New Companies Ordinance
Questions and Answers on financial reporting issues relating to the new Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) ("new CO")
(other than those relating to transition from the predecessor Ordinance (Cap. 32))
These Questions and Answers ("Q&As") have been developed by the Institute's Companies Ordinance Application Issues (Financial Reporting) Working Group (Working Group) and are endorsed by the Institute's Financial Reporting Standards Committee (FRSC). These Q&As will be updated from time to time to provide guidance on emerging financial reporting related application issues on the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622).
These Q&As have been developed by the Working Group to cover other financial reporting related application issues relating to requirements of the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622) which are expected to have continuing relevance beyond the end of the first financial reporting year beginning on or after 3 March 2014. A separate series of Q&As has been developed by the Working Group to cover financial reporting related application issues specific to the transition from the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32) to the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622).
These Q&As are non-mandatory in nature and intended for general guidance only. Users of these Q&As should consider taking their own legal advice if in doubt as to their obligations under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance.
The Institute, the FRSC and the Working Group do not accept responsibility or liability, and disclaim all responsibility and liability, in respect of the Q&As and any consequences that may arise from any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any materials in the Q&As.
All references to Parts, Divisions, Sub-divisions, Schedules and sections in the questions and answers are to the new CO, unless otherwise indicated.
Last revision date: 19 June 2015
| Q1. | Question A1 - Claiming exemption from preparation of a business review Question A1a: How can a company claim exemption from preparing a business review for the directors' report? [UPDATED] |
Answer
Section 388(3) sets out 3 situations under which a company is exempt from including a business review in the directors' report in compliance with Schedule 5. These are:
(a) the company falls within the reporting exemption;
(b) the company is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the end of the financial year; or
(c) the company is a private company that does not fall within the reporting exemption for the financial year, and a special resolution is passed by members to the effect that the company is not to prepare a business review required by that Schedule for the financial year.
For the purposes of claiming exemption from preparing a business review, a company need only satisfy any one of the three exemption criteria set out in section 388(3). Therefore if a company satisfies either criterion (b) (i.e. it is a wholly owned subsidiary) or criterion (c) (it is a private company and its members have passed a special resolution), it is not necessary to consider whether the company would also have been able to claim exemption under criterion (a) (i.e. to consider whether it would also have fallen within the "reporting exemption").
NB: If the purpose is only to claim exemption from preparing a business review, in practice, given the complexity of the size tests and shareholder approval requirements for the reporting exemption, it will generally be more straightforward for a private company to ask its members to pass a special resolution in accordance with section 388(3)(c). There is no need to seek to test whether the company is eligible for the reporting exemption in accordance with sections 359 to 366A of, and Schedule 3 to, the new CO. However, if the purpose is also to claim the reporting exemption from the requirement for the financial statements to give a true and fair view then it will be necessary to comply with the requirements of sections 359 to 366A and Schedule 3.
Unlike criteria (c) of section 388(3), criterion (b) is not limited to just private companies. Accordingly, a public company (as defined in section 12) that is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate can obtain the exemption from preparing a business review.
For the meaning of "wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate" see Question E1 below.
| Q2. | Question A1 - Claiming exemption from preparation of a business review Question A1b - For the purposes of gaining an exemption from including a business review in the directors' report under section 388(3), are all private companies eligible? [UPDATED] |
Answer
A private company is defined in section 11 as a company which is not limited by guarantee and whose articles (i) restrict a member's right to transfer shares, (ii) limit the number of its members to 50 and (iii) prohibit any invitation to the public to subscribe for any shares or debentures of the company.
All private companies (including those in financial services lines of business listed in section 359(4)) are eligible to gain exemption from preparing a business review provided they satisfy either section 388(3)(b) (i.e. the company is a wholly owned subsidiary) or section 388(3)(c) (it is a private company and its members have passed a special resolution).
However, this entitlement may be lost if at any time during a financial year the company acts in a way contrary to the three key elements characterizing a private company listed above, for example, if the membership of the company in practice exceeds 50 members during the year. In such a case, the directors' report relating to that financial year is required to contain a business review, unless the company is also a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the end of the financial year. This provision is set out in section 389, which also includes further provisions relating to applications that may be made to the Court in this regard.
Private companies that do not satisfy either sub-sections (b) or (c) of section 388(3) may still be able to gain exemption under sub-section (a) (i.e. if the company satisfies the size criteria for small private companies or groups under the reporting exemption). However, in this regard, it should be noted that private companies in the financial services lines of business listed in section 359(4) are not eligible for the reporting exemption, even if they satisfy those small size criteria. These types of companies include, for example, corporations licensed under Part V of the Securities and Futures Ordinance to carry on a business in any regulated activity within the meaning of that Ordinance.
| Q3. | Question A1c: For the purposes of gaining an exemption from including a business review in the directors' report under section 388(3)(c), what is a "special resolution"? |
Section 564 sets out the meaning of a "special resolution" and contains details of the procedures to be followed in order to pass a special resolution. This section applies in the case of passing the special resolution to be obtained under section 388(3)(c), in addition to the specific requirements on this matter set out in section 388(4).
| Q4. | Question A1d: If the company is eligible for the reporting exemption under sections 359 to 366A of, and Schedule 3 to, the new CO but voluntarily chooses to prepare its financial statements using HKFRS Accounting Standards or HKFRS for Private Entities Accounting Standard instead of the SME-FRF & SME-FRS, can it still claim exemption from preparing a business review under section 388(3)(a)? [UPDATED] |
Answer
Yes it can still claim exemption from preparing a business review under section 388(3)(a). This exemption does not depend on whether the financial statements are prepared in accordance with the SME-FRF & SME-FRS. The important factor for the purposes of section 388(3)(a) is whether the company (or group) is eligible for the reporting exemption i.e. whether it is not in a financial services line of business listed in section 359(4), whether the company (or group) falls within the size tests and, in some cases, whether the necessary shareholder approvals have been obtained.
| Q5. | Question A1e: Can a company limited by guarantee with revenue of more than HK$25 million exempted from preparing a business review? [UPDATED] |
Answer
Section 388(3) sets out 3 situations under which a company is exempt from including a business review in the directors' report in compliance with Schedule 5. These are:
(a) the company falls within the reporting exemption;
(b) the company is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the end of the financial year; or
(c) the company is a private company that does not fall within the reporting exemption for the financial year, and a special resolution is passed by members to the effect that the company is not to prepare a business review required by that Schedule for the financial year.
A company limited by guarantee with revenue of more than HK$25 million is not eligible to fall within the reporting exemption under section 359(1) as it exceeds the threshold of HK$25 million as specified in section 1(5) of Schedule 3. Such a company is therefore not exempt from preparing a business review under section 388(3)(a). Please see section 363 for the meaning of “small guarantee company” referred to in section 359(1).
Section 11 specifically excludes a company limited by guarantee from the definition of a private company. A company limited by guarantee therefore cannot be exempted from preparing a business review by way of passing a special resolution under section 388(3)(c).
It follows that a company limited by guarantee with annual revenue of more than HK$25 million can only be exempted from preparing a business review by being a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate and therefore being eligible to rely on section 388(3)(b). Under section 357(3) a company (including a company limited by guarantee) is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate if it has only the following as members:
(a) that other body corporate;
(b) a wholly owned subsidiary of that other body corporate;
(c) a nominee of that other body corporate or such a wholly owned subsidiary.
Please refer to Question E1 and E2 for the meaning of "wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate" and "body corporate".
| Q6. | Question A1f: Can a company claim exemption from preparing a business review for the directors' report by written resolution? |
Under section 388(3)(c) a private company that does not fall within the reporting exemption can claim exemption from preparing a business review for the directors' report for the financial year by special resolution.
Under section 548(3) a resolution may be passed as a written resolution, if a resolution is required to be passed as an ordinary resolution or a special resolution. Accordingly a company can claim the exemption from preparing a business review by written resolution, instead of special resolution. A written resolution can be passed without a meeting and without any previous notice being required.
However, a written resolution that is passed for the purposes of section 388(3)(c) must comply with section 388(4) which requires the resolution to be passed at least six months before the end of the financial year to which the directors' report relates.
