Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2011)684 - Annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings

Please note

This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.

dossier COM(2011)684 - Annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings.
source COM(2011)684 EN
date 25-10-2011
1. General comments

The Accounting Directives (hereafter the 'Directives') deal with the annual and consolidated financial statements of limited liability companies in Europe.

There are a number of key objectives in the current Review:

The reduction of administrative burden/simplification targeting mainly small companies.

To increase the clarity and comparability of financial statements targeting the company categories for which these considerations are important due to a more vigorous cross-border activity and a larger number of external stakeholders.

The protection of essential user needs aiming at retaining necessary accounting information for users.

The increased transparency on payments made to governments by the extractive industry and loggers of primary forests.

Consultations have shown that stakeholders are overall broadly content with the current framework which has generally functioned well over the years. Those stakeholders include inter alia preparers and users of financial statements, and public authorities. However they do see room for simplification, especially to benefit the smallest companies. During the past 30 years, amendments to the Directives have added many requirements, such as new disclosures and valuation rules, including detailed provisions on fair value accounting. Less attention has been paid to considering whether existing requirements could be simplified or removed. Whilst every amendment may have been justified in its own right, these additions have tended to disregard the comparability and usefulness of the financial statements, increased reporting requirements and the number of Member State options, and have ultimately led to increased complexity and regulatory burden for all companies. This increased burden bears down primarily on smaller companies.

Stakeholders have also pointed to the need to increase the clarity and comparability of financial statements, especially for larger companies which tend to undertake more extensive cross-border operations.

The raison d'être for the Directives is to establish the requirement for limited liability companies to prepare financial statements and set minimum requirements in order to improve the EU-wide comparability of financial statements. This, in turn, should lead to a better functioning of the Single Market and, more concretely, an increased access to finance, reductions in the cost of capital and increased levels of cross-border trade, merger and acquisition activity. Overall, the proposal contributes to improving Europe's competitiveness through establishing a regulatory environment conducive to job-rich growth.

The proposal complements the proposal for a Directive of 2009 i on the financial statements of micro-entities, which is currently still being negotiated by the EU co-legislators. Given that the Council and the Parliament have now both agreed to the principle of a micro entity regime, the current proposal does not contain any new policy proposal regarding micro companies as assessed in the accompanying Impact Assessment. The European Commission is willing to consider, together with the EU co-legislators, how best to integrate into the current proposal the final inter-institutional agreement on the Directive of 2009.

This proposal supports the Commission's approach on companies outlined in a number of instances. The Europe 2020 Strategy i aims to make the EU a smarter, more sustainable and inclusive economy. The Single Market Act aims to simplify life for SMEs, which make up more than 99% of Europe's businesses, and to improve these companies' access to finance. The Small Business Act (SBA) recognises the need to consider distinct needs for the SME group as well as to have segments within that group. It supports a 'think small first' approach. The proposal also forms part of the Commission's simplification rolling programme and administrative burden reduction initiatives. As such, it delivers on the commitment made by the Commission to review its acquis to ensure the relevance, effectiveness and proportionality of the legislation in place, as well as to reduce administrative burdens by simplifying the regulatory environment.

The proposal repeals the current Accounting Directives, replacing them and their subsequent amendments with a single new Directive.

Contents

1.

2. Consultations of stakeholders and impact assessment


2.

2.1. Consultation of stakeholders and interested parties


The Commission Services have maintained a regular dialogue with stakeholders throughout the Review. The objective was to gather views from all interested parties, including preparers, users, standard setters, public authorities, etc. Dialogue took place through:

– An informal ad hoc SME reflection group composed of 10 experts with diverse experience and backgrounds.

– Two public consultations, respectively on the Review of the Directives and on the International Financial Reporting Standard for Small and Medium-Sized Entities, both followed by stakeholders' meetings to consider and further discuss the results.

– Several targeted meetings with national standard setters, representatives of small and medium-sized businesses, banks, investors and accountants across the EU.

– Consultations with the EFRAG (European Financial Reporting Advisory Group) Working Group on SMEs and the Accounting Regulatory Committee (ARC) ad hoc Working Group on SMEs.

– A study into the effects on administrative burden from changes to Directives conducted by the Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services (CSES).

With respect to country-by-country reporting, the Commission Services have also maintained a regular dialogue with different categories of stakeholders (such as preparers, users, and public authorities). A public consultation was carried out in 2010/2011 and a series of bilateral consultations with stakeholders (especially users and preparers) took place in 2010 and 2011. Furthermore, the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) provided input on the evaluation of the administrative costs associated with possibly requiring country-by-country financial reporting.

