Contract costs FOREIGN EXCHANGE

Chapter 28 – Mineral Resources Page 384 amount of an asset is the amount which can be recovered through continuing use of the asset or by selling it. The standard sets out some “facts and circumstances” which should lead to an impairment, as follows:  the acquired right to explore in a specific area is about to expire and the entity is not able to renew that right;  further expenditure to explore or evaluate a mineral right is not budgeted for;  exploration has ceased due to its unlikely commercial nature; and  where there is an indication that a site is suitable for development but it is unclear whether the cost of the exploration and evaluation will be recovered through its development or sale. Illustration 2 An entity undertakes oil exploration and production activities both on land and at sea. The entity currently has two producing fields, one on land and one at sea. Both fields share a common oil refinery. The onshore and offshore oil producing fields are reported within the same operating segment for the purposes of IFRS 8. The entity is exploring a new offshore oil field. If the exploration is successful, then the new offshore oil field is expected to share the oil refinery facilities with the two existing oil fields. The two offshore fields are expected to be operationally dependent if the new field is successfully developed and commercially viable. However, a recent satellite survey has raised concerns about the reserves and recovery rate of oil from this potential new offshore oil field. In accordance with IFRS 6.18 an impairment review should be undertaken. The exploration and production assets need to be grouped for the purposes of the impairment test. The two offshore fields could be grouped together as a cash generating unit, as they are economically dependent. The impairment test could be performed at this level. Alternatively, management could group all three oil fields together on the basis that they are within the same IFRS 8 operating segment. IFRS 6 has been criticised for the flexibility it allows management in determining the level at which the impairment test is undertaken. However, the policy must be applied consistently from period to period. The existence of circumstances that led to an impairment review being carried out may not lead to an actual impairment of exploration and evaluation assets where for example a number of CGUs have been amalgamated. In such circumstances, assets may be recognised in the statement of financial position at an amount that would otherwise have been impaired had the asset not been grouped with other assets. An entity may therefore consider a policy of writing off exploration and evaluation assets to be more appropriate where a specific area that was being considered for development has been abandoned. The requirements in IAS 36 on the reversal of impairment losses applies to exploration and evaluation assets. In summary, the reversal of an impairment loss should be recognised immediately as part of profit or loss for the period unless the relevant asset was measured at a revalued amount. An impairment loss that has been reversed should not take the asset above its carrying amount had it not be impaired in the first instance i.e. the carrying amount of the asset would be net of depreciation or amortisation of the original carrying amount. [IAS 36.117, 36.119]