Substance Over Form and Leases

 
There has long been a principle of financial reporting that, in deciding the appropriate method to record transactions, economic substance should take precedence over legal form. This is the basis of FRS 5 Reporting the Substance of Transactions, issued in 1994, to deal with the many complex transactions that had developed as a consequence of the ingenuity of the financial experts. We discuss FRS 5 in the first part of this chapter. A very important example of the substance over form principle is to be found in the accounting treatment of leases. Indeed, so important is the example that the ASB produced a standard on the subject, SSAP 21 Accounting for Leases and Hire Purchase Contracts in 1984, some ten years before FRS 5 saw the light of day. SSAP 21 distinguishes between two different categories of lease – finance1 and operating leases respectively, and requiresvery different accounting treatments of each. A lessee is required to capitalise a finance lease, that is to recognise both a fixed asset and a liability, charging depreciation of the asset and an interest or finance charge in respect of the liability in its profit and loss account. A lessee must not capitalise an operating lease, rather the rentals payable should be charged to the profit and loss account in accordance with the accruals concept. The accounting treatment of leases by the lessor mirrors the treatment by the lessee. In the second part of this chapter, we explore the issues involved in the treatment of leases and explain the provisions of SSAP 21 in some detail. We illustrate the accounting treatment of finance and operating leases by both lessees and lessors. The provisions of the international standard IAS 17 are similar to those of SSAP 21 although there are differences, especially in the treatment of the income from finance leases by lessors. 


In recent years, the view has emerged, both in the UK and overseas, that it is unrealistic to attempt to make a distinction between the two categories of leases and that in conceptual terms a strong case could be made for requiring the capitalization of all non-cancellable leases. We explain this view, which is promulgated in two Discussion Papers issued by the G4+1 group, a view that now has strong support from both the ASB and the IASB, although it has yet to emerge in the form of an exposure draft.