Having said that, passing a written resolution requires all eligible members signify their agreement to it. This is a higher threshold than the special resolution, which needs to be passed by majority of at least 75%. Moreover, for passing a written resolution pursuant to the provisions in subdivision 2 of division 1 in Part 12 of the new CO the company needs to follow other procedures in the subdivision , which include notifying its auditor of the proposed resolution under section 555.
Same as for the special resolution (please refer to Question A5), the company under section 622(1)(b) and section 622(2) must deliver a copy of the written resolution to the Companies Registrar for registration within 15 days after it is made or passed.
Please refer to subdivision 2 of division 1 in Part 12 of the new CO for reference.
| Q7. | Question A1g: How should a company which is exempted from preparing consolidated financial statements under the new Companies Ordinance be assessed for the reporting exemption and hence is exempted from including a business review in the directors' report? |
Answer
Under section 388(3)(a) a company that falls within the reporting exemption is exempted from including a business review in the directors' report in compliance with Schedule 5 to the new CO.
Section 379(3) contains requirements on when companies are exempted by the new CO from preparing consolidated financial statements.
As highlighted in the response to Question D6, it would seem reasonable to assume that a correlation is intended between the requirements in section 379(3) and section 359 (on the eligibility to claim the reporting exemption).
Based on such assumption, for the purpose of section 388(3)(a), if the holding company is exempted from preparing consolidated financial statements under section 379(3), then it should be assessed for the reporting exemption as a stand-alone company under section 359(1) and if it qualifies it will be exempted from including a business review in the directors’ report.
Whereas, if the holding company is not exempted by the new CO from preparing consolidated financial statements, then the group needs to qualify for the reporting exemption under section 359(2) before it is exempted from including a business review in the directors' report.
| Q8. | Question A1h - Consequences of missing the “six months before the year-end” deadline for the business review For a private company falling within section 388(3)(c) of the CO, section 388(4) requires the members to pass a special resolution at least 6 months before the end of the financial year in order to exempt the directors from preparing a business review. What should the directors and members do if the directors miss this deadline but the members still wish to support the directors’ intentions not to prepare the business review? |
If the directors miss the “six months before the year-end” deadline, then they must comply with the full requirements for that financial year (i.e. they must prepare a business review) or seek legal advice on the consequences of failing to comply with the relevant statutory requirements, unless they are able to claim exemption under either section 388(3)(a) or 388(3)(b). Failure to meet the six months deadline cannot be excused by the members as this is a statutory requirement.
Note: As per section 388(3)(a) and (b), private companies can also be exempt from preparing a business review if they meet the size and approval tests for the reporting exemption set out in section 359 or they are a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate as defined in section 357(3). These alternative routes should be checked if the directors have failed to take steps to pass the special resolution in time and still wish to be exempt from preparing a business review. Also, it should be noted that failing to meet this deadline in one financial year does not preclude the directors from taking steps to meet them in good time for the next financial year. Also it should be noted that the special resolution that may be passed by private companies in accordance with section 388(3)(c) and (4) in order to claim exemption from preparation of a business review can be worded such that it grants exemption for more than one financial year or until revoked. See also Question A5 “Delivery of special resolution to the Companies Registrar”.
| Q9. | Question A2 – Disclosure of directors' names What are the requirements for disclosure of directors' names under the new CO? [UPDATED] |
Section 390(1)(a) states that the directors' report must contain the name of every person who was a director of the company either during the financial year or during the period beginning with the end of the financial year and ending on the date of the directors' report.
However, if the company is required to prepare a consolidated directors' report (as per section 388(2)), then section 390(3) states that, subject to section 390(4), section 390 has effect as if a reference to "the company" in section 390(1) or (2) were a reference to "the company and the subsidiary undertakings" included in the annual consolidated financial statements for the financial year. This means that the names of any persons who were or are directors of any company in the group included in the consolidated financial statements need to be disclosed in the holding company's consolidated directors' report in such cases.
Effective from 1 February 2019, section 390(4) to (7) provides an alternative way for a holding company to disclose such information either by listing the names of the directors of all subsidiary undertakings on its website, or by keeping such a list at its registered office and making it available for inspection. This amendment to the CO is consistent with guidance on practical measures contained in an earlier FAQ issued by the Companies Registry.
Holding companies will still need to collect and collate the information for all subsidiary undertakings included in the consolidated financial statements to compile the list of directors' names and to ensure that they have appropriate mechanisms in place to update the list for appointments, resignations and removals of directors.
| Q10. | Question A3 – Disclosure of principal activities What information has to be disclosed about principal activities under the new CO? How does this link to the business review? |
Section 390(1)(b) states that the directors' report must contain the principal activities of the company in the course of the financial year.
Section 390 is applicable to all companies required to prepare a directors' report i.e. there is no exemption from its requirements. Therefore, a statement of principal activities is required to be made by all companies as a minimum. Those companies that are also required to prepare a business review under section 388, will then provide further discussion and analysis in their directors' reports relating to those principal activities in accordance with Schedule 5.
For groups, the statement of principal activities will be prepared on a consolidated basis and any required business review will provide further discussion and analysis in the consolidated directors' report relating to the consolidated principal activities in accordance with Schedule 5. This is because section 390(3) states that section 390 has effect as if a reference to "the company" in subsection (1) or (2) were a reference to "the company and the subsidiary undertakings" included in the annual consolidated financial statements for the financial year.
| Q11. | Question A4 – Contents of the directors' report Section 129D(3) of the predecessor CO (Cap. 32) contained the disclosure requirements for the directors' report |
Answer
The disclosure requirements for the directors' report under the new CO are contained in the following locations:
- Sections 388, 390 and 543(2)
- Schedule 5 "Contents of Directors' Report: Business Review" (unless exempt under section 388(3)); and
- Companies (Directors' Report) Regulation (Cap. 622D)
In addition, section 391 sets out the requirements relating to the approval and signature of the directors' report.
| Q12. | Question A5 – Delivery of special resolution to the Companies Registrar If a company opts not to prepare a business review by way of passing a special resolution, is the company required to deliver the special resolution to the Companies Registrar for registration? |
Answer
Section 622 on registration of and requirements relating to certain resolutions applies to a special resolution, other than a special resolution to change the name of a company passed under section 107 or 770.
Section 622(2) requires the company to deliver a copy of the resolution to the Companies Registrar for registration within 15 days after it is made or passed. If the resolution is not in writing, a reference to a copy of the resolution is to be construed as a written memorandum setting out the terms of the resolution. A company is required to keep records comprising copies of resolutions and minutes of general meetings in the manner prescribed in section 618.
In case a company contravenes Section 622(2), the company and every responsible person of the company commit an offence, and each is liable to a fine at level 3 and, in the case of a continuing offence, to a further fine of HK$300 for each day during which the offence continues.
| Q13. | Question A6 – Reference to Regulation Both section 388(1) and section 388(2) state that the directors must prepare a directors' report which contains the information prescribed by the Regulation and complies with other requirements prescribed by the Regulation. In relation to the above which Regulation does section 388 refer to? |
Answer
The Regulation that section 388(1) and (2) refers to is the Companies (Directors' Report) Regulation (Cap.622D). Such Regulation provides for the information that is required to be contained in a director's report under section 388(1) and (2) of the Ordinance and other requirements prescribed for the report.
| Q14. | Question A7 – Disclosure of items under Companies (Directors' Report) Regulation Under section 388(2) if the company is a holding company in a financial year and the directors prepare annual consolidated financial statements for the financial year, the directors must instead prepare a consolidated directors' report for the financial year. Would the abovementioned reference to consolidated directors' report in section 388(2) have any impact on the disclosure requirements of the Companies (Directors' Report) Regulation (Cap.622D) (C(DR)R) such that the disclosure items in that Regulation need to be reported on a consolidated basis? |
Answer
No. The reference to consolidated directors' report in section 388(2) does not automatically cause the reporting items in the C(DR)R to be reported on a consolidated basis. For example, the requirement in section 8 of the Regulation which requires the reasons for a director’s resignation to be disclosed only applies if a director of the company has resigned. Even if the directors’ report is a consolidated report being prepared under section 388(2), there is no need to disclose information in relation to the resignation of a director of any of the company’s subsidiary undertakings in that report. Instead, that information will be disclosed in the directors’ report of the relevant subsidiary undertaking, if it is incorporated in Hong Kong.
| Q15. | Question A8 – Location of the business review Schedule 5 states that a directors’ report for the year must “contain” a business review. Can this requirement be met by including a cross reference in the directors’ report to where this review is located if it is included elsewhere in the annual report? For example, there are many similarities between the requirements already in the Listing Rules for listed issuers to include a Management Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) in the annual report and the prescribed contents of a business review set out in Schedule 5. This MD&A has typically not been included inside the directors’ report section of the annual report. Is it acceptable for directors of listed issuers to meet the requirements of Schedule 5 by including a cross reference in the directors’ report to where the MD&A may be found? |
Answer
Yes, provided that
(a) the cross reference is clear and it is clearly stated that the cross referenced part of the annual report forms part of the directors’ report; and
(b) the discussion and analysis found in that MD&A is sufficient to meet the minimum content requirements of Schedule 5.
