Loss Contingencies and Gain Contingencies
Explore the fundamentals of accounting for loss and gain contingencies under U.S. GAAP, the thresholds for accrual and disclosure, and the conservative treatment of uncertain gains.
19.1 Loss Contingencies and Gain Contingencies
Loss contingencies and gain contingencies are integral to financial reporting, especially under U.S. GAAP and other standard-setting frameworks. These contingencies capture events or circumstances that create potential future economic losses or gains. Properly identifying, measuring, and disclosing contingencies is critical to providing a faithful representation of an entity’s financial position and performance.
Loss contingencies often arise from lawsuits, warranties, environmental liabilities, unsettled taxes, or other uncertainties that may result in a cost to the company. Gain contingencies might emerge from pending legal settlements in favor of the entity, tax refunds under dispute, or favorable outcomes on uncertain claims. However, the accounting treatment for each differs significantly due to the principle of conservatism in financial reporting.
This section focuses on:
• Defining and differentiating loss and gain contingencies under the FASB ASC 450 (Contingencies) framework.
• Recognizing the categories of probability—“probable,” “reasonably possible,” and “remote”—as defined by U.S. GAAP.
• Applying the criteria for measuring and disclosing a loss contingency.
• Understanding the conservative approach to accounting for gain contingencies.
• Illustrating these concepts through real-world examples, case studies, and decision-making diagrams.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Common Terms and Definitions
Before diving into the specifics, it is useful to clarify some key definitions related to contingencies:
• Contingency: An existing condition or set of circumstances involving uncertainty as to possible gain or loss. Its resolution depends on one or more future events that may or may not occur.
• Loss Contingency: A potential liability that may occur if certain future events transpire. Examples include lawsuits filed against a company, equipment warranties, and environmental remediation liabilities.
• Gain Contingency: A potential gain that may occur if certain future events transpire, such as a successful lawsuit claim by the entity, a tax dispute settled in the entity’s favor, or a favorable resolution of contract disputes.
• Probable: The future event or events are likely to occur. Under U.S. GAAP, “probable” generally indicates a high degree of likelihood (though not quantified precisely in FASB-related literature, it is often interpreted as around 75%–80% or higher likelihood).
• Reasonably Possible: The chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than probable—meaning it could happen but is not deemed likely enough to be considered probable.
• Remote: The chance of the future event or events occurring is slight.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Recognition Criteria for Loss Contingencies
Under U.S. GAAP (ASC 450-20), the accounting for loss contingencies revolves around two basic steps: (1) determining the probability of occurrence and (2) ensuring the ability to estimate the amount of potential loss reasonably.
An entity must accrue (record) a loss and a related liability on the balance sheet if:
• Information available before the financial statements are issued indicates that it is “probable” a liability has been incurred as of the date of the financial statements, and
• The amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated.
If both conditions are met, the company recognizes the loss in its income statement (or statement of activities for not-for-profit organizations) and records a liability in the balance sheet. This accrual ensures the financial statements accurately present the risks at the reporting date.
If only one criterion is met—for instance, the loss is probable but not reasonably estimable—disclosure is typically required, but accrual may be inappropriate until better estimates are available. Similarly, if the probability is assessed as “reasonably possible” (but not probable), no accrual is made; instead, a footnote disclosure is required if the loss contingency could be material. If an event is deemed “remote,” neither accrual nor disclosure is required unless there are unique circumstances (e.g., guarantees or significant commitments) that would cause management to consider some form of disclosure.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Probable, Reasonably Possible, and Remote: Decision Framework
To illustrate the decision process for loss contingencies, consider the flowchart below. This “decision tree” approach helps clarify management’s judgment on whether to accrue, disclose, or omit any reference:
flowchart TB
A((Start)) --> B{Is a loss \n contingency \n identified?}
B -->|No| C[No Accrual \nor Disclosure]
B -->|Yes| D{Probability \nAssessment}
D -->|Probable| E{Reasonably \nEstimable?}
D -->|Reasonably \nPossible| F[Disclose \n(No Accrual)]
D -->|Remote| C
E -->|Yes| G[Accrue \n+ Disclose]
E -->|No| F
• If the event is not identified as a potential loss contingency, there is no accrual or disclosure.
• Once identified, a probability assessment determines the path: probable, reasonably possible, or remote.
• If probable and reasonably estimable, the appropriate accounting treatment is to accrue the loss and disclose it in the notes.
• If probable but not estimable—or if reasonably possible—disclosure without accrual is generally needed.
