UK: Accounting In The Technology Industry - Re-Computing Revenue

Last Updated: 14 October 2010
Article by Deloitte Technology, Media & Telecommunications Industry Group

Most Read Contributor in UK, August 2017

The new Exposure Draft on revenue recognition, released on 24 June 2010, is another significant draft standard developed jointly by the two main standardsetters, the IASB and FASB, as part of their path towards convergence. What makes this standard even more significant is that it is in one of the areas that the two GAAPs differ most in their approach: IFRS as it stands has little guidance on revenue recognition compared to US GAAP which has a series of detailed rules dealing with many situations of application.

CFOs of technology companies are all aware that an accounting conclusion on revenue recognition can have a material impact on the financial results of any particular financial year and hence alter both an investor's valuation of the business and KPIs used for management incentive arrangements. Responses from technology companies to the preceding Discussion Paper issued in 2009 were generally positive and most welcomed the single revenue recognition model and convergence between frameworks, though some responses highlighted areas of complexity for further review by the two accounting boards. Some of these thoughts from leading technology companies have been included within this document to show that the impacts of a new revenue recognition standard could be far-reaching and warrant timely consideration by all companies in the sector. The resulting Exposure Draft develops the key principles proposed by the standardsetters into a comprehensive framework that can be applied to a range of industries.

Exposure Draft overview

The new Exposure Draft proposes to replace both IAS 11 Construction Contracts and IAS 18 Revenue in IFRS, and most of the numerous and extensive US GAAP revenue guidance, including most notably EITF 08-01 (which replaced EITF 00-21), SOP 81-1 and SOP 97-2 under the pre-codification references (currently codified in ASC 605). Certain areas of revenue recognition such as leasing are out of scope of this Exposure Draft.

The Exposure Draft includes specific guidance on a number of key areas. This includes:

  • the combining of two or more contracts into a single contract if the pricing is interdependent;
  • the splitting of a single contract into multiple contracts if elements within the contract are priced independently;
  • accounting for a good or service as a separate performance obligation if it is distinct, meaning that the good or service is either sold separately in the customer's market or could be sold separately because it would be useful in itself or in conjunction with another product that is available separately;
  • determining the transaction price through considering the time value of money, variable consideration and the credit risk of the customer; and
  • allocation of transaction price to the separate performance obligations in proportion to the standalone selling price of each element (including, where this is not available, developing an estimate of the stand-alone selling price based on a reasonable approach).

"We agree that it would be desirable to have a single revenue recognition model that is applied to all revenue generating transactions. However, we believe that a single revenue recognition model should only replace the current mixed model if it is superior to the current mixed model ... [W]e do not believe that the model proposed in the [Discussion Paper] meets this superiority requirement."

Group of major software companies – response to the preceding Discussion Paper

The Exposure Draft proposes a five stage approach to revenue recognition transactions, which can be summarised as follows:

Within step 5 there is a focus on the concept of control that has been further developed for the Exposure Draft. A performance obligation is deemed to be satisfied when control of the good or service is obtained by the customer, which may in some cases be different from the equivalent existing IAS 18 revenue recognition requirement that the significant risks and rewards of ownership have been transferred. Control can pass either at a point in time (akin to goods under IAS 18) or continuously (akin to services under IAS 18). However the new concept will potentially require increased application of judgement to determine when control has been obtained, and some transactions currently accounted for as services may be accounted for differently under the Exposure Draft. The Exposure Draft gives some guidance on indicators that may suggest when control has passed, but there are some possible scenarios that may require further clarification.

"We do not believe that a Standard should be drafted so as to focus directly on the 'transfer of control'. The concept is too ambiguous and too far removed from the practicalities of accounting for revenue recognition, and we believe that it would lead to very significant lack of comparability between entities as a result of different interpretation and application.

Deloitte response to the preceding

Discussion Paper, June 19 2009 The Exposure Draft should be assessed by technology companies now, ahead of the final standard, in order to determine the potential impact of these changes on their own businesses.

Some of the key areas are as follows:

  • Percentage of completion
  • Bundled arrangements
  • Intellectual Property
  • Variable consideration
  • Contract modifications
  • Disclosures

Each of these is discussed below, highlighting some of the more significant changes brought about by the Exposure Draft.

Percentage of completion

The new Exposure Draft focuses on the concept of "control" in determining when revenue should be recognised. For software providers who develop customised software for their customers, the structuring of contracts with customers will make it clear if title passes at any stage of the development. In a significant number of situations, the software developer retains legal title to the IP and instead licences the software to the customer or in a number of other instances, legal title to the product only passes at the end of the development phase. The Exposure Draft gives several other factors for consideration in assessing when control has passed, such as a customer-specific design or function, the ability to specify changes to functionality during the construction process and the customer's requirement to pay for work completed to date, however this is an area where judgement will be required on a case-by-case basis.