In order for the cross reference to be clear, it should be a reference to a specific part of the annual report which includes a discussion of the business as prescribed by Schedule 5. It should not simply be a cross reference to the financial statements, since it is clear that the intent of the requirement in section 388 and Schedule 5 is for the directors to provide additional commentary in their report to the shareholders.
The following wording is an example of such a cross reference from the directors’ report to elsewhere in the annual report. This example combines the disclosure required by section 390(1)(b) in relation to the principal activities of the company (or group) with the requirement in section 388 to prepare a business review which complies with Schedule 5. It assumes that the company preparing the financial statements is required to prepare consolidated financial statements:
"Principal Activities and Business Review
The principal activities of the group are … [describe the principal activities of the company and all the subsidiary undertakings included in the consolidated financial statements i.e. the principal activities of the group]. Further discussion and analysis of these activities as required by Schedule 5 to the Companies Ordinance, including a discussion of the principal risks and uncertainties facing the group and an indication of likely future developments in the group’s business, can be found in the Management Discussion and Analysis set out on pages xx to yy of this Annual Report. This discussion forms part of this Directors’ Report."
| Q16. | Question B1 – Capital contributions How should a company account for a shareholder's contribution (e.g. waiver of loan) in equity in its financial statements under the new CO? Should it be credited to share capital or to a reserve? |
Answer
It depends. The company and the shareholder should agree whether the shareholder's contribution is intended to be an increase in share capital or it is in the nature of a gift. The company will credit a shareholder's contribution to share capital in the former case but it will credit it to an "other reserve" outside share capital in the latter. As explained below, different legal constraints on the subsequent use of the contribution will apply depending on its classification as share capital or "other reserve".
If the company credits the shareholders' contribution directly to share capital, it will do so under section 170(2)(b). This section states that a company may increase its share capital without allotting and issuing new shares, if the funds or other assets for the increase are provided by members of the company. Alternatively, the company may treat this as an indirect increase in share capital through a capitalization of profits under section 170(2)(c). This section permits a company to capitalize its profits, with or without allotting and issuing new shares. When a company credits a shareholder's contribution either directly or indirectly into share capital, it alters its share capital. Therefore, the company is required by section 171 to deliver a notice of alteration of share capital to the Registrar.
Where the shareholder's contribution is in the nature of a gift and not a subscription for new shares, a company will credit the amount to an "other reserve" outside of share capital. There is no requirement to notify the Registrar about an alteration of a reserve outside of share capital.
If the contribution is credited to share capital, then the requirements of Part 5 will apply if the company subsequently wishes to reduce share capital. For example, a solvency test and period of publicity may be required before capital may be repaid. On the other hand, if the contribution is credited to a reserve outside of share capital then the requirements of Part 6 will apply if the company subsequently wishes to make a distribution of that reserve (see question B2 below). This difference may be an important factor to consider when the company and shareholder agree the nature of the contribution and decide whether to record the contribution as an increase in share capital or as a reserve outside share capital.
| Q17. | Question B2 – Distributable profits Is the guidance in the Institute Accounting Bulletin 4 "Guidance on the determination of realised profits and losses in the context of distributions under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance" still applicable under the new CO? |
Answer
Yes. The provisions of sections 79A to 79P of the predecessor CO have been brought forward largely unaltered to form Part 6 (i.e. sections 290 to 306). Therefore, the guidance in Accounting Bulletin 4 on how to determine realized profits and losses is still applicable under the new CO.
| Q18. | Question C1 – Company level statement of financial position in consolidated financial statements The predecessor CO requires a holding company's statement of financial position to give a true and fair view despite the fact that the company prepares consolidated financial statements instead and that the consolidated financial statements would give a true and fair view (sections 123 and 125 of the predecessor CO). To comply with such a requirement under the predecessor CO, holding companies normally include the company's statement of financial position as one of the primary statements in its consolidated financial statements (with the related notes included in the notes to the consolidated financial statements).The auditors express an opinion on both the consolidated financial statements as well as on the holding company's statement of financial position. Is there any change in the new CO with regard to the above requirement? |
Answer
Yes. The new CO does not require a true and fair view to be given on a holding company's statement of financial position when the holding company prepares consolidated financial statements. (ref: section 379(2) and section 380(2)).
Instead, section 2 of Schedule 4 requires that the consolidated financial statements of a holding company should contain the company's statement of financial position in the notes to the annual consolidated financial statements and also a note disclosing the movement in the holding company's reserves. Section 2(2) of Schedule 4 also explicitly states that there is no need to include any notes to the holding company's statement of financial position. Even though the holding company's statement of financial position is included in the notes to the consolidated financial statements section 2(3) of Schedule 4 requires that it must be in a format that complies with HKAS 1 "Presentation of Financial Statements".
The auditors' report will cover the consolidated financial statements as a whole, including the notes containing the holding company's statement of financial position and the movement in its reserves, in accordance with section 406(1)(b)(ii).
Note: This requirement to include the holding company's statement of financial position in the notes to the consolidated financial statements applies to all companies that are required to prepare consolidated financial statements. There is no exemption for companies eligible for the reporting exemption. However, the format and contents of that holding company's statement of financial position would follow the SME-FRF and SME-FRS when the consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with that standard (in accordance with section 2(3) of Part 4).
| Q19. | Question C2 – Disclosure of directors' emoluments and other matters that involve directors in the notes to the financial statements Does the new CO require any disclosures regarding directors' emoluments and other matters that involve directors in the notes to the financial statements? [UPDATED] |
Answer
Section 383 requires the information prescribed by the relevant Regulation about the following items to be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements:
(a) the directors' emoluments;
(b) the directors' retirement benefits;
(c) payments made or benefit provided in respect of the termination of the service of directors, whether in the capacity of directors or in other capacity while directors;
(d) loans, quasi-loans and other dealings in favour of (i) directors of the company and a holding company of the company; (ii) bodies corporate controlled by such directors; (iii) entities connected with such directors;
(e) material interests of directors in transactions, arrangements or contracts entered into by the company;
(f) consideration provided to or receivable by third parties for making available the services of a person as a director or in any other capacity while director.
The relevant Regulation for the purposes of section 383 is the Companies (Disclosure of Information about Benefits of Directors) Regulation Cap. 622G ("the Directors’ Benefits Regulation") . This Regulation sets out detailed disclosure requirements and interpretative guidance for the above matters and must be followed by all companies preparing financial statements unless there is a specific exemption (for example, section 23 grants an exemption from Part 4 of the Directors’ Benefits Regulation to companies eligible for the reporting exemption – this effectively grants an exemption from disclosing information relating to item (e) above).
In addition, section 1 of Schedule 4 to the new CO requires that the financial statements for a financial year must contain, under separate headings, the aggregate amount of any outstanding loans made under the authority of sections 280 and 281 during the financial year. While directors are explicitly excluded from the scope of section 281, loans made to them for the purposes of employee share schemes may fall under the scope of section 280.
