market, among these hundreds of pages there is a lot of unnecessary information from the point of view of each specific organization. Therefore, after the ruthless sequestration of multi-page regulations, you will most likely be pleasantly surprised.

The worst thing an accountant can do now is try to figure it out themselves and take on aspects that are now becoming an integral part of accounting, but at the same time require non-accounting qualifications and work experience. For example, determining the fair value of securities. Or calculating the discounted value of financial assets and liabilities. Or making decisions regarding the recognition of estimated and contingent liabilities in accounting. Or, it will not be said by night, actuarial valuations for long-term benefits. Not to mention the disclosure of information in reporting: most of notes and transcripts will be of a specialized nature.

In conditions of limited resources, the head of the NFO is unlikely to be happy with the offer to hire a specially trained person to assess the risk of placed funds

It is clear that in conditions of limited resources (and who has it easy now?) the head of the NFO is unlikely to be happy with your proposal to hire a specially trained person to assess the risk of placed funds. But here, if I were an accountant, I would fight to the last: either we entrust this to a specialist, or we outsource it, or the management takes over this work. Or we send me to advanced training courses and significantly increase my salary. Or we do nothing, leave everything as it is, but at the same time management understands and is aware of the possible consequences.

On the Bank of Russia website it is useful to read not only news and sections dedicated to non-profit organizations, but also “Accounting and reporting in credit institutions”, especially Answers and explanations.

* * *

The task set by the Bank of Russia for the organizations entrusted to it is, frankly speaking, not easy. Actually, the very idea of ​​applying the principles of compilation financial statements V accounting very ambitious and, it seems, has no analogues in world practice.

Time will tell what will come of this.

At this point, it was planned, as usual, to invite interested parties to discuss all pressing issues at the forum. However, surprisingly, there is almost nothing on the Internet other than a sluggish discussion on the NAUFOR forum (or I didn’t search well).

Maybe they will catch up by 2017?..

The transition of non-credit financial institutions to a unified chart of accounts - key changes

From January 1, 2017 Insurance companies, professional participants in the securities market and non-state pension funds are moving to a new chart of accounts and industry accounting standards. Microfinance organizations, credit consumer cooperatives and housing savings cooperatives will switch to the new chart of accounts from January 1, 2018, agricultural credit consumer cooperatives and pawnshops - from January 1, 2019.

The accounting changes expected in the near future by non-bank financial institutions are the largest ever.

In short terms, such innovations are called the transition to the “chart of accounts of the Bank of Russia.” This reflects major changes in form (movement to 20-digit accounts, designation in account number additional information). However, the main substantive innovations are related not to banking accounting, but to IFRS standards, since the principles of IFRS (completeness, reliability, reliability, etc.) comply with the requirements of the Bank of Russia.

First of all, we will describe the main changes in the chart of accounts:

• Transition to 20-digit accounts. Changing the number of levels in accounting. Order of the Ministry of Finance No. 94n defines a two-three level account structure: section->account->subaccount, while subaccounts are regulated for a minority of accounting accounts. Regulation 486-P dated 09/02/2015 introduces a four-level hierarchy of accounts: section -> first-order account (three-digit) -> second-order account (five-digit) -> twenty-digit account.
• Considerably more detailed accounting. It is enough to note that account 58-2 “Debt securities” in the new accounting plan replaces more than 250 second-order accounts.
• With a general increase in accounting detail, the share of various accounts and sections in the balance sheet changes:

At the next level of detail, the same securities are accounted for various categories, depending on their economic sense. For example, account 502 is securities held for sale, and account 503 is securities held to maturity in order to receive interest income guaranteed by the issuer.

To account for transactions relevant to certain financial organizations (insurance companies, non-state pension funds), a specialized section has been introduced (Section III. “Requirements and obligations under agreements that have industry specifics, as well as for intra-business settlements”).

A new accounting chapter has been introduced (Chapter D . “Accounts for recording claims and obligations under derivative financial instruments and other agreements (transactions), under which settlements and delivery are carried out no earlier than the next day after the day of conclusion of the agreement (transaction)”), to forecast and control future movements in financial instruments.

Having outlined the key formal changes during the transition to the ENP, let's turn to the key substantive changes. In this case, first of all, it is worth considering the relevant international financial reporting standards (there are two types - IAS and IFRS, depending on the date of appearance).

Why are international standards so important? At least for the following reasons:

• The new industry standards of the Bank of Russia clearly indicate “...When applying these Regulations, non-credit financial organizations are guided by the International Financial Reporting Standards (hereinafter referred to as IFRS) and the IFRS Interpretations...”.
• The experience of banks shows that the Bank of Russia quite often makes changes to its Regulations. In addition, even before they are put into effect, new industry standards raise a lot of questions among the professional community (see, for example, questions on the Bank of Russia website). At the same time, it is important to note that new IFRS standards or their clarifications appear much less frequently, so strategically it is more convenient for the bank to focus on them (for example, when developing accounting policies).
• International standards pay more attention to key concepts and provide illustrative examples.

This table shows which IFRS standards the legislator was guided by when developing new accounting rules for non-credit financial organizations.

In particular, one of the key differences between IFRS standards and accounting under OSBU is the concepts of fair value and the probability of receiving benefits in the future, which play huge role when determining assets and liabilities. And it was the concept of “probability of future accounting” that led to the creation of a whole new industry standard - standard 488-P “On the accounting procedures for derivative financial instruments by non-credit financial institutions.”