Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
New Zealand Securities Commission |
Last Updated: 16 November 2014
FINANCIAL REPORTING SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMME
REVIEW OF FINANCIAL REPORTING BY ISSUERS
For the periods ended 31 March 2010
CYCLE
13
Securities Commission New Zealand
Level 8, Unisys House
56 The Terrace
P O Box 1179
WELLINGTON 6011
March 2011
ISBN 978-0-478-36516-0 (print) ISBN 978-0-478-36517-7 (pdf)
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
............................................................................................................
1
INTRODUCTION
..........................................................................................................................
3
CYCLE 13
FINDINGS...................................................................................................................
4
Scope and issuer selection
.............................................................................................
4
Overall comments on Cycle
13......................................................................................
4
Specific comments on Cycle 13 findings ...................................................................... 7
Segment reporting ................................................................................................................... 7
Financial instruments............................................................................................................. 9
Investment property valuation assumptions ........................................................................ 10
Goodwill impairment disclosures ......................................................................................... 10
Description of non-audit services
provided..........................................................................
11
Market matters............................................................................................................. 11
Directors’ interests and share dealings ................................................................................ 11
Substantial security holders.................................................................................................. 12
Auditors’ reports
...................................................................................................................
12
CONCLUSION
.............................................................................................................................
13
LOOKING AHEAD
.....................................................................................................................
13
APPENDIX 1: BACKGROUND TO THE SECURITIES COMMISSION’S FINANCIAL
REPORTING SURVEILLANCE
PROGRAMME...................................................................
14
The Commission’s Financial Reporting Surveillance Programme
......................... 14
New Zealand Generally Accepted Accounting Practice
........................................... 15
Selecting
issuers............................................................................................................
15
Identifying matters and taking action ........................................................................ 16
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Financial Reporting Surveillance Programme (FRSP) encourages high-quality
financial reporting that will enhance the credibility
of issuers’
financial information and thus strengthen investor confidence.
Our FRSP report informs directors, chief financial officers, other
financial statement preparers, auditors and financial
analysts on what the New
Zealand Securities Commission considers could, and should, be improved. The
Commission’s Cycle 13
finds improved compliance in some areas of NZ IFRS.
However, there remain areas for issuers to focus on in preparing their financial
reports.
These include a continuing need for greater transparency. Ensuring
stakeholders and investors are fully informed about all
areas of their
investment is vital. Issuers must ensure they provide clear, concise and
transparent financial reports, which are
easily understood.
Actions taken as a result of this review
We wrote to 16 of the 20 issuers whose reports were reviewed, mainly about
segment reporting and financial instrument disclosures.
None of the matters dealt with warranted Commission enforcement action or
referral to any other body.
Segment reporting
Issuers should provide a level of disclosure consistent with the core principle of NZ IFRS 8
Operating Segments. This enables financial statement users to
evaluate the nature and financial effects of business activities and the
economic
environment in which they operate.
Issuers need to be aware of what segment information conveys about the
structure of their organisation’s activities and segment
performance. They
should take the opportunity NZ IFRS 8 offers them to communicate how various
components of their entity operate,
particularly where the business is
complex.
Financial instruments
A good set of financial instrument disclosures is essential for user
understanding of the issuer’s exposure to, and risk associated
with, its
financial instruments. Recent amendments to reporting standards require
disclosure about re-valued financial assets
and liabilities. Issuers must
include a breakdown showing the extent to which valuations are linked to market
prices. They must
also reveal the underlying assumptions for valuations not
directly based on market prices.
Looking ahead
The Commission will continue to monitor compliance with segment reporting and
the fair- value hierarchy disclosures NZ IFRS 7 Financial Instruments:
Disclosures requires.
The Commission also proposes to focus on disclosures relating to alternative
performance measures.
INTRODUCTION
1. This report sets out findings from Cycle 13 of the
Commission’s ongoing Financial Reporting Surveillance Programme
(FRSP). It
covers 20 issuers with a balance date of 31 March 2010.
2. Appendix 1 sets out the programme’s background, including
how the Commission selects issuers for review and deals
with issues it
identifies.
3. The report informs directors, chief financial officers and other
financial statement preparers, auditors and financial
analysts on financial
reporting areas the Commission considers could and should be improved.