3.

2.2. Impact assessment


4.

2.2.1. Financial Statements


The preparation of financial statements has been identified as one of the most burdensome regulatory obligations for companies i. Small companies face proportionally higher administrative burdens in comparison to medium-sized / large companies.

The Impact Assessment analysed five broad policy options starting from the baseline scenario. The broad option of revising and modernising selected requirements currently in the Accounting Directives was finally retained as the preferred option.

After examining more detailed options, it appeared that a 'mini-regime' specific to small companies would be the best policy choice. The potential for administrative burden reduction of this policy amounts to EUR 1.5 bn which arises from reduced reporting requirements in the notes, further relaxation of statutory audit and the exemption from preparing consolidated financial statements for small groups.

A second detailed option concerned the increase of the thresholds for small and medium-sized companies as defined by the Directive to reflect inflation in the period 2007 to 2011. The burden reduction potential of this proposal amounts to around EUR 0.2 bn.

The estimated potential for savings from the above is therefore estimated at EUR 1.7 bn overall. Micro-companies will in any event benefit from the simplified regime offered to small companies. However, the impact on micro-entities of the above policy choices has been disregarded as the proposal for a Directive on micro-entities that is pending before the European Parliament and the Council specifically addresses these.

These policy choices will reduce the amount of information available to users of small and medium-sized company financial statements, including information which is publicly available. Creditor protection would however be strengthened due to the fact that two disclosures concerning guarantees and commitments and related party transactions would become mandatory. There would be a slightly positive impact on the information available in the case of medium-sized and large companies due to an improved clarity and comparability of their financial statements.

Statistical authorities might need to adjust their way of collecting some data from smaller companies although the maximum harmonisation of thresholds would allow them to collect data for companies that are objectively the same size across the EU, thereby improving comparability. However, harmonisation of the thresholds may have an adverse impact on the collection of statistical data especially in Member States where the proportion of small companies is high. In order to estimate national economic indicators these Member States may need to revise the way they collect statistical data from companies. The Commission proposal to interconnect the central, commercial and companies registers should, as a mitigating factor, improve cross-border access to company information. Tax authorities will retain the power to decide how profits for tax purposes should be computed and what should be the associated reporting requirements.

In terms of the social impact of the proposal, simplified accounting requirements should foster a business climate that encourages company formation and entrepreneurship. The impact assessment considered that by freeing up resources available to companies, the initiative is expected to contribute, at least marginally, to the creation of jobs in the EU. Some of the savings at company level would stem from a reduction in fees paid to accountancy firms or external accountants. The impact on jobs due to this transfer of resources is expected to be neutral or only marginally negative in terms of overall employment levels. No measurable environmental impacts are expected. It is not expected that the introduction of simpler accounting regimes would create disincentives for small companies to grow as accounting is less burdensome than tax or social legislation in this regard. In addition, the 'think small first' approach of this proposal allows for accounting regimes to fit different sizes of company.

5.

2.2.2. Reporting of payments to governments


The Commission has publicly expressed support for the international Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI), and envisaged willingness to present legislation mandating disclosure requirements for extractive industry companies.[9] A similar pledge was made in the concluding Declaration of the G8 Summit in Deauville of May 2011 i, where the G8 governments committed 'to setting in place transparency laws and regulations or to promoting voluntary standards that require or encourage oil, gas, and mining companies to disclose the payments they make to governments.' Furthermore, the European Parliament has presented a Resolution reiterating its support for country-by-country reporting requirements, in particular for the extractive industries.

EU legislation does not currently require companies to disclose, on a country basis, payments to government made in countries where they operate. Therefore such payments made to governments in a specific country are normally not disclosed, even though such payments by the extractive industry (oil, gas and mining) or loggers i of primary forestscan represent a significant proportion of a country's revenues, especially in third countries that are rich in natural resources. In order to make governments accountable for the use of these resources and promote good governance, it is proposed to require the disclosure of payments to governments at the individual or consolidated level of a company. This proposal is comparable to the US Dodd-Frank Act, which was adopted in July 2010, and requires extractive industry companies (oil, gas and mining companies) registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to publicly report payments to governments on a country- and project-specific basis. The SEC's implementing rules are scheduled to be adopted by the end of 2011.