Seller X enters into a contract to develop a software module for Customer A. Customer A has determined the functionality that the software needs and retains the right to modify the functionality during the contract but Seller X retains title to the final product. In the event of a contract termination, Customer A would recompense Seller X for the costs incurred todate. Seller X agrees to install the software for Customer A however because it is a module of a standard software system, the installation could be performed by a third party.

In this situation, although legal title remains with Seller X, this right may be judged to be a protective right as outlined under the Exposure Draft. While it is clear that Customer A would gain control at the end of the contract, Seller X needs to consider whether Customer A has control of the development work throughout the development phase.

In this case, the customer has neither possession of nor physical title to the software as it is being developed. However, the customer-specific functionality of the software, the customer's ability to significantly alter the functionality during the development process and the contractual obligation of Customer A to recompense Seller X for work completed to date, appear to be indicators that would support Customer A having control of the software as it is developed. Accordingly, there are mixed indicators and the ED requires judgement over whether the customer has control – i.e. the present right to use the asset for its remaining life and to obtain substantially all the potential cash flows from it.


In a different contract to the above, Seller X has a separate performance obligation, which is the supply and installation of a piece of standard software on existing hardware already owned by Customer A. This arrangement requires Seller X to use its knowledge of the developed software in order to install it successfully and so installation could not be performed by another party. Customer A retains the right to terminate the installation at any point in time and recompense Seller X for the costs incurred to-date.

In this example, Seller X again looks to see when the customer has control. Benefit from the software is clearly with the customer by the time the installation is complete, however it would appear probable that in this example the Seller would find it harder to demonstrate that Customer A has control during the installation process. Instead it could be possible to conclude that that Seller X retains control until the installation process is complete, mainly as a result of the proprietary knowledge relating to the installation process, which effectively prevents another supplier coming in mid-way and completing the installation work where Supplier X left off, should Customer A request it. Therefore the cancellation right may appear to lack substance and appear more to be a protective right granted to Customer A.

It would therefore appear possible that in this situation Seller X would conclude under the new Exposure Draft that no revenue should be recognised until the installation is complete.

"In addition to long-term construction contracts, we have identified the following situations where there is satisfaction of performance obligations without clear transfer of control ... :

a) Right to use or licensing arrangements ... c) Software-as-a-service (SaaS)"

Global hardware manufacturer and systems provider – response to the preceding Discussion Paper

Allocation of transaction pricing

The new Exposure Draft provides significantly more guidance than the current IFRSs as it considers several key areas such as bundled arrangements and related contracts. In assessing the revenue recognition of bundled arrangements, the IASB has proposed a rule that prescribes how companies should allocate the total contract price between the various elements of a bundled arrangement. It appears that this allocation will be required by the Exposure Draft even where it may appear that it does not reflect the economic substance of how the elements within the arrangement have been priced.

Good news for US software companies

For technology companies that report transactions under US GAAP, other than those that fall within the scope of SOP 97-2 (ASC 605-985), EITF 08-01 has eased the requirement to demonstrate fair value for all elements of arrangements that would have previously been accounted for under EITF 00-21. However software companies are currently still required to demonstrate fair value through Vendor Specific Objective Evidence ("VSOE") for transactions that remain under SOP 97-2.

The new Exposure Draft will therefore be a welcome change when implemented by FASB as it is proposed that it will replace all existing revenue recognition guidance, including SOP 97-2.

"[Company name] is concerned that the proposed model could result in an onerous exercise to identify and account for numerous performance obligations. As indicated in the [Discussion Paper], even a simple contract can comprise many performance obligations."

Global software company – response to the preceding

Discussion Paper


Seller Y enters into a contact with Customer B for a software licence and for 12 months of maintenance services. The stand-alone price of the software licence is £100,000, though significant discounts are sometimes granted, and the stand-alone price of the maintenance services is £120,000 per annum. The contractual prices agreed by Seller Y with Customer B are £20,000 for the software licence and £90,000 per annum for the maintenance, giving a total transaction price of £110,000.

Assuming that the Seller can demonstrate the licence and the maintenance services are separate performance obligations as defined under the Exposure Draft, Seller Y must then consider how to allocate the transaction price to the separate obligations.

Under the Exposure Draft, the transaction price for the contract should be allocated to the separate performance obligations in proportion to the stand-alone selling price at contract inception.

