IAS 28

Now, in our meeting this September, as I said, we completed the re-deliberations needed to finalize what we want the staff to do in a revised IES 28.

And we did dealt with some sweep issues and we talked about some consequential amendments that we'd also need to make to IAS 27 and IFRS 19 to be consistent with the changes we're making to IAS 28.

We looked at the fact that we had completed our due process and the board was happy that the staff had summarized and we completed all the necessary due process steps.

And we also thought about re-exposure and we concluded that there is no need to re-expose.

And once we complete those two hurdles, Then the board can give us permission to the staff to start balloting.

And the final decision we made was that we will make the effective date the 1st of January 2029 with early application permitted.

So the next steps on this standard are the staff will start the drafting, we will have a pre-ballot and then a ballot, and we would expect the revised IAS 28 to be issued sometime in the first half of 2027.

Now, Anybody who can do the math says, Linda, it's September, and the end of the first half of 2027 is like nine months away, so it's like having a baby.

Because I think, at least definitely from my perspective, I'm not sure the committee was 100% sure what the question actually was.

Because on the one hand, if it was a simple question of how do the requirements of that paragraph, I think we're going to start calling it 53C now as we talk about it, but that requirements that assets that generate a return individually and largely independently of other resources go in the investing category, and what does that actually mean? That could have been interpreted as part of the question, but I think the submitter was also saying, Why this is important is because it might actually affect how entities determine whether or not they can use the pretty recent amendment to IAS 28 on the fair value option for associates and JVs.

And some of the scenarios in the actual detailed submission from the submitter were trying to demonstrate how a specific type of entity and investment fund might make the assessment under 53C which might actually influence how it classified some of its debts and equity instruments.

So sorry, I know that's a lot to take in and maybe that sounds confusing and maybe by design it's supposed to sound confusing because I think at least me and the committee weren't actually sure which of those questions the submitter actually wanted answered.

I think we didn't all agree on that.

But I think the important thing is don't forget you need to think about whether or not you have a specified main business activity before you jump straight to a 53C assessment.

And the other one thing that I just wanted to point out, which kind of got mentioned in the discussion but didn't make its way into the agenda decision, is the submission kind of said this is really important for entities who may want to take advantage of the new amendment that's coming into IAS 28.

So just to remind folks, the board has amended IAS 28 to say...