The Impact Assessment analysed five broad policy options starting from the baseline scenario (policy option 0), next examining possible schemes that would result in a global agreement for country-by-country reporting for EU and non-EU MNCs (policy option 1), and finally assessing several policy options that would oblige only EU companies to disclose country by country information (policy options 2 to 4). Whilst policy option 2 requires the disclosure of payments to governments on a country basis from the extractive industry and the loggers of primary forests, policy option 3 requires the disclosure of such information on a country- and project- basis. In addition to a report on payments to government, policy option 4 would require a complete set of country-by-country accounts to be prepared by companies active in the extractive industry and loggers of primary forests.

The option of requiring country-by-country reporting (CBCR) of payments to government on a country-and-project basis by EU Multinational Companies (MNCs) in the extractive industry and logging of primary forests (policy option 3) was retained. The extractive industry covers all companies with activities which involve the exploration, discovery, development and extraction of minerals, oil and natural gas deposits. The logging of primary forests covers all companies with activities which involve the clear-cutting, selective logging or thinning of primary forests. The disclosure of payments to government on a country-and, as the case may be, on a project- basis would better satisfy the demands of stakeholders calling for enhanced disclosures whilst the costs of such a policy option would remain acceptable, on condition that an appropriate materiality threshold is introduced. This approach would strike a balance between more transparency without overburdening companies, and without excessively putting EU companies at a competitive disadvantage. This should not compromise future efforts by the EU to obtain international agreement, and to create via negotiations with international partners a worldwide level playing field with respect to CBCR.

The issue of a potential conflict between an EU disclosure requirement and a recipient country's national legislation prohibiting the publication of such information has been raised by some companies within the scope of the proposal. Calls have been made to create an exemption in such cases from reporting the relevant payments to government. Although the Commission has found very few examples of countries prohibiting disclosures, a strictly circumscribed exemption has been provided for situations in which a company complying with the disclosure obligations would find itself in clear contravention of the criminal law of the country concerned.

Energy security figures high on the EU's agenda for several reasons inter alia because energy generated in EU Member States does not cover current demand. Some argue that the EU extractive operators may find it harder to operate in third countries which could have a consequent effect on security of oil and gas supplies to Europe. While some companies already disclose payments to governments on a country basis without impediments to their activities, this might be different for others Therefore a review should inter alia evaluate the issue of security of energy supply in Europe. The issue has been raised that such disclosure might result in a competitive disadvantage for EU industry. The Commission takes the view that in majority of cases the disclosure of payments to government on a country and project basis where those payments have been attributed to a specific project (with a materiality threshold) would not give direct insight into confidential company information such as levels of turnover, costs and profits. The strengthening of the EITI would also militate against any possible short-term loss of competitive position, as it may lead to a more global application and enhanced reputation of compliant companies.

6.

2.3. Budgetary Implications


The proposal has no implications for the Union budget.

7.

3. Additional information


8.

3.1. Simplification


The proposal introduces a specific regime for small companies that will considerably reduce the administrative burden currently borne by small companies when they prepare their financial statements. It will limit disclosures by way of notes to the accounts to (i) accounting policies; (ii) guarantees, commitments, contingencies and arrangements that are not recognised in the balance sheet; (iii) post-balance sheet events not recognised in the balance sheet; (iv) long-term and secured debts; and (v) related party transactions. It should be noted that mandating the disclosure of items (iii) and (v) will result in new obligations imposed for small companies, as a majority of Member States have provided for exemptions from these disclosures for such companies.

The proposal also seeks to harmonise thresholds to ensure that the administrative burden reduction actually reaches all small companies in the EU. Currently many companies that are small under EU definitions enter the medium-sized or large company category because the definitions foreseen in the Directives are lower when transposed at Member State level.

The table below provides a summarised overview of the main simplification effects of this proposal:

Small Companies ~ 1,1 million companies ~21 % of companies| – Maximum harmonisation will ensure that companies of the same size benefit from a level playing field across the EU. – Notes to the accounts will be limited to only five key areas. – No requirement for a statutory audit. – Small groups will be exempt from preparing consolidated financial statements.

9.

3.2. Other measures


The proposal seeks to improve the comparability and clarity of financial statements prepared by medium-sized and large companies, and by small companies to a limited extent.

To this end, the proposal seeks to reduce the number of options currently available to Member States, insofar as these options are detrimental to the comparability of the financial statements. General principles such as 'substance over form' will become mandatory so as to increase the clarity of financial statements.

As regards amendments to existing provisions, the table below provides a summarised overview of the main modifications:

Medium-sized /Large Companies ~ 0.3 million companies ~ 4% of companies| – Introduction of general principles of 'materiality' and 'substance over form' – Reduction in the number of Member State options.

