IFRS vs K3 : En komparativ studie av IFRS och K3 gällande redovisning avleasing

Sammanfattning: The 1st of January 2019 a new leasing standard was introduced, IFRS 16, where all leasing agreements are included in a company’s financial statements. The new standard was developed against the backdrop of the old standard that enabled companies to withhold leasing agreements of large values from the financial statements, which subsequently allowed them to present an enhanced picture of a company’s financial strength. The introduction of IFRS 16 eliminated the possibility of expensing a leased asset. The baseline in IFRS 16 is that the party who has the right of use of the leased asset is responsible for reporting the asset in the financial statements. According to the standard, a leased asset should be capitalized on the financial statements as a right of use and as a lease liability. Large unlisted Swedish companies can choose to apply IFRS as an accounting method when preparing their consolidated financial statements, however, they also have the choice to apply K3, which is a regulatory framework for larger Swedish companies. In K3, a leasing agreement can be reported in two different ways depending on the financial meaning of the lease agreement, either as an operational agreement or a financial agreement. A financial agreement according to K3 capitalizes the asset on the income statement and the balance sheet while an operational agreement expenses the leased asset. These different ways of reporting a lease agreement contributes to companies’ reporting over their financial position looking differently. Moreover, their key figures which are a key part for a company and their stakeholders are also affected, enabling companies to give a different outlook depending on the approach they decide to take. The purpose of this study is to investigate what differences it means for a company’s accounting depending on which leasing standard they choose to apply and how these differences affect a managers choice of accounting standard. Furthermore, we will examine what effects the chosen standard will have on a company’s financial reports and key figures, and if they affect the companies stakeholders. To illustrate the effect the standards have on the accounting, the study’s empirical chapter consists of hypothetical case examples. The results of the hypothetical case studies have been analyzed based on IASBs and the Swedish accounting board’s qualitative characteristics, as well as with selected key figures and economic theories. The study’s results show that the biggest difference between the K3 and IFRS standards are when an operational lease agreement is reported. The reporting of an operational lease agreement according to K3 results in financially stronger numbers compared to reporting according to IFRS. The results also show that reporting according to K3 means more uncertainty regarding the portrayal of a fair picture of a company’s financial position. For a company with a large share of operational leasing agreements, our conclusion is that a company’s financial reports benefit from reporting according to the K3 regulation. However, we believe reporting according to the K3 regulations does not meet the characteristics fair picture and comparability and if it is of the greatest interest to a stakeholder or company leader, we consider the regulations IFRS 16 to be most appropriate. For a lease agreement which is classified as a financial lease agreement there are small differences between the accounting standards. The results also show that a lease agreement classified as an operational agreement under K3 and runs for twelve months, is reported according to the same methods as IFRS. For a company with financial leases or leases that are shorter than twelve months, a choice of accounting standard has little effect on a company’s reporting and therefore our conclusion is that IFRS should be applied because IFRS gives greater credibility to a company as it is an internationally accepted standard. This study is hereafter written in Swedish.