Transaction price = £110,000

Total of stand-alone prices = £220,000

Allocation factor = 0.5

Consideration allocated to licence: £100,000*0.5 = £50,000

Consideration allocated to maintenance: £120,000*0.5 = £60,000

The answer that is proposed under the Exposure Draft might be regarded as favourable for Seller Y's revenue recognition profile compared with how many companies would currently account for this transaction, with £30,000 of maintenance consideration being brought forward and recognised as part of the licence fee. But in some cases this allocation may not reflect the substance of the arrangement, which is often that a high-margin licence fee is more heavily discounted than low-margin maintenance services. In some cases, this allocation of revenue to maintenance services may even result in them being provided at a loss, with the result that an onerous contract provision would be required at contract inception.

Intellectual Property

Nearly all technology companies have some Intellectual Property ("IP") and the Application Guidance in Appendix B of the new Exposure Draft goes some way in outlining how revenue should be recognised from the licensing of this IP to third parties.

The Exposure Draft considers the three main types of IP contracts, which are summarised in the table below along with their respective revenue recognition conclusions.

The final scenario could arise when sellers and customers enter into an arrangement for the entire duration of an IP contract but structure the contract so that a portion of the contract life is in the form of a customer renewal option at the end of an initial contract period. While the seller and customer may for all intents and purposes intend to enact the renewal, the form of the contract may lead to the conclusion that revenue is recognised over the duration of the contract, as opposed to recognising revenue up-front.

In a recent webcast held by the IASB and FASB to discuss the impact of the Exposure Draft on technology companies, one of the questions from attendees was how the Boards had arrived at the conclusion to recognise revenue over the duration of the contract for exclusive licence arrangements that are not considered to be out-right sales (the third option in the table above).

The response was that the Boards applied a similar logic to this transaction as had been applied in the Leases Exposure Draft: namely that there was a right to use the asset over time and no outright sale hence revenue should be recognised over the duration of the contract.

Variable consideration

One area the Exposure Draft addresses in a new way compared to the approaches allowed previously under IFRS and US GAAP is that of variable consideration. If sellers cannot yet predict reliably the probabilities associated with different outcomes for variable consideration, the revenue recognised is based only on any fixed element of consideration. However, sellers who are able to predict contract outcomes reliably are required to allocate probabilities to the various outcomes and to determine a weighted average consideration at contract inception. This assessment is then regularly updated, which will lead to adjustments throughout the contract life as the outcomes and associated probabilities are reconsidered at each reporting period.

US GAAP guidance on contingent fees is generally obtained from the SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin Topic 13.A.14."Contingent Rental Income." The staff guidance is that contingent revenue which does not exist at the start of the arrangement becomes "accruable" when the change in factors on which the contingent payments are based actually occur, regardless of historical trends that may support the recognition of additional amounts at the start of the arrangement. The new Exposure Draft would therefore allow companies having transactions with variable consideration and reliable outcomes to recognise a proportion of these amounts up-front, which would represent a marked change from current guidance.

Contract modifications

For technology companies that enter into long-term contracts, contract modifications are a normal part of business activity. The new Exposure Draft outlines a method of accounting for these but the accounting that results can be very significantly different depending on relatively small changes in the revised pricing that is adopted.

As the below example shows, a contract modification can result in a one-off change in revenue recognised at the point of the amendment. Whilst our example considers only the simple case of going from a market value transaction price to a non-market value transaction price, this may get more complex when the arrangement has multiple elements.


The new Exposure Draft proposes a raft of new disclosures to help the users of financial statements. However, some have expressed concern that the additional compliance burden placed upon preparers may be onerous.

The Exposure Draft proposes extensive disclosures in the following key areas:

  • analysis of revenue disaggregated to an appropriate level;
  • reconciliation of opening and closing contract assets and liabilities showing revenue recognised, changes in transaction pricing, consideration received (both cash and non-cash), and contracts acquired as part of a business combination;
  • detail of future performance obligations, including the typical periods and manner of settlement;
  • aggregated analysis of amounts receivable in future years from long-term contracts; and
  • analysis of onerous performance obligations along with supporting explanations.

Final thoughts

The Exposure Draft proposed by the IASB will greatly increase the amount of detailed revenue guidance included within IFRS as it addresses a number of areas where previously there was little guidance. Whether US regulators and US listed companies will welcome the extent to which companies will be required to exercise judgement remains to be seen.

What is certain is that this Exposure Draft helps with convergence of US GAAP and IFRS in one of the most diverse, and sometimes most complex, areas of accounting.

As highlighted above there are certain aspects of the Exposure Draft that could have serious implications for technology companies. We hope that the IASB refines and improves the final standard in these areas but recommend that technology companies act now in considering the implications of accounting for revenue under the new regime.

Those who wish to communicate their thoughts directly to the IASB should visit their website at – the closing date for comments is 22 October 2010.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.