4. Although it primarily encourages improvements in financial
reporting, the FRSP can result in enforcement action. If we
identify a matter
warranting enforcement, it is removed from the FRSP and treated as an
enforcement matter. That was unnecessary
in this cycle.
CYCLE 13 FINDINGS Scope and issuer selection
• 17 listed on the NZX (NZSX/NZDX/NZAX); and
• three whose securities are not listed on any exchange.
6. The entities reviewed included:
(a) three financial institutions;
(b) three investment property companies/trusts; (c) three unit trusts; and
(d) one Kiwisaver scheme.
Overall comments on Cycle 13
7. We wrote to 16 issuers about:
(a) segment reporting disclosures – in particular, whether all appropriate business segments had been disclosed;
(b) financial instruments – in particular, on inadequate disclosure of
concentrations of credit risk by security type and fair-value
assumptions.
8. These letters drew issuers’ attention to a total of 31 matters
raised.
Outcome of matters raised
Notes
|
Table 1: Outcome of matters raised
Outcome
|
Matters raised 1
|
%
|
(1)
|
Resolved
|
13
|
|
(2)
|
Point taken/change agreed
|
17
|
|
|
Agreement reached
|
30
|
97%
|
(3)
|
Second letter sent
|
1
|
|
(4)
|
Other follow-up action
|
0
|
|
|
|
1
|
3%
|
|
Total matters raised
|
31
|
100%
|
Notes to the Table
(1) Resolved: the issuer provided a satisfactory explanation.
(2) Point taken/change agreed: the issuer acknowledged the point made and/or agreed to make changes in subsequent financial statements.
(3) Second letter sent: a second letter reiterated the points made and closed the matter.
(4) Other follow-up action: more action required eg a written request
for answers to further questions; or referral to another body, such as the
National Enforcement
Unit of the Companies Office, for consideration of
enforcement
action.
1 Matters raised exclude instances where the Commission
wrote directly to audit firms and/or directors of issuers.
Comparison with previous cycles
9. Table 2 compares statistics from previous FRSP cycles with Cycle
13 results. Under NZ IFRS, the Commission has written
to more issuers and
raised, on average, more issues per issuer than under previous NZ
GAAP2. We would like to see this situation improve.
Table 2: Financial Reporting Surveillance Programme
statistics
Cycle
#
|
NZ GAAP
|
Number of issuers reviewed
|
Number of issuers we wrote to
|
Issuers written to
%
|
Matters raised
|
Matters per issuer written to
|
1
|
Previous NZ GAAP
|
40
|
15
|
38%
|
22
|
1.5
|
2
|
Previous NZ GAAP
|
46
|
19
|
41%
|
24
|
1.3
|
3
|
Previous NZ GAAP
|
45
|
19
|
42%
|
27
|
1.4
|
4
|
Previous NZ GAAP
|
40
|
17
|
43%
|
27
|
1.6
|
5
|
Previous NZ GAAP
|
40
|
16
|
40%
|
19
|
1.2
|
6
|
Previous NZ GAAP
|
30
|
20
|
67%
|
37
|
1.9
|
7
|
Previous NZ GAAP/NZ IFRS
|
44
|
17
|
39%
|
29
|
1.7
|
8
|
NZ IFRS
|
40
|
35
|
88%
|
97
|
2.8
|
9
|
NZ IFRS
|
24
|
17
|
71%
|
31
|
1.8
|
10
|
NZ IFRS
|
20
|
17
|
85%
|
50
|
2.5
|
11
|
NZ IFRS
|
24
|
20
|
83%
|
34
|
1.7
|
12
|
NZ IFRS
|
21
|
17
|
81%
|
39
|
2.3
|
13
|
NZ IFRS
|
20
|
16
|
80%
|
31
|
1.9
|
2 Previous NZ GAAP is the financial reporting regime existing in
NZ prior to the implementation of NZ IFRS.