In the case of a holding company that has to prepare consolidated financial statements and a consolidated directors' report, there is no requirement to make the disclosures required by section 383 and the Directors’ Benefits Regulation on a consolidated basis. These disclosures are limited to the directors of the holding company only.
| Q20. | Question C3 – The adoption of financial reporting standards for the purpose of the new Companies Ordinance Companies incorporated in Hong Kong are required by Part 9 to prepare annual financial statements which comply with the general requirements of section 380. For such purpose, can a company prepare its financial statements using IFRS Accounting Standards or other standards issued by a standard-setting body other than the Institute? [UPDATED] |
Answer
Section 380(4)(b) states that the financial statements for a financial year must comply with "the accounting standards applicable to the financial statements". Under section 357(1) accounting standards means statements of standard accounting practice issued or specified by a body prescribed by the Regulation. Only the Institute is prescribed for the purposes of section 357(1) under the current Companies (Accounting Standards (Prescribed Body)) Regulation (Cap.622C).
For the purposes of section 380(4)(b), there are 3 sets of accounting standards (otherwise known as frameworks) issued by the Institute:
1 HKFRS Accounting Standards
2 The HKFRS for Private Entities Accounting Standard (HKFRS for PE); and
3 The Small and Medium-sized Entity Financial Reporting Framework and Financial Reporting Standard (SME-FRF & SME-FRS).
All Hong Kong incorporated companies may choose to prepare their financial statements in accordance with HKFRS Accounting Standards. However, only eligible companies may choose to adopt the HKFRS for PE or the SME-FRF & SME-FRS, as explained below.
For a company incorporated in Hong Kong which falls within the section 359 reporting exemption
Such company is permitted to prepare their financial statements under any one of the above 3 frameworks, however, it must choose one of these frameworks issued by the Institute for the purposes of complying with section 380(4)(b). Each of these frameworks includes specific provisions which apply in the first period in which an entity chooses to adopt that framework. Moving from one framework to another is therefore not expected to be common.
For a company incorporated in Hong Kong which is not eligible for the reporting exemption
Such company will be in breach of section 380(4)(b) unless its statutory financial statements contain an explicit and unreserved statement of compliance with HKFRS Accounting Standards, or HKFRS for PE (if eligible for that standard), as issued by the Institute. Section 380(3) and Schedule 4 Part 1 Section 4(a) require that the financial statements must state whether they have been prepared in accordance with the applicable accounting standards as defined by section 357(1). However, this does not prohibit a dual compliance statement stating that the financial statements comply with both HKFRS Accounting Standards and with a basis or standard of accounting other than HKFRS Accounting Standards provided that the financial statements satisfy the requirements of both accounting frameworks.
For example, if an existing IFRS reporter wishes to assert dual compliance with HKFRS Accounting Standards and IFRS Accounting Standards, it would be necessary that no material changes to accounting policies or reported amounts were made as a result of applying the requirements of HKFRS 1 First-time adoption of Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards on transition to HKFRS Accounting Standards.
Similarly, if a company had not previously included an explicit and unreserved statement of compliance with IFRS Accounting Standards as issued by the IASB in its financial statements and wishes to do so in addition to continuing to comply with HKFRS Accounting Standards, it would be necessary that no material changes to accounting policies or reported amounts were made as a result of applying the requirements of IFRS 1 First-time adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards.
| Q21. | Question C4 – Information required to be disclosed by section 383(1)(e) of the CO on material interests of directors Part 4 of the Companies (Disclosure of Information about Benefits of Directors) Regulation (C(DIBD)R or Cap. 622G) deals with disclosure in the notes to the financial statements of material interests in transactions, arrangements or contracts entered into by the company in accordance with section 383(1)(e) of the CO. What information needs to be disclosed, and where, about “material interests of directors in transactions, arrangements or contracts entered into by … another company in the same group of companies” that was previously required by section 129D(3)(j) of the predecessor ordinance (Cap. 32) and was also mentioned in section 388(1)(e) until the 2018 Amendment Ordinance amended that section? [UPDATED] |
Answer
Requirements relating to disclosure of material interests of directors in transactions, arrangements or contracts entered into by other group companies can be found in section 10 of the Companies (Directors’ Report) Regulation (C(DR)R or Cap. 622D). This section of the C(DR)R brings forward the remainder of the scope of section 129D(3)(j) of the predecessor Ordinance (Cap. 32) by requiring disclosure in relation to such transactions entered into by a “specified undertaking” of the company and in which a director of the company had a material interest. “Specified undertaking” is defined in section 2 of the C(DR)R as a parent company of the company, a subsidiary undertaking of the company or a subsidiary undertaking of the company’s parent company (i.e. a fellow subsidiary undertaking).
In other words, this requirement in section 10 of the C(DR)R covers “material interests of directors in transactions, arrangements or contracts entered into by … another company in the same group of companies”, with the effect that information relating to other group companies is therefore required to be disclosed in the directors’ report and not in the notes to the financial statements.
| Q22. | Question D1 – Exemption from giving a true and fair view If a company is eligible for the reporting exemption but decides not to follow the SME-FRF and SME-FRS is it still exempt from preparing financial statements which give a true and fair view? |
Answer
No. Every company that is required to prepare financial statements under the new CO is required by section 380(4)(b) to comply with the accounting standards applicable to the financial statements. "Accounting standards" are defined in section 357(1) as being those issued or specified by the Institute (as per the Companies (Accounting Standards (Prescribed Body)) Regulation (Cap. 622C) referred to in section 357(1)).
Therefore, if an eligible company does not follow the SME-FRF and SME-FRS, then it must prepare financial statements which comply with another body of accounting standards issued or specified by the Institute, for example HKFRS Accounting Standards, which is a body of accounting standards intended to give a true and fair view if properly complied with.
| Q23. | Question D2 – Eligibility: Change in ownership after general meeting Under section 360, a larger private company not involved in any of the financial services lines of business listed in section 359(4) may use the SME-FRF & SME-FRS, if at least 75% of all the members pass a resolution at a general meeting that the company is to fall within the reporting exemption for the financial year, with none objecting. The 75% vote is calculated as a percentage of the entire shareholding of a company, not simply as a percentage of the shareholders who attend the general meeting. The resolution is defeated if any member objects either at the meeting or at any time by giving notice in writing to the company. This is provided that the written notice is given at least 6 months before the end of the financial year to which the objection relates. In the case where there is a change in ownership of the company after such resolution was passed at a general meeting, does the new CO or the SME-FRF & SME-FRS require that company to pass a new resolution at a general meeting for it to use the SME-FRF & SME-FRS? [UPDATED] |
Answer
The new CO or SME-FRF & SME-FRS contains no specific requirement mandating that a larger "eligible" private company (a company that complies with sections 359(1)(c) and 360(1)) must pass a new resolution at a general meeting to re-confirm its eligibility to use the SME-FRF & SME-FRS following a change in ownership. Therefore, if the new shareholders are in agreement with the earlier decision to use the SME-FRF & SME-FRS, then no further action is required.
If the new shareholders disagree with the earlier decision and it is at least 6 months before the end of the financial year, then they may exercise their right to object under section 360(3), causing the company to be ineligible for the reporting exemption. In all other cases of disagreement, the new shareholders may consider seeking legal advice as to their ability to call for another vote and/or their rights (if controlling shareholders) to reverse the earlier decision.
| Q24. | Question D3 - Eligibility: Shareholders' approval in subsequent years Is it permissible under the new CO for a larger "eligible" company to pass a resolution to adopt the SME-FRF & SME-FRS for more than one year? [UPDATED] |
Answer
The new CO is silent on this matter. It is therefore a legal question as to whether the words of section 360(1) may be interpreted as allowing the company to pass a resolution in respect of more than one financial year.