10.

3.3. IFRS for SMEs


Adopting the International Financial Reporting Standards for SMEs (IFRS for SMEs) for mandatory use within the EU was considered as an option. Stakeholders, notably public authorities, were, however, divided on this idea and the Impact Assessment also concluded that introducing this new standard would not serve the objectives of simplification and reduction of administrative burden. Moreover, considering that the IFRS for SMEs is a relatively new standard, experience with its implementation worldwide was still lacking.

Mandatory adoption of the IFRS for SMEs is not being pursued as a policy within this proposal, and differences between this proposed Directive and the IFRS for SMEs in the areas of presentation of unpaid subscribed share capital and the amortisation periods for goodwill whose expected useful life cannot be reliably estimated mean that explicit full adoption of the IFRS for SMEs will not be possible.

11.

3.4. Reporting of payments to governments


In order to promote governments' accountability and good governance, the proposal introduces new reporting requirements for companies active in the extractive industry or in the logging of primary forests. It is proposed that companies shall disclose the payments they make to governments in each country where they operate and for each project, where the payment has been attributed to a certain project and when material to the recipient government. In line with the overall objective and in order to limit the additional administrative burden, the new requirement is limited to large companies and public interest entities.

12.

3.5. Proposed Directive and repeal of existing legislation


The proposal takes the form of a new Directive repealing the 1978 and 1983 Directives and their subsequent amendments.

13.

3.6. Legal basis, subsidiarity and proportionality


The proposal is based on Article 50 of the Treaty, which is the legal basis for adoptingUnion measures aimed at achieving an Internal Market in company law.

The proposal provides that limited liability companies should prepare financial statements under a set of requirements devised to improve the EU-wide comparability of financial statements with the objective of contributing to a better functioning of the Single Market and to an increased level of cross-border trade. According to the principle of subsidiarity the EU should act only where it can provide better results than intervention at Member State level and action should be limited to what is necessary and proportionate in order to attain the objectives of the policy pursued. The objectives of this review are such that they cannot be fulfilled by unilateral action at the level of Member States.

Being subject only to a single set of basic EU level requirements would be advantageous for small companies under a 'think small first' approach. Small companies should be treated equally across the EU in order for them to benefit from access to the single market on homogenous terms. Member States should not impose unnecessary additional requirements. This can be best achieved through coordinated EU law. As far as r medium-sized and large companies are concerned, financial reporting needs to be made more comparable at EU level as the activities of these companies are often EU-wide and relevant to stakeholders throughout the internal market. Nevertheless, Member States should have a degree of leeway as far as additional reporting requirements for these types of companies are concerned. To this end, a Directive is the most appropriate legal instrument as it allows a certain margin of manoeuvre for Member States. A Directive also ensures that the content and form of the proposed EU action does not go beyond what is necessary and proportionate in order to achieve the regulatory objective of simplification and reduction of administrative burdens.

14.

4. Comments on the Articles


The following Articles remain the same in substance as corresponding Articles in the Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EEC and the Seventh Council Directive 83/349/EEC, although their numbering in most cases differs from the numbering originally used. These include Articles 1 (including Annexes I and II), 2 i to 2, 3 i to 3, 4, 5 i to 5 i, 6 i to 6 i, 7, 8 to 8, 10, 11 to 11 and 11, 12 i, 19 i, 20, 21, 22, 28 i, 29 i and 29 i, 30, 32, 33 to 33 i, 34, 35 except 35 i, 44, 45, 47, and 51. A correlation table is provided in Annex III.

For the sake of conciseness and clarity, explanations are provided in this section only where this proposal brings about substantial modifications compared to the Directives that will be repealed.

A number of changes have been introduced throughout the text in order to bring terminology within the proposed Directive in line with modern accounting language, with no impact on the substance of the relevant articles. These include: replacing 'company' with the term 'undertaking', all references to 'accounts' have been replaced by 'financial statements', and all references to 'annual report' have been replaced by 'management report'.

15.

4.1. Chapter 1 - Scope, definitions and categories of undertakings


Article 2 groups together a number of definitions that were previously dispersed throughout the original Directives. Public interest entities are defined, taking the definition used in Directive 2006/43/EC on Statutory Audits. Definitions for parent, subsidiary and affiliated undertakings have been set out more clearly than in the Seventh Council Directive 83/349/EEC. However, there is no change in the underlying meaning. Similarly associated undertakings are defined more clearly than at present, and in presuming significant influence to exist where an investor holds 20% or more of the voting rights the definition follows the relevant international accounting standard – IAS 28.

