Case 12-05
MEMO:
LabCo must determine if their accounting policy for the revenue treatment of its construction contracts is reasonable, if it is appropriate for LabCo to change its method of accounting for the Halibut contract from the percentage-of-completion method to the completed-contract method and how the change should be treated on the basis of the guidance provided within ASC 250, and how LabCo’s accounting policy and accounting for the Halibut contract may change under IFRS if adopted in the coming year. This memorandum will provide support for how the overall conclusion, based on the issues above, was reached.
Facts
Accounting Policy for Revenue Treatment
LabCo is a large construction contracting firm, and negotiates all of its contracts with its customers on either a fixed-price or cost-plus basis. LabCo has developed an accounting policy for revenue recognition related to its customized construction contracts, as follows:
“The Company performs under a variety of contracts, some of which provide for reimbursement of cost plus fees, and others that are fixed-price-type contracts. Revenues and fees on these contracts are primarily recognized on a contract-by-contract basis using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, which is most often based on contract costs incurred to date compared with total estimated costs at completion (cost-to-cost method).”
“The completed-contract method of accounting is used in instances in which reliably dependable estimates of the total costs to be incurred under a specific contract cannot be made.”
Change in Method of Accounting for Revenue Treatment
LabCo has entered into a contract with Halibut to build a six-axis laser cutting machine. The contract entered into was for a fixed-price and requires detailed and involved performance specifications. Even though this was a unique arrangement that required a great deal of customer specification, LabCo believed that with its extensive experience performing under
LabCo must determine if their accounting policy for the revenue treatment of its construction contracts is reasonable, if it is appropriate for LabCo to change its method of accounting for the Halibut contract from the percentage-of-completion method to the completed-contract method and how the change should be treated on the basis of the guidance provided within ASC 250, and how LabCo’s accounting policy and accounting for the Halibut contract may change under IFRS if adopted in the coming year. This memorandum will provide support for how the overall conclusion, based on the issues above, was reached.
Facts
Accounting Policy for Revenue Treatment
LabCo is a large construction contracting firm, and negotiates all of its contracts with its customers on either a fixed-price or cost-plus basis. LabCo has developed an accounting policy for revenue recognition related to its customized construction contracts, as follows:
“The Company performs under a variety of contracts, some of which provide for reimbursement of cost plus fees, and others that are fixed-price-type contracts. Revenues and fees on these contracts are primarily recognized on a contract-by-contract basis using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, which is most often based on contract costs incurred to date compared with total estimated costs at completion (cost-to-cost method).”
“The completed-contract method of accounting is used in instances in which reliably dependable estimates of the total costs to be incurred under a specific contract cannot be made.”
Change in Method of Accounting for Revenue Treatment
LabCo has entered into a contract with Halibut to build a six-axis laser cutting machine. The contract entered into was for a fixed-price and requires detailed and involved performance specifications. Even though this was a unique arrangement that required a great deal of customer specification, LabCo believed that with its extensive experience performing under