Specific comments on Cycle 13 findings
Figure 1: Top Matters Raised from Cycles
13
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Segment reporting* Financial instruments disclosures*
Directors share trading Substantial security holders
Services provided by auditors
Segment reporting
11. NZ IFRS 8 Operating Segments became applicable for issuers
whose equity and debt securities are traded (or to be traded) in a public market
for periods beginning
on or after 1 January 2009. Cycle 13 focused on the
application of NZ IFRS 8.3 The Commission believes issuers
should provide a level of disclosure consistent with the core principle of NZ
IFRS 8:
An entity shall disclose information to enable users of its financial
statements to evaluate the nature and financial effects of the
business
activities in which it engages and the economic environments in which it
operates.
12. Consistent with its FRSP policy, the Commission makes enquiries
when it is unclear if the reportable and/or operating segments
and related
disclosed information are appropriate. This is more likely to occur
when:
• the titles and responsibilities of the management or executive management team imply an organisational structure that is not reflected in the operating segments;
• reported segments seem inconsistent with the entity’s internal reporting;
• the board of directors is identified as the chief operating
decision-maker (CODM) when the directors are non-executive and
said to be
responsible for strategy rather than operating decisions;
* The majority of Matters Raised in relation to segment reporting and financial instruments disclosures relate to recent changes in the corresponding standards.
3 Also see article “What are you communicating” by Lay Wee Ng in The Chartered Accountants’ Journal
(December 2010).
• financial statements fail to disclose factors used to identify reportable segments, including the basis on which the entity is organised;
• it is unclear whether the aggregation and/or quantitative criteria set out in the accounting policies or in NZ IFRS 8 were met in determining the reportable segments;
• only one reportable segment is reported, but the issuer seems diverse, with various businesses or products/services, or significant operations in various places;
• the disclosures in other parts of the annual report or in prospectuses show business segments not disclosed in the financial statements; or
• the commentary in the narrative report focuses on non-NZ IFRS
measures but the segment disclosures are based on NZ IFRS
amounts.
13. In Cycle 13, the Commission wrote to five issuers for clarification
or information about their segment disclosures, particularly
:
• the factors used to identify reportable segments, including the basis on which the entity is organised, the basis for identifying its CODM and the information the CODM was receiving and reviewing internally;
• whether the aggregation and/or quantitative criteria set out in the accounting policies or in NZ IFRS 8 were met in determining the reportable segments;
• whether further segmentation would have let financial statements users better evaluate the nature and financial effects of the entity’s business activities and the economic environment it operates in;
• when the board of directors was identified as the CODM and they were non- executive and said to be responsible for strategy rather than operating decisions, as emphasised by NZ IFRS 8;
• when a financial institution’s impairment losses were not allocated to identified segments; and
• when only one segment was reported, notwithstanding that the issuer
appeared to be diverse with various businesses or products/services,
or
significant operations in various places.
14. Of the five issuers written to:
(a) one revised its operating-segment information, identifying another segment and explaining that the CODM is made up of the board’s executive members;
(b) one agreed to review its reporting as its business evolved to the next stage;
(c) one agreed to consider further disclosures in its next set of financial statements; and
(d) two for whom matters were resolved.
15. It is important for issuers to keep reviewing and revising their
segment information as the nature of their business activities
and their
operational structure change.
16. Issuers need to be cognisant of the message segment information
conveys about how the business is structured by management
for allocating
resources and assessing performance. The Commission urges issuers to take the
opportunity NZ IFRS 8 offers to communicate
this information, particularly where
the business is complex.
Financial instruments
17. Financial instruments include financial assets and financial
liabilities. Financial assets include cash, shares in other
entities, trade
receivables and derivatives that are “in the money”. Financial
liabilities include trade payables, loans
received and derivatives that are
“out of the money”. NZ IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures
and NZ IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation sets
out the disclosure and presentation requirements for financial
instruments.
18. These disclosures are important because they allow users to assess
the impact and various risks of an entity’s financial
instruments.
19. Matters raised in this area seldom relate to just one aspect of financial instruments.
Our view is that the absence of, or errors in, disclosures related to aspects
of an entity’s financial instruments usually mean
the disclosures, taken
as a whole, are inadequate. A good set of disclosures in this area can provide a
“high-definition”
picture of an issuer’s involvement with
financial instruments.
Security dissection
20. Our Cycle 11 and 12 reports highlighted the need for issuers in
financial institutions providing mezzanine finance to consider
providing
quantitative information on concentrations of loans by security type. In Cycle
13, we wrote to one finance company about
this. The company prospectus had
provided such an analysis but not its financial statements. The issuer agreed to
provide the analysis
in future financial statements.
