ABSTRACT
Accounting for an investee as a subsidiary or as an investment can significantly change the investor’s financial reporting in dramatic ways. Coming out of the financial crisis, there were concerns as to whether the control model used to determine when an investee is a subsidiary adequately reflected whether an investor had control over an investee. These concerns caused both the IASB and the FASB to reconsider their respective consolidation models. Unfortunately for financial statement users, the Boards chose different paths. As a consequence, consolidation conclusions under the IASB’s single control model can often be very different from the conclusion under the FASB’s VIE vs. non-VIE models. Here we explore, in depth, the IASB’s control model and contrast it with that of the FASB (including examples of where differences in the conclusion can arise). We also show how the differing conclusions about control can affect other accounting outcomes such as whether a business combination has occurred and the accounting for joint arrangements.
