Yogi Berra said it best. “It’s déjà vu all over again.” That is what should come to everyone’s mind upon reviewing the third measurement focus and basis of accounting proposal from the Governmental Accounting Standards Board’s (GASB) recent Invitation to Comment (ITC), Financial Reporting Model Improvements – Governmental Funds. As was noted in the previous blog post You Are Doing WHAT to the Governmental Funds?? – Part 2, the Short-Term Approach, each proposal is moving further and further away from the current financial resource measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting currently used in the governmental funds. Well, this is an all-out retreat!! In fact, it is also being referred to as the total financial resources approach.
Author: Gregory Allison (page 2 of 2)
In our last chapter, You Are Doing WHAT to the Governmental Funds?? – Part 1, The Near-Term Approach, we explored one of the three new measurement focus and basis of accounting (MFBA) options being considered for the governmental funds. These approaches are presented in the Governmental Accounting Standards Board’s recent Invitation to Comment (ITC), Financial Reporting Model Improvements – Governmental Funds. And you thought it was a scary chapter!?? The suspense continues with the second MFBA proposal – the short-term (or working capital) approach. One spoiler alert (but it is for your own good) – each approach goes further away from the current resource measurement focus and modified accrual basis of accounting currently used by the governmental funds. (Just wait until you read Part 3….)
In my previous post, Invitation to Comment – or Invitation to Disaster?? The Long Slog to a New Financial Reporting Model Begins!, I provided a fascinating overview of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board’s (GASB) new financial reporting model project. As was noted, the actual Invitation to Comment (ITC), Financial Reporting Model Improvements – Governmental Funds is a first step in the long due process of developing a new GAAP standard. As is the case here, an ITC usually provides an opportunity for the GASB to solicit feedback on various proposal considerations. A significant aspect of the reporting model project is the reconsideration of the unique measurement focus used in the governmental funds (current financial resources). The ITC details three new measurement focus approaches to consider – the near-term approach, the short-term approach, and the long-term approach. This post, focusing on the near-term approach, is the first in a series that will provide (hopefully) a clearer insight into the plotting that is occurring in Norwalk.
Well, it was inevitable. While we all are still reeling from the fun that has been GASB Statement No. 34, Basic Financial Statements – and Management’s Discussion and Analysis – for State and Local Governments that was issued in June 1999, another chapter in the never-ending saga has begun. Yes, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) recently added a new financial reporting model project to their official agenda. Now, the good news is that this type of project takes time – lots of time. The project that culminated in GASB Statement No. 34 was a 15-year process. The first implementers of GASB Statement No. 34 did so 15 years ago. So, one would hope that this is the beginning of another 15 year adventure and, at the end, most of us will be retired. Well, no such luck this time. While we do have time to possibly retire, the potential release of a new reporting model standard is currently slated for November 2021, with implementation certainly several years after that. However, we are not looking at a 15-year process.
The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issued GASB Statement No. 84, Fiduciary Activities the last week in January 2017. Obviously, this is breaking news – stop the presses! The standard is the culmination of a long-term, wide-ranging project to address accounting and financial reporting for the following:
- Pension plan assets that are entrusted (GASB Statement No. 67 and
- Pension plan assets that are not entrusted (GASB Statement No. 73)
- Other postemployment plans (OPEB) assets that are either entrusted or not entrusted (GASB Statement No. 74 and GASB Statement No. 75)
With GASB Statement No. 84, the GASB provides definitive guidance on how all fiduciary activities of a governmental entity should be reported. It is now definitive that assets that are associated with a fiduciary activity and are legally entrusted should be reported in one of three specific fiduciary fund types. Those assets that are not legally entrusted but still meet the definition of a fiduciary activity are to be reported in a separate fiduciary fund type. This does clear some inconsistencies with fiduciary fund reporting currently where entrusted and non-entrusted assets may be reported in the same fund type (although many of us probably never lost much sleep over it).
Everyone is well aware, or should be, that the cost of retiring is escalating almost by the minute. There are financial advisors and estate planners who solely focus on enabling us to have a shot at a decent retirement, relatively free of financial concern. Employers in both the public and private sectors are recognizing mammoth liabilities for the pension resources they are holding in trust for their employees. But, are employees all that are going to retire from a state or local government? Is that the only long-term cost that a governmental entity is going to be liable for (above and beyond normal indebtedness)? The answer is obviously no or I would not be writing this post.
In my previous post, Are You Certifiable?, I reviewed the North Carolina Finance Officers’ Certification program, sponsored by the North Carolina Government Finance Officers Association (NCGFOA). As was probably clear in the post, the process is challenging but certainly doable, and those that become certified finance officers in North Carolina should definitely be proud of their achievement. But after the months (or years) of classes, studying, and testing, what happens after the success? Is the certification permanent (just like an appointment on the United States Supreme Court)? Does it expire? DO I HAVE TO TAKE THE TESTS AGAIN?? This blogpost will summarize the “post-certification” years and how certified finance officers must continue maintaining the high standards that got you where you are in the first place.
Tax Abatement, visual by Ruth Lerner
I’m here to help alleviate fears. In August 2015, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issued GASB Statement No. 77, Tax Abatement Disclosures. The guidance, which if it were applicable to North Carolina governments, would be effective for fiscal year end June 30, 2017. The requirements are relatively simple – if a government has any tax abatement agreements, as defined in the standard, there are certain note disclosure requirements that must be made regarding the agreement(s). A tax abatement in is defined in the standard as follows: Continue reading
Benjamin Frankin, (1706-1790) , North American printer, publisher, writer, scientist, inventor and statesman. Source: Wkipedia
Our new Constitution is now established, and has an appearance that promises permanency; but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.
Benjamin Franklin, in a letter to Jean-Baptiste Leroy, 1789
© 2024 Copyright,
The University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