Article 3 creates a legal basis for the expressions 'small', 'medium-sized' and 'large' undertaking, and maintains the practice of determining an undertaking's size by reference to its net turnover, balance sheet total and number of employees. Depending on the purpose of EU policies, the Union may use definitions that differ to a certain extent from those in this Article[17]. The proposal is to fully harmonise size criteria, whereas previously the Member States could choose whether or not different sizes of undertaking should be recognised within their jurisdiction and, within limits, the relevant size criteria.

Small and medium-sized groups are defined in clearer terms than those used in the Seventh Council Directive 83/349/EEC. The net turnover and balance sheet total size criteria are increased in line with the level of inflation since they were last revised in 2006.

The definitions and exemptions for 'financial holding companies' and 'investment companies' have been removed, as industry specific accounting treatments act as a barrier to harmonisation. Furthermore these provisions have not been widely used across the EU.

16.

4.2. Chapter 2 - Main provisions and principles


Article 4, together with Article 17 (see 4.4 below), create a fully harmonised regime for the preparation of small undertakings' financial statements consisting in the preparation of a profit and loss account, balance sheet and limited notes. The Member States should not require the presentation of further information.

A general principle of materiality is introduced in Article 5. It provides that recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure in financial statements should be subject to materiality constraints. This will allow, for example, the combination of line items in the profit and loss account or balance sheet, or the omission of note disclosures where the relevant information is immaterial. Similarly non-material accruals, prepayments and provisions would not need to be recognised. Detemining materiality will remain a company's primary responsibility, whether that company is subject to an audit or not.

A requirement to present the economic reality of a transaction in the financial statements, and not just its legal form is also introduced as a general principle within Article 5 to provide for common general principles, and hence harmonisation, across the EU. Previously, such a method of presentation was permitted within the Directives but the Member States were not required to adopt the principle into their national law.

In Article 6 the option for Member States to allow revaluation accounting for fixed assets, as an alternative to historic cost accounting is retained whilst, to ensure greater harmonisation of valuation bases, the Member State options that allowed replacement cost accounting and inflation methods of accounting methods have been removed.

17.

4.3. Chapter 3 - Balance sheet and profit and loss account


General provisions in Article 8 have been amended to express more clearly that the Member States may require or permit an associated undertaking to be accounted for in the annual financial statements using the equity method.

The proposed Directive proposes only one balance sheet layout (see Article 9), whereas previously the Member States could choose between two different layouts. This will ensure better comparability of the financial statements from one jurisdiction to another in the EU. In addition, formation expenses are removed as a category of asset, as their recognition was dependent upon their being defined in Member States' law. A consequential amendment is necessary to the distributable profits test set out in Article 11.

Article 11 also introduces a requirement that the amount recognised in respect of a provision should correspond to the undertaking's best estimate of the liability or future expenditure, and this Article also excludes the 'last in, first out', (LIFO) method of valuation as a permitted valuation method for stocks and fungible items. These changes will ensure better comparability of financial statements.

Articles 12 to 15 provide for only two profit and loss account layouts – one on a 'by nature' basis, one on a 'by function' basis. Previously four layouts were permitted. The objective here is to bring more comparability whilst retaining a presentation which will be familiar to financial statements' users. The previous distinction between ordinary and extraordinary items within the profit and loss account is removed, thereby countering an inherent bias which favoured the presentation of 'large' or 'unusual' items of expense as extraordinary, so as not to distort the headline profit after tax figure. Conversely there was an inherent bias to present 'large' or 'unusual' items of income as ordinary to bolster the headline profit figure. To ensure a neutral presentation of such items of income and expenditure there is a new requirement to disclose them separately within the profit and loss account, with an explanatory note. Therefore all such items will be recognised in arriving at profit after tax.

The abridged financial statements regime is subject to consequential amendments in Article 16, reflecting the reduced number of layouts.

18.

4.4. Chapter 4 - Notes to the financial statements


Numerous Member State options existed around the note disclosures in the previous Directives. This approach has been replaced by a harmonised approach, which will mean that undertakings of the same size category throughout the EU will have the same or a comparable disclosure regime.

This chapter creates a 'bottom-up' approach to the provision of information by way of notes to the financial statements. Article 17 sets out the note disclosures that all undertakings shall make. Small undertakings will, overall, have a more limited disclosure regime, when compared to the previous Directives, and consistent with the requirements of Article 4 (see 4.2 above), it is proposed that the Member States should not require these categories of undertaking to disclose further information, given that a wide range of consultees agreed that these were the key disclosures for small undertakings.

