How Digital Business Is Changing State Tax Exposure
Digital sales, software, inventory, and multistate operations can expand a company’s state tax footprint. Understanding where obligations arise can help businesses manage exposure and plan...
On June 21, 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued a final Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2018-08, Not-For-Profit Entities (Topic 958): Clarifying the Scope and the Accounting Guidance for Contributions Received and Contributions Made. This ASU clarifies and reduces...
On June 21, 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued a final Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2018-08, Not-For-Profit Entities (Topic 958): Clarifying the Scope and the Accounting Guidance for Contributions Received and Contributions Made. This ASU clarifies and reduces the current diversity in practice in accounting for grants and contributions, particularly for grants and contracts from governmental entities. We outlined the main provisions of ASU 2018-08 in a blog published last year.>>
The primary determinant of whether a grant or contract is a contribution (nonreciprocal) or an exchange (reciprocal) is if the two parties receive and sacrifice commensurate value. If the resource provider (e.g. a government agency) receives commensurate value in return for the cash or other resources transferred, the transaction will be accounted for as an exchange transaction and both parties will follow guidance in ASC Topic 606 or other applicable guidance. If commensurate value is not received, the transaction will be accounted for as a contribution and the guidance in ASC Subtopic 958-605 will be applied.
The key for the evaluation is to focus on the terms of an agreement or contract, not type of resource provider. In addition, the term used in the presentation of financial statements to label revenue (i.e. contracts, grants, contribution, or donations) is not a factor for determining whether an agreement is within the scope of ASC Topic 606 or ASC Subtopic 958-605. Under the new guidance in ASU 2018-08, a resource provider is not synonymous with the general public, even a governmental entity. When a value received by the resource provider is incidental to the potential public benefit, the transaction is not considered commensurate value received in return. The resource provider must receive direct and primary benefit for the resources transferred to be considered a reciprocal transaction. The new guidance further clarifies that execution of the resource provider’s mission or the positive sentiment from acting as a donor shall not constitute commensurate value received by the resource provider. As a result, we expect most government contracts and grants will be accounted for as contributions—unless the governmental entity receives the direct commensurate value in return for the cash or other resources transferred.
Transactions involving a specified third party may present a challenge for nonprofits in determining if the transaction is reciprocal or nonreciprocal. Nonprofits must use judgment to make the determination based on review of the substance of the contract or grant agreements. In general, if a contract or grant is made by a donor on behalf of an identified customer for an existing exchange transaction, the contract or grant is simply a third-party payment to the exchange transaction. If a contract or grant is made by a donor for a group of beneficiaries with eligibility criteria, the grant is a contribution since there are no identified customer(s) at the time the grant is awarded. AAFCPAs has provided examples below to assist clients in evaluating transactions where there are specified third parties involved.
Understanding and implementing accounting standards can be complex, time-consuming, and often require requisite skills and expertise not found on your internal finance team. AAFCPAs provides financial management assistance on these complex technical accounting issues, allowing clients to confidently apply the standard with greater efficiency and ease.
If you have any questions please contact: Hui-Ting Grady, CPA at 774.512.4106, hgrady@aafcpa.com; Matt Hutt, CPA, CGMA at 774.512.4043, mhutt@aafcpa.com; or your AAFCPAs Partner.
Digital sales, software, inventory, and multistate operations can expand a company’s state tax footprint. Understanding where obligations arise can help businesses manage exposure and plan...
In cannabis transactions, key details may carry over after the deal closes. Understand how prior tax filings, Section 280E, and deal structure can shape a...
From the monthly close to internal controls and board reporting, strong financial management depends on a series of interconnected practices. AAFCPAs’ David Kelleher and Lauren...