However, as explained in response to Question D2, a larger "eligible" company (or group) will not have certainty about their ability to adopt the SME-FRF & SME-FRS until the later of a successful shareholder vote and a date 6 months before the end of the financial year in question. Therefore, even if a larger "eligible" company attempts to pass a resolution to adopt SME-FRF & SME-FRS for more than one year, it needs to be aware that the objection period will remain open for future years.
| Q25. | Question D4 – Eligibility: Hong Kong incorporated subsidiary of an overseas incorporated company Would a Hong Kong incorporated company being a subsidiary of an overseas incorporated company be disqualified from falling within the reporting exemption (thus the use of SME-FRF & SME-FRS) under section 359(1)(b)? [UPDATED] |
Answer
The intention of section 359(1)(b) is to bring forward the qualifying criteria that were previously found in section 141D of the predecessor CO. Under section 359(1)(b) a company falls within the reporting exemption for a financial year if:
(a) it is not:
- one that carries on any banking business and holds a valid banking licence granted under the Banking Ordinance (Cap.155); or
- one that is a corporation licensed under Part V of the Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap.571) to carry on a business in any regulated activity within the meaning of that Ordinance; or
- one that carries on any insurance business otherwise than solely as an agent; or
- accepts, by way of trade or business (other than banking business), loans of money at interest or repayable at a premium, other than on terms involving the issue of debentures or other securities; and
(b) it does not have any subsidiary and is not a subsidiary of another company; and
(c) all members of the company agree in writing that the company is to fall within the reporting exemption for the financial year only.
Section 2 defines "company" as (a) a company formed and registered under the new CO or an existing company. "Existing company" is defined as a company formed and registered under a former Companies Ordinance. An overseas incorporated company is therefore not a company defined under the new CO.
Based on the above, being a subsidiary of an overseas incorporated company in itself will not disqualify a company incorporated under the Companies Ordinance from falling within reporting exemption under section 359(1)(b).
| Q26. | Question D5 - Delivery of shareholders' resolution or agreement on reporting exemption to the Companies Registrar There are certain types of companies that require a shareholders' resolution or agreement for them to fall within reporting exemption for the financial year. What are the thresholds of the required shareholders' resolution or agreement? Are the companies required to deliver the resolution or agreement to the Companies Registrar for registration? [UPDATED] |
Answer
The following types of companies are required to obtain shareholders' resolution or agreement in order for these companies to be eligible for the reporting exemption when preparing their directors’ report and financial statements:
|
Type of company |
Shareholder approval requirements |
|
1. The company is an "eligible" private company which fails the small size tests butfalls within the larger size tests (HK$200 million total annual revenue, HK$200 million total assets and 100 employees), and has no subsidiaries (section 359(1)(c), section 362 and Sch 3(1)(3)). |
A resolution has to be passed by at least 75% of all shareholders of the company (or the holding company in case of a group) (i.e. not merely 75% of the shareholders attending the meeting) in order for the company to be eligible for the reporting exemption.
This requirement to obtain approval from the reporting entity’s own shareholders applies regardless of whether or not that entity is a holding company i.e. it applies equally to Type 1 companies and Type 2 companies in this table. As from 1 February 2019, there is no requirement for a holding company to seek approval from the shareholders of any of its subsidiaries.
The resolution will fail if any shareholder votes against the resolution at a general meeting or if any shareholder objects in writing and gives notice of objection to the company at least six months before the end of the financial year to which the objection relates (section 360(1), section 360(2) and section 360(3)).
Alternatively, the company may pass a written resolution under section 548(1), which can be passed without a meeting and without any previous notice being required, for falling within the reporting exemption. A written resolution is passed when all eligible members have signified their agreement to it. However, for passing a written resolution the company needs to follow other procedures in subdivision 2 of division 1 in Part 12 of the new CO, which include notifying its auditor of the proposed resolution under section 555.
Please refer to subdivision 2 of division 1 in Part 12 of the new CO about written resolution. |
|
2. The company is a private company* which is the holding company of a group which fails the small size tests but falls within the larger size tests of HK$200 million total annual revenue, HK$200 million total assets and 100 employees when measured on a consolidated basis (section 359(2)(c)(ii), section 365, Sch 3(1)(11) and Sch 3(2)(2)).
NB As from 1 February 2019, a holding company falling within these size limits is eligible for the reporting exemption even if its group includes companies limited by guarantee (i.e. it is a “mixed group”), provided that it itself is a private company (section 359(3A) and section 366A(4))
* If the holding company is a company limited by guarantee, rather than a private company, then it is only eligible for the reporting exemption if its group as a whole falls within the annual revenue limit of HK$25 million applicable to companies limited by guarantee (section 359(3), section 366 and Sch 3(1)(13)). As from 1 February 2019, this is the limit which applies, even if that group is a mixed group i.e. even if the group contains some private companies (section 359(3A) and section 366A(4)(c)).
No shareholder approval is required if the group headed by a company limited by guarantee falls within this very small annual revenue limit. However, if the group as a whole exceeds this limit then the company is not eligible for the reporting exemption at all. In other words, shareholder approval cannot make a company limited by guarantee eligible for the reporting exemption if the consolidated annual revenue of the group of which it is the holding company exceeds HK$25 million.
|
|
|
3. The company is a private company which does not have any subsidiaries and is not a subsidiary of another Hong Kong incorporated company and has unanimous shareholder support (section 359(1)(b)). |
All the members of the company have to agree in writing that the company is to fall within the reporting exemption for the financial year (section 359(1)(b)(iii)).
|
Delivery of resolution or agreement to the Companies Registrar
Section 622 on registration of and requirements relating to certain resolutions applies to the resolution (whether special or written) for Types 1 and 2 (under section 622(1)(f)) and the agreement for Type 3 (under section 622(1)(e)).
Section 622(2) requires the company to deliver a copy of the special or written resolution or agreement to the Registrar for registration within 15 days after it is made or passed. If the resolution is not in writing, a reference to a copy of the resolution is to be construed as a written memorandum setting out the terms of the resolution. A company is required to keep records comprising copies of resolutions and minutes of general meetings in the manner prescribed in section 618.
If a company contravenes section 622(2), the company and every responsible person of the company commits an offence, and each is liable to a fine at level 3 and, in the case of a continuing offence, to a further fine of HK$300 for each day during which the offence continues.
| Q27. | Question D6 – Interaction between the eligibility for the reporting exemption (s.359) and the exemption from preparing consolidated financial statements (s.379(3)) For a holding company, which fulfills the requirement in section 379(3) and is exempted from the new CO's requirement to prepare consolidated financial statements, when assessing its eligibility for the reporting exemption should it be considered on a standalone basis (i.e. at company level) under section 359(1); or does each company in the group (including the holding company), and the group as a whole, need to pass the eligibility tests under s.359(2) before that holding company itself can fall within the reporting exemption? [UPDATED] |
Answer
There is no clear link stated in the new CO between the requirements in section 379(3) (on the eligibility for not preparing consolidated financial statements) and section 359 (on the eligibility for the reporting exemption). However it would seem reasonable to assume that a correlation is intended.
Based on such assumption, if a holding company is required to prepare consolidated financial statements, then the group needs to qualify for the reporting exemption under section 359(2) before it is qualified for simplified reporting (i.e. qualified for preparing consolidated financial statements under the SME-FRF & SME-FRS); whereas if the holding company does not need to prepare consolidated financial statements, then it may qualify for simplified reporting as a stand-alone company under section 359(1) and thus, qualify for preparing company-level financial statements only under the SME-FRF & SME-FRS.
| Q28. | Question E1 – Meaning of "wholly owned" Section 379(3) exempts a holding company from preparing consolidated financial statements if it is a "wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate". Similarly, section 388(3) exempts a company wholly owned by another body corporate from preparing a business review. What does "wholly owned by another body corporate" mean? |
Answer
The definition of "wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate" can be found in section 357(3). This states that a body corporate is a "wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate" if it only has the following as its members:
| (a) | that other body corporate (for the meaning of "body corporate" see Question E2 below); |
| (b) | a wholly owned subsidiary of that other body corporate; |
| (c) | a nominee of that other body corporate or such a wholly owned subsidiary. |
So, for example, in the following group Companies A, B and C are all "wholly owned subsidiaries of another body corporate", with that "other body corporate" being Company H

| Q29. | Question E2 - Meaning of "company" and "body corporate" Sometimes the new CO refers to a "company" and other times to a "body corporate". What is the difference? |
Answer
Section 2 sets out definitions for both of these terms. According to section 2(1):
- a "company" is a company formed and registered under the new CO, or an "existing company" (which is in turn defined as a company formed and registered under a former Companies Ordinance); whereas
- a "body corporate" includes a "company" and a company incorporated outside Hong Kong, but excludes a corporation sole.