21. All issuers should consider whether financial information presented
in prospectuses should be updated or commented on in
ongoing financial
reporting. If the information was considered important enough to be in the
prospectus, it is probably important
enough to include in ongoing financial
reporting.
Fair value hierarchy disclosures
22. In response to the global financial crisis, the
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) amended IFRS
7. The
amendments include requiring entities with financial instruments that have
been measured at fair value to classify and
disclose them based on a fair-value
hierarchy.
23. The hierarchy gives users more information about the relative
reliability of inputs to fair-value measurements, and has
the following
levels:
(a) Level 1: fair values have been based on quoted prices (unadjusted) in an active market for identical assets or liabilities;
(b) Level 2: fair values have been based on inputs, other than quoted prices included in Level 1, which are observable for the asset or liability, either directly (ie as prices) or indirectly (ie derived from prices); and
(c) Level 3: fair values have been based on inputs for the asset or
liability that are not based on observable market data (unobservable
inputs).
24. The hierarchy complements disclosures that NZ IFRS 7 requires in
paragraph 27:
... the methods and, when a valuation technique is used, the assumptions
applied in determining fair values of each class of financial
assets or
financial liabilities. For example, if applicable, an entity discloses
information about the assumptions relating to prepayment
rates, rates of
estimated credit losses, and interest rates or discount rates.
25. Assets or liabilities falling under Level 2 or Level 3 are valued
using a valuation technique. Therefore, where entities
hold material balances of
such assets or liabilities they must disclose the actual underlying inputs and
assumptions used in the
valuation techniques.
26. In Cycle 13, we wrote to an issuer with material financial assets
and liabilities in Level 3 of the hierarchy. The issuer
disclosed information on
the valuation technique used but not details of actual underlying assumptions.
The issuer agreed that in
its next set of financial statements it would disclose
key variables used, including information on interest rates, commodity-forward
rates and volatility assumptions.
27. Often issuers will engage third parties to value their Level 2 and
Level 3 financial instruments. In this case, issuers
need to ensure they have
enough information on the techniques used and assumptions applied to meet their
financial reporting requirements.
28. The Commission will continue to monitor disclosures in this area. So it is in issuers’
interests to ensure they meet the greater transparency NZ IFRS 7 requires. Investment property valuation assumptions
29. NZ IAS 16 Property, plant and equipment (paragraph 77(c))
requires that, where items of property, plant and equipment are stated at
revalued amounts, entities must disclose
“the methods and significant
assumptions applied in estimating the items’ fair values”.
30. In this cycle, we wrote to one issuer asking that it enhance
disclosure of significant assumptions for investment property
revaluations in
its next financial statements.
31. In previous cycles we have raised the issue of greater disclosure of
significant assumptions for investment property revaluations.
We see a
noticeable improvement in the level and type of disclosures by many issuers. We
will continue to raise this with issuers
where disclosures are
inadequate.
Goodwill impairment disclosures4
32. Under NZ IFRS 3 Business Combinations, goodwill from a
business combination is calculated as the excess of the consideration paid over
the identifiable net assets
4 See article in the December 2009 issue of the New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants’ Journal by Lay
Wee Ng and Liz Hickey for further discussion on this topic.
acquired. This goodwill must be allocated to the cash-generating units (CGUs)
expected to benefit from the business combination.
33. Under NZ IAS 36 Impairment of Assets, CGUs to which goodwill is allocated must be tested for impairment at least annually, and when there is an indicator of impairment.5
This involves calculating the recoverable amount of the CGU, usually
using a discounted cash-flow model, based on the future
profitability of the
CGU.
34. We remind issuers that growth rates used in a value-in-use
calculation cannot reflect any estimated cash inflows and outflows
expected to
arise from future restructurings or from improving or enhancing the
asset’s performance for a particular division.
