24.01.2013 Views

preface

preface

preface

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

BDO Israel<br />

DOING BUSINESS IN ISRAEL<br />

♦ Segment reporting - Israeli GAAP focuses primarily on the use of a primary<br />

and secondary format for reporting financial information pertaining to<br />

business and geographical segments. U.S. GAAP, on the other hand, uses a<br />

management approach for segment reporting, such that the enterprise<br />

component frameworks are evaluated by the chief operating decisionmaker.<br />

♦ Marketable securities - In Israel, investments in securities are classified into<br />

two categories (current and permanent investments). In the United States, on<br />

the other hand, investments are classified into three categories (held to<br />

maturity and trading, and available for sale investments). The categories<br />

prescribed in the United States have been adopted by the Israel<br />

Commissioner of Banks for financial statements compiled by banks.<br />

Differences also exist in regard to the application of statements of cash<br />

flows, and balance sheet presentation.<br />

♦ Capitalized financing costs - The accounting treatment is prescribed in<br />

Israeli Accounting Standard No. 3, pursuant to which financial costs - which<br />

might have been avoided had the asset not been built/established - are<br />

capitalized to qualifying assets as defined in this Standard. According to<br />

Accounting Standard No. 3, all other financial costs are charged to the<br />

statement of operations for the appropriate accounting period. The Standard<br />

adopts the principles prescribed by the American Standard (FAS 34),<br />

whereby it is obligatory to capitalize financing costs. Differences exist in<br />

the definition of financing costs and capitalization methods.<br />

♦ Fair value measurement and fair value option - Following the publication<br />

of FAS 157, the definition of 'fair value' under US GAAP has now been<br />

standardized. By contrast, Israeli GAAP does not provide a conceptual<br />

framework for fair value measurement, while IFRS offer more detailed<br />

definitions. Either way, the definition under US GAAP refers to a relative<br />

exit price as fair value, while its common concept under Israeli GAAP and<br />

IFRS is the entrance price-i.e. the price at which the transaction was<br />

concluded.<br />

Another issue is the option to measure financial instruments intended to be held<br />

at amortized cost, at fair value. This choice of accounting policy is<br />

unacceptable under Israeli GAAP.<br />

69

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!