The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) is on track to release a feedback statement on the outcome of the public consultation on its workplan, the board’s vice chair Sue Lloyd confirmed.
Lloyd said: “We’re now in the process of pulling together the feedback statement, which is going to summarise these discussions that we’ve had.”
She added that the statement will address the comments the board received from constituents and how those views were taken into account.
Staff told the 16 May meeting they expect to publish the feedback statement “by the end of June 2024”. The staff also noted in their meeting paper that the ISSB “will begin work on the next consultation on its work plan before this work plan ends”.
Two-year priorities
Additionally, the paper sets out a summary of the board’s decisions to date and details the board’s work priorities for the two years from 2204 to 2026.
The ISSB conducts a public consultation every five years to gather feedback on its work plan, including its strategic direction and project assessment criteria. It launched this latest consultation last May.
According to a plan hammered out by the board in recent months, the ISSB will prioritise support for jurisdictions applying International Financial Reporting Standard S1 and IFRS S2, the ISSB’s new requirements for general sustainability reporting and climate-related disclosures.
The board’s commitment to support implementation of IFRS S-1 and S-2 will not, however, feature as a separate workstream on the board’s workplan. Instead, it will run through the board’s outreach work as a general theme.
Human rights considerations
Meanwhile, observers also glimpsed some of the delicate balancing act that the board has had to perform in finalising its work priorities.
Alongside the planned research project on human capital, the board also sought views on whether it should pursue a separate project on human rights.
ISSB board joint vice chair Jingdong Hua said: “Very briefly, on human capital […] I would also say that because the term human right[s] has been politicised, so the connotation probably can be understood differently by different jurisdictions.”
Hua added that referring to human rights to the title of the human capital workstream “might bring more confusion”.
No comments yet