The boards discussed whether they should try to reduce differences between their respective models for the classification and measurement of financial instruments.
The boards decided to jointly redeliberate selected aspects of their classification and measurement models to seek to reduce key differences. The boards decided to discuss the following differences:
1. the contractual cash flow characteristics of an instrument;
2. the need for bifurcation of financial assets and if pursued, the basis for bifurcation;
3. the basis for and scope of a possible third classification category (debt instruments measured at fair value through other comprehensive income); and
4. any knock-on effects from the above (for example, disclosures or the model for financial liabilities in the light of the financial asset decisions).
The boards tentatively plan to discuss each issue jointly and what changes, if any, they would propose to make to their separate models and incorporate in their respective exposure drafts.
Thirteen IASB members voted in favour of the decision with one member supporting a wider review. All FASB members voted in favour of the decision.