35. NZ IAS 36 (paragraph 33(b)) states that, in measuring value-in-use, an
entity shall:
...base cash flow projections on the most recent financial
budgets/forecasts approved by management, but shall exclude any estimated
future cash inflows or outflows expected to arise from future
restructurings or from improving or enhancing the asset’s
performance. [emphasis added]
Description of non-audit services provided
36. We wrote to three entities about their disclosure of non-audit services from their auditors. We note that, while entities usually disclose fees paid to auditors by the prescribed categories, some do not describe the nature of those services as NZ IAS 1
Presentation of Financial Statements (paragraph NZ105.1)
requires.
37. These disclosures are important as they increase the transparency
of the auditor-issuer relationship, enabling annual report
readers to judge the
degree of independence between auditors and issuers.
Market matters
Directors’ interests and share dealings
38. The Companies Act 1993 (section 148(1)) requires directors with a
relevant interest in any shares the company issues to
disclose the number and
class of these shares, and the nature of the relevant interest, and
ensure the information is
entered in the interests register. If a director
acquires or disposes of an interest in such shares, he/she must disclose certain
information to the board and ensure it is entered in the interests register
(section 148(2)).
39. In Cycle 13, the Commission wrote to three issuers about this. In
one case, failure to file the required notices was due
to issuer oversight. In
another, we reiterated that we would expect the issuer’s corporate
governance policies on directors’
and officers’ disclosures, and on
the trading of units by directors and officers, to cover directors’ and
officers’
obligations under the Securities Markets Act. The third issuer
agreed to make required disclosures in its next annual report.
5 NZ IAS 36 paragraph 90.
40. None of the matters in relation to directors’ interests and
share dealings were material or required enforcement action.
Substantial security holders
41. The Securities Markets Act 1988 (section 35F) requires public
issuers that are also companies to send certain information
on their substantial
security holders (SSH) to every shareholder. This may be sent with or in the
annual report or by notice under
the Companies Act 1993 (section 209).
Issuers are required to disclose only information based on the SSH notices
they have
received.
42. In Cycle 13, the Commission wrote to three issuers about their disclosures in this area:
(a) one agreed to make changes;
(b) correspondence with another indicated a related problem beyond its control;
and
(c) the matter was resolved with the third issuer.
43. None of the matters raised with these three issuers about
SSH disclosures were material or required enforcement
action.
Auditors’ reports
44. The Commission wrote to two auditors about disclosure in their
respective audit reports that they had no relationship with
the issuers or any
of their subsidiaries other than in their capacity as auditor. In both cases,
the issuers’ financial statements
made the necessary disclosures about
the nature of the relationship and the amounts involved. However, the
audit reports
omitted the disclosures.
45. The Financial Reporting Act (section 17) and the New Zealand
Institute of Chartered Accountants Auditing Standard AS-702
The Audit Report
on an Attest Audit (paragraphs 25(e) and 30) require auditors to
identify in their audit report the existence and nature of any other
relationship
between them and the entity.
46. In one case, it was unclear from the financial statements whether
work carried out by the auditor constituted “other
assurance
services”; the auditor confirmed that it was. Another case was resolved by
the auditor agreeing to provide better
disclosures in future.
47. The Commission considers it important for auditors and
issuers to ensure clear disclosure of all fees paid to
their auditor. There
must be transparency in the types of services (other than audit services) and
related fees paid to an issuer’s
auditor. The provision of other
services, particularly when the amounts involved are large in relation
to an auditor’s
total fees, could compromise an auditor’s
independence in carrying out audit work.
CONCLUSION
48. Cycle 13 indicates improved compliance in some areas of NZ IFRS.
However, this report highlights segment reporting and financial
instruments
disclosures as areas needing improvement.
LOOKING AHEAD
49. The Commission will continue to monitor compliance with NZ IFRS 8
and the NZ IFRS 7 fair-value hierarchy disclosures.
50. The Commission also proposes to focus on disclosures about
alternative performance measures.
APPENDIX 1: BACKGROUND TO THE SECURITIES COMMISSION’S FINANCIAL
REPORTING SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMME
1. The Securities Commission is the main regulator of the
New Zealand securities market. Our purpose is to strengthen
investor
confidence and foster capital investment in New Zealand by promoting the
efficiency, integrity and cost-effective regulation
of our securities
markets.
2. The Commission regards quality financial reporting by
issuers6 to be fundamental to the fairness, efficiency and
transparency of New Zealand’s securities markets.