In other words, a "company" for the purposes of the new CO is a Hong Kong incorporated company, whereas a "body corporate" must be an incorporated entity but need not be incorporated in Hong Kong. This means, for example, that the exemptions available in the new CO to companies which are "wholly owned subsidiaries of another body corporate" (such as in section 388(3) in respect of the business review) are available to Hong Kong incorporated subsidiaries of overseas incorporated parents, as well as to Hong Kong subsidiaries of Hong Kong incorporated parents.
| Q30. | Question E3 – Meaning of "financial year" The new CO refers to "financial year". Does this always mean 12 months or can a company prepare financial statements for a longer or shorter period? |
Answer
A "financial year" is usually 12 months but need not necessarily be 12 months, if the company is newly incorporated or when the directors decide to alter the "accounting reference date".
The requirements relating to the meaning of "financial year" can be found in Division 3 of Part 9 (sections 367 to 371). In accordance with these sections, a company's first "financial year" after the coming into operation of section 367 on 3 March 2014 starts on the first day of its first "accounting reference period" and ends on the last day of that "accounting reference period".
So the length of a "financial year" depends on the length of the company's "accounting reference period". This period is generally 12 months, in accordance with sections 368(3) and 370, except in the case of the first accounting reference period of a company incorporated under the new CO (i.e. the period from the date of the company's incorporation to its "primary accounting reference date" (sections 369(5) to (7) and 370)) or when the directors decide to alter the accounting reference date (i.e. the end of the reporting period) in accordance with section 371. That section permits directors to shorten or lengthen the accounting reference period by altering the accounting reference date. This is subject to certain restrictions as set out in that section.
However, in no circumstances is a company's accounting reference period (and thus a financial year) permitted to be longer than 18 months (see sections 369(6) and 371(5)).
| Q31. | Question E4 – When will section 436 first affect interim financial reports? Section 436(3) deals with certain statements that need to be made in respect of non-statutory accounts. Interim financial reports prepared in accordance with HKAS 34 fall within the scope of section 436 as a form of non-statutory accounts, as it is a requirement of HKAS 34 that the interim financial report contains the statement of financial position as of the end of the preceding financial year. Consequently, when is section 436 first effective so far as interim financial reports are concerned? For example, does it impact on the interim reports for years ending in 2015, such as half year reports ending on 30 June 2015 for a December 2015 financial year end? |
Answer
Section 358(3) states that section 436 is first effective in relation to financial statements for a financial year beginning on or after the commencement date of that section. In other words section 436 is first effective in relation to financial statements for financial years beginning on or after 3 March 2014.
However, for December year ends the first half-year interim financial reports expected to be affected will be the June 2016 interims. This is because for December year ends, the first financial year of the company which falls under section 436 is the year ended 31 December 2015. It is too early for the June 2015 interim financial report to include financial information for that full year and the comparative statement of financial position for the preceding financial year is for the year ended 31 December 2014, which commenced before 3 March 2014. Instead, the first interim report impacted by section 436 will be the June 2016 interim financial report, which will contain the statement of financial position as at 31 December 2015 as comparative information.
In summary:

| Q32. | Question E5 – Can a “financial year” be set to end on a specific day of the week rather than a specific date? Some companies find it convenient to prepare their financial statements for a financial period ending on the same day of the week each year, rather than on the same date each year, for example setting the financial year to end on the last Friday in January each year. This means that each “financial year” (see Question E3 for the meaning of financial year) is generally 52 weeks long, with a 53 week year every seven years. Is this practice acceptable under the new CO? [UPDATED] |
Answer
Yes, this is now expressly provided for in the CO. Specifically, section 367 was amended by the 2018 Amendment Ordinance to permit the company to shorten or lengthen the financial year by a period not exceeding 7 days. This amendment is effective as from 1 February 2019.NB The requirement to obtain a directors’ resolution under section 371(3) when shortening or lengthening an accounting reference period (which requirement is found in section 368(3)) does not apply if a company takes advantage of the amended section 367 to shorten or lengthen its financial year by a few days. This is because taking advantage of the amended section 367 is not setting a new accounting reference date within the meaning of section 371.
Questions and Answers on financial reporting issues relating to the transition from the predecessor Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32) to the new Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) ("new CO")
These Questions and Answers ("Q&As") have been developed by the Institute's Companies Ordinance Application Issues (Financial Reporting) Working Group (Working Group) and are endorsed by the Institute's Financial Reporting Standards Committee (FRSC). These Q&As will be updated from time to time to provide guidance on emerging financial reporting related application issues specific to the transition from the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32) to the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622).
These Q&As deal with transitional matters and are therefore only expected to have relevance in a financial year which crosses over 3 March 2014 or in the first financial reporting year beginning on or after 3 March 2014. A separate series of Q&As has been developed by the Working Group to cover other financial reporting related application issues relating to requirements of the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622). These other Q&As are expected to have continuing relevance beyond the end of the first financial reporting year beginning on or after 3 March 2014.
These Q&As are non-mandatory in nature and intended for general guidance only. Users of these Q&As should consider taking their own legal advice if in doubt as to their obligations under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance.
The Institute, the FRSC and the Working Group do not accept responsibility or liability, and disclaim all responsibility and liability, in respect of the Q&As and any consequences that may arise from any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any materials in the Q&As.
All references to Parts, Divisions, Sub-divisions, Schedules and Sections in the questions and answers are to the new CO, unless otherwise indicated.
Last revision date: 30 September 2014
| Q33. | Question A1 – References to specific sections of the CO Is there any requirement to amend the general CO references in the annual report (such as references to section 161 in respect of directors' emoluments) if the financial year covered by that annual report ended before 3 March 2014? |
Answer
No, the new CO and the financial reporting standards do not contain such requirement. This answer applies even if the date of approval of that annual report is on or after 3 March 2014, since Schedule 11, "Transitional and saving provisions", only refers to financial years which began before 3 March 2014 and end on or after 3 March 2014, and not to earlier financial years.
However, as the relevant provisions in the predecessor CO (Cap. 32) were repealed on 3 March 2014, companies are encouraged (but not mandated) to add a note or remark in their financial statements that references to the provisions in the CO are references to the provisions in the predecessor Companies Ordinance (Cap.32) as was in force before 3 March 2014 or other wordings to similar effect.
| Q34. | Question A2 – Disclosure under HKAS 10 Events after the Reporting Period For financial years which end before 3 March 2014, is it necessary to disclose the commencement of the new CO on 3 March 2014 in the financial statements for those periods, and/or the automatic transition to the no-par value regime as non-adjusting post balance sheet events under paragraph 21 of Hong Kong Accounting Standard (HKAS) 10? |
Answer
No. As the commencement of the new CO on 3 March 2014 and the transition to the no-par value regime have no immediate financial impact on the company and no impact on the number of shares in issue or the relative entitlement of any of the members, they are not events that should influence the economic decisions of users of the financial statements. They therefore fall outside the scope of the disclosure required by paragraph 21 of HKAS 10.
However, care should be taken to ensure that any post balance sheet (reporting date) event note (or other disclosure, such as in the directors' report), which refers to a specific transaction (such as an issuance of new share capital), makes the correct references to the relevant Companies Ordinance (i.e. either the predecessor Ordinance, Cap. 32, or the new Ordinance Cap. 622), depending on whether the transaction occurred before or after 3 March 2014.
| Q35. | Question A3 - Disclosure under HKAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors For financial years that end before 3 March 2014, is it necessary to mention in the financial statements for those periods the new CO when disclosing information under paragraph 30 of HKAS 8 about the possible impact of amendments, new standards and interpretations issued but not yet effective? |
Answer
No. Paragraph 30 of HKAS 8 refers to HKFRS Accounting Standards which have not yet been adopted. HKAS 8 does not specifically require equivalent disclosure when there are other regulatory requirements that impact on the preparation of the financial statements, such as the annual report requirements of Part 9 "Accounts and Audit", which have not yet been adopted by a company.