Medium-sized undertakings shall disclose the information required by Articles 17 and 18, whilst large undertakings and public interest entities shall disclose the information required by Articles 17, 18 and 19.

Article 17 introduces a requirement for all undertakings to disclose post-balance sheet events in the notes to the financial statements. This key information was previously disclosed only in the management report and Member States had the option of exempting its disclosure. To ensure a greater level of transparency, the disclosure of related party transactions also becomes mandatory for all sizes of undertaking, including those between wholly owned subsidiaries in their respective annual financial statements – previously the Member States could exempt their disclosure regardless of an undertakings' size.

4.5. Chapter 5 – Management report

There are no substantive changes to the provisions governing the content of this report compared to those currently provided by the Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EEC and the Seventh Council Directive 83/349/EEC.

19.

4.6. Chapter 6 - Consolidated financial statements


This chapter incorporates the provisions of the Seventh Council Directive 83/349/EEC on consolidated accounts, thereby creating a single Directive on the form and content of annual and consolidated financial statements.

To simplify the text and avoid repetition, large parts of the text of Directive 83/349/EEC have been removed and replaced with a principle that in preparing consolidated financial statements the accounting treatment in annual financial statements should be followed taking account of the essential adjustments resulting from the particular characteristics of consolidated financial statements as compared with annual financial statements.

The changes of substance compared to the current provisions in the Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EEC and the Seventh Council Directive 83/349/EEC are:

To create a set of harmonised consolidation criteria, in Article 23 consolidation will be required in situations where one undertaking exerts dominant influence or control over another undertaking; or where undertakings are managed on a unified basis. Previously the Member States were able to choose whether to consolidate in these circumstances.

In Article 24 small groups are exempted from the requirement to prepare consolidated financial statements, whereas previously the Member States had the option of exempting such undertakings. This harmonises the exemption across the EU and reduces administrative burden in line with the approach taken for the annual financial statements of small company undertakings.

The options for Member States to permit merger accounting and to permit the immediate write-off of goodwill to reserves (respectively Articles 20 and 30 of Directive 83/349/EEC) have been removed as they were little used and their removal creates a more harmonised set of consolidation principles. Article 25 also creates a principles-based treatment for the recognition of negative goodwill in the consolidated profit and loss account.

4.7. Chapter 7 – Publication

There are no substantive changes to the publication provisions compared to those currently provided by the Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EEC and the Seventh Council Directive 83/349/EEC.

4.8. Chapter 8 – Auditing

General requirements laid down in Article 34 have been amended to reflect the 'think small first' approach presiding the proposal. As a result, small companies will be totally exempt from an audit from an EU company law perspective. This Article also specifies that public interest entities shall be subject to a statutory audit, regardless of their size.

An addition in Article 35.3 brings clarification on how the audit requirements apply to groups of undertakings.

4.9. Chapter 9 – Report on payments to governments

New reporting requirements are introduced for large companies and public interest entities active in the extractive industry or in the logging of primary forests. For each country where they operate, they shall, where the amount is material to the recipient government, disclose on an annual basis the payments they make to governments in the financial year, and where payments have been attributed to a project, payments for each such project. Where appropriate, reports shall be prepared at a consolidated level. If a consolidated report is prepared, the subsidiaries and the parent company preparing the report are exempted. The report shall be published in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 2 of Directive 2009/101/EC.

20.

4.10. Chapter 10 - Final Provisions


The Contact Committee created by the Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EEC has become obsolete and in this proposal is no longer provided for.

To take account of economic developments and inflation, Article 42 would empower the Commission to revise periodically the thresholds for determining the undertakings' size contained in Article 3. This is necessary to preserve the thresholds' real value over time.

The Commission should also be empowered to update the types of entity contained in Annexes I and II in order to ensure that they correspond to any changes in the Member States.

It is necessary to specify and develop further the concept of materiality of payments in order to ensure the relevant and appropriate level of disclosure of payments to governments by the extractive industry and loggers of primary forests. It is appropriate to use delegated acts, in order to ensure technically sound and effective rules, allowing the Commission to take into account all the available expertise.

The exact scope and modalities of such delegated powers are carefully circumscribed in Article 42.

Finally, Article 46 has been introduced to specify that as a general rule public interest entities shall, in principle, not be entitled to the exemptions within the Directive.