The Commission’s Financial Reporting Surveillance
Programme
3. Section 10(c) of the Securities Act 1978 requires the Securities
Commission “to keep under review practices relating
to securities, and to
comment thereon to any appropriate body”.
4. As part of this function, the Commission established an ongoing Financial Reporting
Surveillance Programme (FRSP) in 2004, its first cycle review taking place in
2005.
5. The FRSP aims to encourage New Zealand issuers to improve the
quality of their financial reporting so that:
(a) issuers’ financial statement disclosures are clear and comprehensive;
(b) investors can have confidence in the credibility of financial information provided by issuers; and
(c) high-quality financial reporting contributes to the integrity of New
Zealand’s securities markets.
6. The FRSP involves reviewing selected issuers’ financial
statements. At the end of each cycle the Commission publicly
reports on this
surveillance work by providing market participants with a summary of its
findings. Copies of reports for all cycles
are available on the
Commission’s website www.seccom.govt.nz
6 An issuer is defined by the Securities Act 1978 (section 2) to mean:
(a) In relation to an equity security or debt security, or to an advertisement, investment statement, prospectus, or registered prospectus that relates to an equity security or a debt security, or to a trust deed that relates to a debt security, the person on whose behalf any money paid in consideration of the allotment of the security is received:
(b) In relation to a participatory security, or to an advertisement, investment statement, prospectus, or registered prospectus, or to a deed of participation that relates to a participatory security, the manager:
(c) In relation to an interest in a contributory mortgage offered by a contributory mortgage broker, or to an
advertisement that relates to such an interest, the contributory mortgage broker:
(d) In relation to a unit in a unit trust, or to an advertisement, investment statement, prospectus or registered prospectus that relates to such a unit, the manager:
(e) In relation to a life insurance policy, or to an advertisement, investment statement, prospectus, or registered
prospectus that relates to a life insurance policy, the life insurance company that is liable under the policy:
(f) In relation to an interest in a superannuation scheme, or to
an advertisement, investment statement, prospectus,
or registered prospectus
that relates to such an interest, the superannuation trustee of the
scheme.
New Zealand Generally Accepted Accounting Practice
7. The Financial Reporting Act 1993 requires issuers to prepare
financial statements that comply with New Zealand Generally
Accepted Accounting
Practice (NZ GAAP) and provide a true and fair view of the matters to which they
relate7.
8. The Commission reviews issuers’ financial statements against
NZ GAAP. For the purpose of the Financial Reporting
Act, financial
statements and group financial statements comply with NZ GAAP only if those
statements comply with:
(a) applicable financial reporting standards; and
(b) in relation to matters for which no provision is made in applicable financial reporting standards and that are not subject to any applicable rule of law, accounting policies that:
(i) are appropriate to the circumstances of the reporting entity; and
(ii) have authoritative support within the accounting profession in New
Zealand.
9. The Financial Reporting Act defines “applicable financial
reporting standard” to mean an approved financial
reporting standard that
applies to a reporting entity (or group) and to an accounting period (or interim
accounting period) in accordance
with a determination of the Accounting
Standards Review Board (ASRB) for the time being in force or any election made
under section
27 of the Financial Reporting Act. All issuers are required to
apply NZ IFRS in the preparation of their financial statements for
annual
accounting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2007.
10. The purpose of the Commission’s cycle reviews is to form a
view on:
(a) the level of issuer compliance with NZ GAAP in financial statements prepared under the Financial Reporting Act;
(b) whether any breach of NZ GAAP identified in those financial statements is likely to cause the financial statements to not show a true and fair view, or be materially misleading to users in the context of information disclosed for investment decision-making under the Securities Act, and therefore require enforcement action; and
(c) the overall quality of financial reporting practices by
issuers.
Selecting issuers
11. The FRSP aims to review all issuers listed on NZX Limited (NZX) at
least once during a three-to-four-year period.
7 Part II of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 (section 11)
requires every ‘reporting entity’ to prepare financial statements
that comply with generally accepted accounting practice and to provide any
additional information required to ensure those statements
are a true and fair
view of the matters to which they relate.
Part I, Section 2 of the Financial Reporting Act 1993 defines a reporting entity as : (a) An issuer; or
(b) A company, other than an exempt company; or
(c) A person that is required by any Act, other than this Act, to comply
with this Act as if it were a reporting entity.