However, the company may wish to make disclosure about the commencement date for the annual report requirements of Part 9 for the avoidance of doubt. For example, it would be acceptable to expand the disclosure made under paragraph 30 of HKAS 8 for new HKFRS Accounting standards not yet effective as follows:
"Possible impact of amendments, new standards and interpretations issued but not yet effective for the year ended [31 December 2013*]
*Amend date as appropriate
Up to the date of issue of these financial statements, the Institute has issued a few amendments and a new standard which are not yet effective for the year ended [31 December 2013*] and which have not been adopted in these financial statements. These include the following which may be relevant to the group …
*Amend date as appropriate
In addition, the annual report requirements of Part 9, "Accounts and Audit", of the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) come into operation as from the company's first financial year commencing on or after 3 March 2014 in accordance with section 358 of that Ordinance. The group is in the process of making an assessment of the expected impact of the changes in the Companies Ordinance on the consolidated financial statements in the period of initial application of Part 9 of the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622). So far it has concluded that the impact is unlikely to be significant and will primarily only affect the presentation and disclosure of information in the consolidated financial statements."
(Note: Similar disclosure is also relevant for financial years which cross over 3 March 2014: see question B1)
| Q36. | Question B1 – References to specific sections of the CO How should a company refer to the Companies Ordinance in its annual report for a financial year ending on or after 3 March 2014 but before 3 March 2015? |
Answer
The divisions of Part 9, which cover directors' reports, financial statements and the audit requirement, are not effective until the first financial year that begins on or after 3 March 2014. For any financial years that began before that date, the various sections of the predecessor CO (i.e. Cap. 32) relevant to the accounts and directors' report continue to apply (as stated in section 78 of Schedule 11). For example, the disclosure of directors' emoluments in such a reporting period will need to be made in accordance with section 161 of the predecessor CO (Cap. 32), rather than in accordance with section 383 of the new CO and the new Companies (Disclosure of Information about Benefits of Directors) Regulation (Cap. 622G).
However, all other parts of the new CO come into effect on 3 March 2014. For example, as from 3 March 2014 the company will need to comply with the requirements of section 135 and paragraph 37 of Schedule 11 to automatically transition to the new no-par regime (see questions B2 and B3 below). This will have an impact on the presentation of changes in equity in the financial statements prepared for that period.
As a result, care needs to be taken when preparing financial statements for a period that began before 3 March 2014 but will end on or after that date, to make sure that it is clear as to which Companies Ordinance reference is being made. For example, the company may consider including the following wording in its notes to financial statements when referring to the predecessor CO (Cap. 32):
"Statement of compliance
"These financial statements have been prepared in accordance with all applicable HKFRS Accounting Standards, the collective term which includes all applicable individual Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards, Hong Kong Accounting Standards (HKASs) and Interpretations issued by the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants (HKICPA) and accounting principles generally accepted in Hong Kong. These financial statements also comply with the applicable requirements of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance which concern the preparation of financial statements, which for this financial year and the comparative period continue to be those of the predecessor Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32), in accordance with transitional and saving arrangements for Part 9 of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), "Accounts and Audit", which are set out in sections 76 to 87 of Schedule 11 to that Ordinance. A summary of the significant accounting policies adopted by the group is set out below."
For disclosure on directors' remuneration, the company may consider to include the following example wording in notes to financial statements:
"Directors' remuneration
Directors' remuneration disclosed pursuant to section 78 of Schedule 11 to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), which requires compliance with section 161 of the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32), is as follows: …"
For disclosure on "new standards and amendments issued but not yet effective" under HKAS 8, the company may consider to include the following example wording:
"Possible impact of amendments, new standards and interpretations issued but not yet effective for the year ended [31 December 2014*]
*Amend date as appropriate
Up to the date of issue of these financial statements, the Institute has issued … which are not yet effective for the year ended [31 December 2014*] and which have not been adopted in these financial statements. These include the following which may be relevant to the group …
*Amend date as appropriate
In addition, the annual report requirements of Part 9 "Accounts and Audit" of the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) come into operation as from the company's first financial year commencing on or after 3 March 2014 in accordance with section 358 of that Ordinance. The group is in the process of making an assessment of expected impact of the changes in the Companies Ordinance on the consolidated financial statements in the period of initial application of Part 9 of the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622). So far it has concluded that the impact is unlikely to be significant and will primarily only affect the presentation and disclosure of information in the consolidated financial statements."
| Q37. | Question B2 – Automatic transition to the no-par regime Which reserves form part of "share capital" on 3 March 2014? For example, would a "capital reserve" or a "merger reserve" form part of "share capital" under the new CO? |
Answer
In accordance with section 135 of, and section 37 of Schedule 11 to, the new CO, "share capital" is expanded on 3 March 2014 to consist of:
| (a) | the nominal (or par) value of shares issued prior to 3 March 2014; |
| (b) | any amount standing to the credit of the share premium account (i.e. as created under section 48B of the predecessor CO (Cap. 32)); and |
| (c) | any amount standing to the credit of the capital redemption reserve (i.e. as created under section 49H of the predecessor CO (Cap. 32)). |
All other reserves of any description (such as capital reserves, merger reserves, revaluation reserves) are unaffected by the automatic transition to the no-par regime. These reserves would only form part of share capital if the company subsequently decided to capitalize them in accordance with section 170(2)(c).
| Q38. | Question B3 – Disclosure of the transition to the no-par regime How should a company reflect the transition to the no par regime for share capital in its financial statements for a period ending on or after 3 March 2014 but before 3 March 2015? Should comparatives be re-stated? |
Answer
The transition to the no-par regime for share capital is an event that occurred on 3 March 2014 for all Hong Kong incorporated companies with share capital. The transition to the no-par regime is not a change in accounting policy or presentation. Therefore, the event should be shown as occurring on that date and the financial information for periods prior to that date should not be re-stated. For example, if a Hong Kong incorporated company is preparing a set of financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2014, it will need to show the following:
- in the statement of financial position (or in the notes thereto), the current year information will show "share capital" as at 31 December 2014 computed as described above in question B2, whereas the comparative information as at 31 December 2013 should distinguish between nominal value, share premium account and capital redemption reserve, as computed in accordance with the predecessor CO (Cap. 32); and
- in the statement of changes in equity, the company will need to include a line item for the event on 3 March 2014 whereby the balances on share premium account and capital redemption reserve were transferred into share capital in accordance with section 37 of Schedule 11. For any issuances of shares prior to 3 March 2014, the monetary amounts should be reflected in the statement of changes in equity, and in the relevant notes to the financial statements, in accordance with the applicable requirements of the predecessor CO (Cap. 32) to record nominal value and share premium. Whereas for any issuances of shares on or after 3 March 2014, the monetary amounts should be reflected as increases in the single amount of "share capital".
In addition, the company may need to break-down the comparative amounts of equity on the face of the statement of financial position if the company in previous years only split the amount of equity between "share capital" (i.e. nominal value of shares issued) and "other reserves" (i.e. share premium plus retained earnings etc.). This is to minimize the risk of confusion or misunderstanding when comparing the current year amount of "share capital" to the previous period.
For example, the company could take the following approach:
| (a) | the comparative amounts of "other reserves" could be broken-down between "statutory reserves" (i.e. share premium account and capital redemption reserve) and "non-statutory reserves" (i.e. those reserves which will continue to be presented outside of share capital even on orafter 3 March 2014), and |
| (b) | the company could then include a sub-total within equity on the face of the statement of financial position of "share capital plus other statutory reserves" which would be comparable to the new concept of "share capital" under the no-par regime. |
Additional explanation in the notes to the financial statements highlighting the impact of the new CO on share capital would also be useful.
This approach is illustrated below:
(Note: The abolition of par value applies to all classes of share capital (ordinary, preference, deferred etc). However, to keep the illustration simple it only deals with ordinary shares.)
[Extract from consolidated statement of financial position:]

[Extract from consolidated statement of changes in equity]

[Extract from notes to the financial statements:]
|
33 |
Share capital | ||||||
| (a) | Authorised and issued share capital | ||||||
![]() |
|||||||
|
Note (i): Under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), which commenced operation on 3 March 2014, the concept of authorised share capital no longer exists.
[Note to preparer: consider adding further disclosure if the number of shares that the company may issue is constrained in other ways, such as through the company’s articles of association]
Note (ii): In accordance with section 135 of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), the company’s shares no longer have a par or nominal value with effect from 3 March 2014. There is no impact on the number of shares in issue or the relative entitlement of any of the members as a result of this transition.
