Understand the pivotal difference between recognized (adjusting) and nonrecognized (disclosure-only) subsequent events. Learn how each type impacts financial statements, discover best practices, and avoid common pitfalls.
Subsequent events can significantly affect the way financial statements are prepared and presented. In practice, an event that occurs between the balance sheet date and the date the financial statements are available to be issued (or “issued” in the case of public companies) can either require a direct adjustment to the financial statements or a disclosure in the notes. This distinction is crucial because it ensures that users of financial statements have accurate and relevant information about conditions existing at period-end and events arising after that date. In this section, we will explore the types of subsequent events, how they affect the financials, and the principles that guide whether such events are recognized through adjusting entries or disclosed in the notes.
When we talk about subsequent events in the context of U.S. GAAP, we generally rely on Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 855, “Subsequent Events.” IFRS has a parallel concept under IAS 10, “Events After the Reporting Period,” commonly referred to as “adjusting” versus “non-adjusting” events. Regardless of the framework, the core idea is the same: to determine which events should shape the reported financial results and which should only be disclosed in the notes.
Recognized subsequent events (sometimes called “Type 1 events”) reflect information about conditions that existed on or before the balance sheet date. Because they provide evidence regarding the estimate of an asset’s or liability’s value as of period-end, they must be incorporated into the financial statements through adjusting entries.
• They concern conditions that were present at the balance sheet date.
• They often involve refinements or clarifications of estimates made prior to period-end—for example, the final determination of litigation, the receipt of new information on uncertain accounts receivable, or updated inventory data.
• They change the estimates on which the financial statements are based.
Imagine a company had a receivable of $100,000 from a client at year-end. Subsequent to the balance sheet date (but before issuance of the statements), the client files for bankruptcy. Evidence shows the financial difficulties existed prior to year-end, although the bankruptcy filing occurred shortly thereafter. The adjusting journal entry might look like this:
Dr. Bad Debt Expense ………. $100,000
Cr. Allowance for Doubtful Accounts … $100,000
This entry ensures the updated financial statements accurately reflect the collectibility risk at the balance sheet date.
Nonrecognized subsequent events (often called “Type 2 events”) arise from conditions that did not exist at the balance sheet date; rather, they arose after that date. In these instances, the financial statements are not adjusted, but disclosure is typically required if failure to do so would mislead financial statement users.
• They typically reveal new conditions (e.g., a terrorist attack damaging company assets after period-end, or a major acquisition contract entered into after year-end).
• Financial statement amounts remain unchanged.
• Adequate disclosure in the footnotes is necessary if the impact on the company is material and knowledge of the event is essential for users.
If a company invests heavily in specialized equipment after year-end and the transaction is large enough to influence a user’s understanding of the business, it should disclose, for example:
“On February 10, 20XX, the Company acquired advanced manufacturing equipment for total consideration of $2.5 million. Management expects the new equipment to significantly improve production efficiency and expand manufacturing capacity. No adjustments to the December 31, 20XX, financial statements have been made since the purchase was completed after that date.”
Determining whether an event is recognized or nonrecognized often requires significant professional judgment. Management must assess:
Nature and Timing of the Event
– Did the event indicate a preexisting condition as of the balance sheet date?
– Or was it triggered by circumstances arising fully after that date?
Materiality
– Would omitting or misstating either the adjustment or the disclosure be likely to influence users’ decisions?
Legal Considerations
– Potential confidentiality agreements or ongoing negotiations might affect the wording of disclosures, but do not remove the need to disclose.
Communication with Auditors
– Subsequent events are frequently a key audit point. Auditors request legal letters and internal confirmations to verify major post-balance sheet events.
Below is a Mermaid.js diagram that summarizes the decision flow for determining whether to adjust or disclose:
flowchart TB A([End of Reporting Period]) --> B{Event Occurs\\After Reporting Date?} B -- Yes --> C(Is the condition\\related to prior year end?) B -- No --> D[No subsequent event\\treatment required] C -- Yes --> E[Recognized Event\\\(Adjust FS)] C -- No --> F[Nonrecognized Event\\\(Disclosure Only)] E --> G([Issue Financial\\Statements]) F --> G
Explanation of Diagram:
• If the condition existed at the reporting date, record an adjusting entry and revise the financial statements.
• If the condition arose after the reporting date and did not exist before, disclosure is typically required if the event is significant. Otherwise, no subsequent event treatment is needed.
• Establish a Formal Review Process
– Create a clear “cutoff” after the balance sheet date and regularly check for significant events that could affect financial statements.
• Collaborate with Legal Advisors
– Subsequent events often involve legal cases or contingencies. Involving legal counsel helps ensure that potential amounts or liabilities are spotted in time.