• If remote, no accrual or disclosure is typically required.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Measurement of Loss Contingencies
When accruing a loss contingency, the recognized amount should be the best estimate of the probable loss. If no single amount within a range of possible outcomes is a more likely estimate than any other amount, U.S. GAAP generally requires accrual at the minimum amount of the range. The entity then discloses the range of possible outcomes to provide the user with additional context.
For example, a company faces litigation in which management and legal counsel believe an unfavorable outcome is probable. The possible outcomes range from $400,000 to $1,000,000, with no single amount more likely than another. In this scenario, the company generally accrues $400,000 (the lower bound) and discloses that an additional loss up to $600,000 (i.e., difference between $1,000,000 and $400,000) is possible.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Disclosure Requirements
Even when a loss is not recorded, certain disclosures might be necessary:
• Nature of the contingency—what the contingency is, how it originated, and the events that must occur for it to materialize into a loss.
• The facts and circumstances that have shaped management’s conclusion, including major assumptions and uncertainties.
• An estimate of the possible loss or range of losses, or a statement that such an estimate cannot be made.
Entities should present these disclosures in a manner that does not compromise legal positions (e.g., revealing privileged information in an active lawsuit). The goal is transparency without prejudicing the outcome.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Gain Contingencies and Conservatism
Under the conservatism principle, accountants (especially under U.S. GAAP) tend to be cautious about recognizing gains that have not yet been realized. Gain contingencies are not recorded in the financial statements until they are realized or are virtually certain (i.e., all contingencies have been resolved, leaving virtually no room for the gain to fail to materialize).
In other words, a company should not recognize a gain (in the income statement) or an asset (on the balance sheet) based on speculation that a lawsuit might be settled in its favor. Instead, companies may disclose (in the notes) the existence of potential gains if the future realization is probable. However, disclosure is often minimized to avoid giving misleading signals or revealing strategic information about legal and business matters.
Example of Gain Contingency
Suppose a company sues a supplier for a breach of contract. The company’s management believes it has a strong case for damages of approximately $200,000. Because the lawsuit is still pending and the final outcome remains uncertain, the company cannot record an asset or gain for this $200,000. However, if the outcome becomes virtually certain (e.g., through a final court ruling that is unlikely to be appealed), the company can then record the gain once the favorable judgment is enforceable or otherwise assured.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Real-World Examples
-
Lawsuit Liability
• A manufacturing firm is sued for product defects alleged to have caused accidents. Management, after consulting with legal counsel, concludes that it is probable the firm will lose the case and, based on settlement negotiations, estimates the loss at $2 million. The journal entry would be:
Dr. Lawsuit Expense $2,000,000
Cr. Lawsuit Liability $2,000,000
• The notes disclose the nature of the lawsuit, the judgment that it is probable an unfavorable outcome will occur, and the range of possible losses if there is uncertainty. -
Warranty Liabilities
• A company sells power tools with a one-year warranty. Based on historical data, the company typically experiences warranty costs of 2% of sales. If the company’s total sales are $5 million during the year, it may recognize a warranty liability of $100,000 (2% of $5 million) in the same period. This represents management’s best estimate of probable future warranty claims. -
Gain Contingency from Tax Refund
• An entity is disputing a tax assessment and believes it is entitled to receive a $300,000 tax refund. The tax authority has not yet concluded its audit, which introduces uncertainty. Because the refund is not yet assured, the entity should not recognize a $300,000 asset. However, if it is probable but not yet resolved, the entity may include a note disclosure indicating the nature of the tax dispute, but no accrual is recorded until resolution or near-certainty is established.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Case Study: Litigation Contingency
XYZ Corporation, a publicly traded entity, faces a series of legal claims related to environmental damage. Various governmental entities and community groups have filed suits alleging contamination of local rivers from XYZ’s manufacturing processes. Here are the salient facts:
• Management has reviewed environmental studies and engaged in negotiations with the plaintiffs.
• Based on the totality of evidence and legal counsel advice, management concludes it is probable XYZ will be found liable.
• The range of damages is difficult to predict, but the most likely figures suggest a range of $3 million to $5 million.
• Legal counsel cannot pinpoint a single best estimate—no point in the range is more likely than another.
Accounting Treatment
• XYZ Corporation should accrue a liability for at least $3 million (the lower bound of the range).
• The entity discloses the nature of the litigation, the estimation challenges, and that additional settlements up to $2 million above the accrued amount may be possible.
