Aktuariella vinster och förluster
Valet av redovisningsmetod enligt IAS 19 samt borttagandet av korridormetoden
Pension liabilitiesDefined benefit plansActuarial gains and lossesCorridor methodIAS 19PensionsskuldFörmånsbestämda pensionsplanerAktuariella vinster och förlusterKorridormetodenIAS 19
Background to problem: Pensions play a big role in people's lives when life expectancy continues to increase. Companies can choose different ways of reporting their pension plans, and within the defined benefit pension plan poses the actuarial gains and losses that can be reported based on three different methods. Only one method will exist from 2013, how will the companies that use the other two handle the new situation?Purpose: Investigate why different companies have chosen to report its actuarial gains and losses along the corridor approach, directly against income or directly in equity. How will the companies that use the corridor method manage the situation when it will only be allowed to report in other comprehensive income as of 2013 and how will this affect them.Methodology: Data was collected through qualitative questionnaires sent to companies listed on Nasdaq OMX Nordic Stockholm, Large Cap and Mid Cap, and a qualitative interview. We felt that the best way to getting the desired information was to use qualitative questionnaires and an interview.Conclusions: The corridor method is chosen mainly because the actuarial gains and losses do not affect the company as much as when using the other two methods. To report directly to equity is preferred as the result of the company is not affected. The change from the corridor method to recognize in other comprehensive income as of 2013 will mean that the pension liability and equity is adversely affected.Suggestions for further research: Study how companies were affected by the implementation of the revised IAS 19. What was the impact on businesses in the method transition?