• Transparent Disclosure
– Even if an event is nonrecognized, clarity in written footnotes about timing, nature, and potential financial effect is critical.
• Use of an Event Log
– Document every major event happening after year-end (mergers, capital raises, large capital expenditures), then evaluate them systematically.
• Failing to Identify an Ongoing Risk at Year-end
– Companies may not realize a recognized subsequent event if they only consider documents signed after year-end. The underlying condition could have existed earlier.
• Inadequate Disclosures
– Understating the significance of a major acquisition or ignoring it altogether can mislead readers.
• Overlooking Nonrecognized Events
– Dismissing a post-reporting event without considering its future implications can leave financial statement users uninformed.
• Cutoff Confusion
– Some events may straddle the barrier between recognized and nonrecognized. Clear articulation and documentation are essential for making the right call.
Bankruptcy Filing Reveals Preexisting Conditions
A small manufacturing company had been receiving late payments from a major customer. The audit team requested updates regarding this customer’s solvency. One week after the balance sheet date, the customer declared bankruptcy. Evidence indicated the customer had been insolvent for months, so the event was recognized, and the manufacturing company recorded an allowance for uncollectible receivables.
Scroll-Tech Acquisition
Scroll-Tech, a tech startup, was acquired by a large conglomerate 10 days after year-end. Negotiations began well after the balance sheet date, with no prior indications. Because the condition (the merger offering) did not exist at year-end, it was deemed a nonrecognized event. Management included a note to highlight the acquisition in the financial statements, especially as it would significantly alter the company’s financial outlook.
Fire at a Warehouse Days After Year-End
A distribution company stored most of its inventory in a single warehouse. On December 31, the inventory was intact and in good condition. However, on January 3, a fire devastated the warehouse. The inventory was uninsured. Because the fire happened after the balance sheet date and was unrelated to conditions existing at year-end, the financial statements were not adjusted. However, a detailed secondary note was included to inform investors of the potential impact on future operations and the financial position.
Under IFRS (IAS 10), subsequent events are split into “adjusting events” and “non-adjusting events,” which closely align with the recognized and nonrecognized events in U.S. GAAP. Adjusting events under IFRS provide evidence of conditions that existed at the end of the reporting period, leading to an adjustment in the financial statements. Non-adjusting events are those indicative of conditions that arose after the reporting period, thus disclosed but not recognized.
Key differences typically include the precise terminology and certain definitions regarding what might constitute a “condition” at the reporting date. However, the overall concept is consistent across IFRS and U.S. GAAP.
Below is a summary table contrasting recognized (adjusting) and nonrecognized (disclosure-only) subsequent events:
Recognized (Adjusting) Event | Nonrecognized (Disclosure-Only) Event | |
---|---|---|
Definition | Occurs after year-end but provides additional evidence about conditions that existed at the balance sheet date. | Occurs after year-end and relates to new conditions that did not exist at the balance sheet date. |
Accounting Treatment | Record adjusting entry in the financial statements. | Add footnote disclosure if the event is significant and material. |
Examples | Bankruptcy of a major customer that was insolvent at year-end; settlement of pre-existing litigation. | Stock issuance after year-end for expansion; major disaster destroying inventory after year-end. |
Impact on Financials | Changes reported amounts or classifications. | No direct changes in recognized amounts, but ensures transparency for users. |
Reference | U.S. GAAP: ASC 855; IFRS: IAS 10 (Adjusting events). | U.S. GAAP: ASC 855; IFRS: IAS 10 (Non-adjusting events). |
Stay Alert During the Subsequent Events Period
Conduct regular meetings with department heads and legal counsel in the weeks following year-end to keep a pulse on any developments.
Maintain Consistency with Prior Periods
If a certain category of transaction was previously deemed recognized, a shift to disclosure-only (or vice versa) warrants a coherent explanation.
Consultation with External Experts
Complex situations, such as catastrophic environmental damage or massive litigation, may require outside expertise to gauge timing and potential financial impact accurately.
Create a Timeline
Mark the date the financial statements are expected to be issued or available to be issued. Map all major events and their relevant facts along this timeline, noting especially which conditions existed at year-end versus which arose later.
Cross-Reference with Other Parts of the Financial Statements
For significant subsequent events, ensure the disclosures match with or reference any relevant management discussion and analysis (MD&A) for public companies, or additional required supplementary information (RSI) in governmental reporting, as discussed in Chapter 5 of this guide.
• FASB ASC 855 – “Subsequent Events”
• IFRS IAS 10 – “Events After the Reporting Period”
• AICPA Audit Guide – Guidance on the role of auditors in identifying and evaluating subsequent events
• COSO’s Enterprise Risk Management Framework – Helpful for designing robust internal controls that spot subsequent event triggers proactively
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!
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.