• Depending on developments—such as partial settlements, newly discovered evidence, or negotiation progress—XYZ updates its accrual and disclosures each period until the litigation is resolved.
This example highlights the interplay of probability, alignment with best estimates, and the comprehensive disclosure required to inform financial statement users.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
IFRS Differences at a Glance
While U.S. GAAP (ASC 450) and IFRS (IAS 37, Provisions, Contingent Liabilities, and Contingent Assets) share similar principles, some notable differences exist:
• Probability Threshold: IFRS uses “more likely than not” (a threshold of >50%) to define “probable.” In practice, this can be somewhat lower than the typical “probable” threshold under U.S. GAAP, potentially leading to earlier recognition of provisions under IFRS.
• Measurement: IFRS tends to use the “expected value” method when outcomes involve a range of possible values, especially if multiple outcomes are equally likely. U.S. GAAP usually accrues at the lowest point in the range if no single outcome is more likely.
• Gain Contingencies (Contingent Assets): IFRS allows recognition of a contingent asset when the inflow of economic benefits is “virtually certain.” Disclosure becomes appropriate when the inflow is “probable”—a slight variation from U.S. GAAP’s more conservative approach.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Best Practices and Common Pitfalls
• Thorough Assessment: Always perform a detailed review, in consultation with legal and other experts, of the likelihood of occurrence and the range of potential loss.
• Timely Updates: Update estimates each reporting period based on new information. Contingencies are not “set and forget” items—facts change, negotiations progress, and new evidence emerges.
• Consistency in Past Estimates: If prior experience with similar contingencies suggests an upper or lower boundary for losses, use historical data to inform your estimate.
• Avoid Premature Gain Recognition: Resist the temptation to record potential gains early. Overly optimistic gain reporting can mislead financial statement users and may violate the conservatism principle.
• Adequate Disclosure: Even if no accrual is recognized, robust disclosures maintain transparency and uphold the entity’s credibility.
Pitfalls include:
• Overlooking remote contingencies that require some disclosure due to unique contractual or regulatory conditions.
• Underestimating the range of loss or using out-of-date assumptions.
• Accruing a gain before the underlying event is resolved, which may result in restatements or audit issues if the gain does not transpire.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Additional Considerations
Subsequent Events:
If events occur after the balance sheet date but before the financial statements are issued (subsequent events window) that provide additional evidence about conditions existing at the balance sheet date, an entity may need to adjust the accrual or disclosures. If a subsequent event arises from conditions that did not exist at the balance sheet date, the entity typically discloses but does not adjust the basic financial statements.
Materiality:
As with all financial reporting matters, materiality considerations guide the extent and detail of disclosures. A contingency that involves a relatively small dollar amount might not be material to the overall financial statements.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting:
Robust processes are necessary to ensure that contingencies are identified promptly and accounted for correctly. This includes cross-department communication (e.g., legal, operations, and finance teams) and periodic reviews of major business risks.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Conclusion
Loss and gain contingencies illustrate the inherent uncertainty in financial reporting. The framework for evaluating contingencies emphasizes judgment regarding future events, probability assessments, and the ability to estimate potential outcomes. Loss contingencies may impact financial statements through accruals and disclosures, ensuring stakeholders are informed of significant risks. Conversely, the accounting for gain contingencies remains conservative—entities recognize such gains only when realization is virtually certain.
By implementing a disciplined approach to probability assessment, estimation methodologies, and thorough disclosures, organizations can uphold the concepts of faithful representation and reliability. Being mindful of evolving circumstances and legal developments is crucial for ensuring that contingencies reflect the most up-to-date information, thereby safeguarding both compliance and user trust.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Master Your Knowledge: CPA Exam on Loss & Gain Contingencies
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
For Additional Practice and Deeper Preparation
FAR CPA Hardest Mock Exams: In-Depth & Clear Explanations
Financial Accounting and Reporting (FAR) CPA Mocks: 6 Full (1,500 Qs), Harder Than Real! In-Depth & Clear. Crush With Confidence!
- Tackle full-length mock exams designed to mirror real FAR questions.
- Refine your exam-day strategies with detailed, step-by-step solutions for every scenario.
- Explore in-depth rationales that reinforce higher-level concepts, giving you an edge on test day.
- Boost confidence and minimize anxiety by mastering every corner of the FAR blueprint.
- Perfect for those seeking exceptionally hard mocks and real-world readiness.
Disclaimer: This course is not endorsed by or affiliated with the AICPA, NASBA, or any official CPA Examination authority. All content is for educational and preparatory purposes only.