12. Dual and overseas-listed issuers may also be selected.
Overseas-listed issuers are issuers domiciled or incorporated outside
New
Zealand that have a recognised stock exchange as the home exchange and are also
listed on NZX.
13. Dual-listed issuers are issuers incorporated in Australia that are on the Australian
Stock Exchange’s (ASX) Official List and also listed on the
NZX.
14. When dual- and overseas-listed issuers are selected, the Commission
first writes to the regulator in the overseas jurisdiction
to determine whether
a review of the issuer’s financial reporting has already been undertaken
locally. If it has, the Commission
does not review it. When the issuer has not
been reviewed by the overseas regulator, the Commission reviews the annual
report, NZX
announcements and, if applicable, the current prospectus. Where
appropriate, findings are communicated to the overseas regulator.
If the
Commission communicates a significant matter about an issuer to an appropriate
overseas regulator and the overseas regulator
proposes to take no action, the
Commission will write directly to the overseas or dual-listed issuer about the
matter.
15. Issuers trading on the Unlisted8 exchange and issuers
not listed on any exchange may be also included in cycle reviews.
16. Issuers may be selected on the basis of criteria determined by the
Commission: on areas of particular risk affecting the
issuer; the sector the
issuer is in at the time of selection; and/or their balance dates. Issuers can
also be reselected for a later
review when the issues identified in an earlier
cycle raised concerns.
Identifying matters and taking action
17. The Commission reviews an issuer’s annual report when reviewing
its financial statements and, in the case of listed
issuers, this includes a
review of any NZX announcements for the period and any relevant prospectuses.
While NZX announcements are
not comprehensively reviewed, any market matters
relating to continuous disclosure, disclosure of relevant interests by directors
and officers, and substantial security holder disclosure are followed up where
necessary.
18. Matters identified in the review are referred to as matters raised9 or other matters.
Matters raised include market matters.
19. Matters raised are those that are important or where
further clarification or information is needed. The Commission is likely, for
example,
to write to an issuer where a matter:
(a) appears to be wrong;
(b) appears not to make sense;
(c) is unclear and lacks transparency;
8 Unlisted is an unregistered securities trading facility; it is not a registered stock exchange or authorised securities exchange under the Securities Markets Act 1988. Unlisted provides a facility for trading previously allotted securities.
9 Prior to Cycle 6, the Commission referred to matters raised
as significant matters.
(d) seems unusual or irregular;
(e) raises questions about its validity; or
(f) is insufficiently explained.
20. Financial reporting requires the exercise of professional
judgement. The Commission takes this into account when reviewing
financial
statements and determining which matters to follow up.
21. The Commission writes to an issuer requesting additional
information, and in some cases asks the issuer to revise or enhance
disclosures
in future financial statements.
22. When writing to an issuer about matters raised, the
Commission includes other matters the review raises in relation to that
issuer. Other matters are miscellaneous matters the Commission considers
could be better disclosed.
23. The Commission’s policy is to not write to an issuer whose
financial statements raise only other matters unless these are so
numerous that it is useful to give the issuer feedback. In this respect, the
Commission is mindful of the FRSP’s
educative role.
24. When the Commission writes to an issuer, a copy of the letter is
also sent to the issuer’s auditor. This practice
acknowledges the role of
auditors in maintaining and improving the standard of financial reporting. It
also alerts an auditor to
the particular aspects of its client’s financial
statements that concerns the Commission.
25. Auditors have an important role in encouraging companies to comply
not only with the statutory requirements but also with
best practice. The
Commission encourages auditors to be vigilant when auditing financial
statements. High-quality external auditing
is critical to the integrity of
financial reporting, and to the efficiency and integrity of the securities
markets.
26. Where a matter may have significant market impact, it is removed
from the FRSP and considered separately as an enforcement
matter.
27. Referrals are also made to appropriate bodies when the FRSP
identifies matters as a breach of:
(a) the Financial Reporting Act;
(b) the Rules or the Code of Ethics of the New Zealand Institute of Chartered
Accountants; or
(c) the NZX Listing Rules.
NZLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/other/NZSecCom/2011/1.html