Share this content

FRS102 terminology

FRS102 terminology

Didn't find your answer?

Somebody must have thought about this before, but I haven't seen anything written about it. How can we use the FRS102 terminology ("Income Statement", "Statement of Financial Position", "Inventories", etc.) when CA2006 s. 396 and the Formats in the Regulations lay down specific terminology ("Profit & Loss Account", "Balance Sheet", "Stock", etc.) that must be used? I know that companies using IAS are allowed to vary the format, but, as far as I can see, there is no equivalent option for companies using UK GAAP.

What have I missed?

Replies (4)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By taxguru
21st Apr 2015 20:47

1. FRS102 is modelled on IFRS for SMEs

2. A4.7 (page 324) does say that FRS102 accounts are s.396 accounts

3. A4.11 does acknowledge the superiority of CA/06 over the standards

4. Appendix III (page 322) lists the diff with the CA terminologies

5. And finally, the format of the balance sheet has to comply with s.4.2

Thanks (1)
avatar
By TerryD
22nd Apr 2015 17:39

Thank you

I guess I must've fallen asleep before I got as far as Appendix III. So it's clear: until they change the law, we don't have inventories - we have stock. Hurrah!

Thanks (0)
Euan's picture
By Euan MacLennan
22nd Apr 2015 17:53

Legislation vs. Accounting Standards

I would have thought that the requirements of UK legislation - specifically, the balance sheet and P&L formats set out in SCG(ADR) Regs. 2008 Sch.1 - take precedence over mere accounting standards, such as FRS102.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By TerryD
23rd Apr 2015 09:51

Indeed they do (thank goodness). But if one adopts IAS, s. 397 applies, instead of s. 396, and the regulations regarding the format of accounts do not then apply (both small and large company versions apply to accounts prepared under s. 396 only). So I have been half expecting a similar exemption to be made for companies adopting FRS102, as regards terminology at least. So I scoured the small print of SI 2015/980, but found no such provisions - hence my wondering if some other pronouncement had been made but slipped under my radar. Apparently not.

Thanks (0)
Share this content