Note (iii): In accordance with the transitional provisions set out in section 37 of Schedule 11 to Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), on 3 March 2014 any amount standing to the credit of the share premium account has become part of the company’s share capital.
The holders of ordinary shares are entitled to receive dividends as declared from time to time and are entitled to one vote per share at meetings of the company. All ordinary shares rank equally with regard to the company’s residual assets. |
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
(b)
|
Nature and purpose of reserves
|
||||||
|
|||||||
| (c) | Dividends | ||||||
| ... | |||||||
| (d) |
Shares issued under share option scheme
|
||||||
|
On 1 February 2014, options were exercised to subscribe for 1,000,000 ordinary shares in the company at a consideration of $6,000,000 of which $1,000,000 was credited to share capital and the balance of $5,000,000 was credited to the share premium account in accordance with section 48B of the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.32). $400,000 was transferred from the capital reserve to the share premium account in accordance with policy set out in note 1(w)(iii). |
| Q39. | Question C1 – Comparative information in financial statements for an entity's first financial year beginning on or after 3 March 2014 An entity's first financial year beginning on or after 3 March 2014 will be the first financial year for which the requirements of sections 380 and 383 will be effective. For example, this will be the first financial year for which disclosures under Schedule 4 and the Companies (Disclosure of Information about Benefits of Directors) Regulation (Cap. 622G) ("the Directors' Benefits Regulation") will be required, instead of those under the 10th Schedule to, and section 161 of, the predecessor Ordinance (Cap. 32). What information should be disclosed in the financial statements for this financial year ("current financial year") as comparative information for these requirements? |
Answer
Section 9(2) of the Directors' Benefits Regulation provides that if an amount is shown for a financial year in the notes to the financial statements for that year in relation to the information prescribed by Part 2 of the Regulation, the corresponding amount for the immediate preceding financial year must also be shown in the notes. This is similar to section 161A(1) of the predecessor Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32).
The following amounts are prescribed by Part 2 of the Regulation:
| (a) | the aggregate amount of directors' emoluments prescribed by section 4; |
| (b) | the aggregate amount of directors' retirement benefits prescribed by section 5; |
| (c) | the aggregate amount of payment for loss of office of directors prescribed by section 6; |
| (d) | the aggregate amount of consideration for making available directors' services prescribed by section 7. |
Consequently, if the company discloses any of these amounts in the notes to the financial statements for the year ended, for example 31 December 2015, the company is required also to disclose the corresponding amount for the year ended 31 December 2014.
Except for the above requirement, the new CO does not contain any additional transitional requirements in this respect, nor does it specify that comparative information needs to be disclosed in respect of the disclosures required by section 380 and 383. Instead this matter falls within the general requirement in section 380(4)(b) for the financial statements to comply with the applicable accounting standards. Section 4(b) of Schedule 4 also requires the financial statements for a financial year must state, if they have not been so prepared, the particulars of, and the reasons for, any material departure from those standards.
In this regard, paragraph 38 of HKAS 1 states that as a minimum an entity shall present comparative information in respect of the preceding period for all amounts reported in the current period's financial statements. Paragraph 38 of HKAS 1 also states that an entity shall include comparative information for narrative and descriptive information that is relevant to understanding the current financial year's financial statements. This indicates that a company's directors may use judgment when deciding whether to continue to disclose information required by the predecessor CO that was included in the financial statements for the preceding financial year, when such information is no longer specifically required by the new CO in the financial statements for the current financial year (for example, the disclosures under the 10th Schedule to the predecessor CO).
| Q40. | Question D1 – Eligibility: End of financial year Is the end date of a financial year relevant when determining whether the company is eligible to use the SME-FRF & SME-FRS? |
Answer
No. The effective date of the SME-FRF & SME-FRS is aligned with the effective date of Part 9. Consequently, these standards are effective for a qualifying company's financial statements that cover a financial year beginning on or after 3 March 2014. Earlier application is not permitted.
| Q41. | Question E1 – For financial years ended before 3 March 2014 but auditor's report dated on or after that date How should an auditor make reference to the predecessor CO (Cap.32) in their auditor's report on financial statements for financial years ended before 3 March 2014 (e.g. a financial year ended 31 December 2013, 31 January 2014 or 28 February 2014), when the auditor's report is dated on or after 3 March 2014? |
Answer
Transitional and savings provisions set out in paragraph 80 of Schedule 11 apply to financial years which both begin before 3 March 2014 and end on or after 3 March 2014. Given this, it is acceptable for an auditor's report dated on or after 3 March 2014 on financial statements for financial years ended before 3 March 2014 (for example: the financial year ended 31 December 2013, 31 January 2014 or 28 February 2014) to make no reference to the new CO. Audit reports may continue to refer to the predecessor CO , as was in force throughout the financial year in question, as the "Hong Kong Companies Ordinance" for audit reports issued under HKSA 700 (Clarified) and refer to "section 141D of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance" for reports issued with reference to PN900 (Clarified) "Audit of Financial Statements Prepared in Accordance with the Small and Medium-sized Entity Financial Reporting Standard".
Auditors may alternatively choose to refer in their reports to the "predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32)" for the avoidance of doubt. This alternative practice is equally acceptable provided the date of the auditor's report itself is on or after the commencement date of the new CO (i.e. 3 March 2014).
Consequently, the opinion paragraph in Illustration 1 of HKSA 700 (Clarified) "Forming an Opinion and Reporting on Financial Statements" can read as follows:
"In our opinion, the financial statements give a true and fair view of the state of the Company's affairs as at 31 December 20X1, and of its [profit][loss] and cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards and have been properly prepared in accordance with the [Hong Kong Companies Ordinance/predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32)]*."
* Delete as appropriate
| Q42. | Question E2 (Updated 30 September 2014) – For financial years ended on or after 3 March 2014 but before 3 March 2015 ("cross over periods") (e.g. financial year ended on 31 March 2014, year ending on 30 June 2014 or 31 December 2014 or 28 February 2015) How should an auditor make reference to the Companies Ordinance ("CO") in their auditor's report on financial statements for cross over periods ended on or after 3 March 2014 but before 3 March 2015 (e.g. year ended on 31 March 2014, year ending on 30 June 2014 or 31 December 2014 or 28 February 2015)? |
Answer
| I. | If the auditor's report usually only refers to "Companies Ordinance" (and not a specific section reference) |
| The auditors may regard this as a generic reference and leave it unchanged (i.e. not using the word "predecessor" either). | |
| II. | If the auditor's report referred to section 141 in previous years |
|
As section 141 of the predecessor CO (Cap. 32) was repealed with effect from 3 March 2014, it is therefore incorrect to simply continue referring to "section 141 of the Companies Ordinance" in a report for a cross over period that ended on or after 3 March 2014 but before 3 March 2015. This means that any audit report that would have referred to section 141 explicitly needs to be reworded if covering a cross over period.
For example, the auditor should refer to section 80 of Schedule 11 to the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) in their auditor's report, because section 141 of the predecessor CO only continues to have life through that section.
Consequently, the first paragraph of the "auditor's responsibility" section can read as follows:
"Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. This report is made solely to you, as a body, in accordance with section 141 section 80 of Schedule 11 to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622), and for no other purpose. We do not assume responsibility towards or accept liability to any other person for the contents of this report." |
|
|
|
|
| III. | If the auditor's report referred to section 141D in previous years |
|
Applying the same rationale as mentioned in II. above and with reference to the specific requirements, any auditor's report that would have referred to section 141D explicitly needs to be reworded if covering a cross over period.
For example, the auditor should refer to section 77 of Schedule 11 to the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) in their auditor's report, because section 141D of the predecessor CO only continues to have life through that section.
Consequently, the relevant paragraphs and title in the auditor's report can read as follows:
"In addition, section 77 of Schedule 11 to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622), with reference to section 141D of the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.32) requires that the balance sheet together with the notes thereon should be prepared in accordance with the requirements of section 77 of Schedule 11 to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622), with reference to the Eleventh Schedule to that the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.32)."
"Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. This report is made solely to you, as a body, in accordance with section 141D section 77 of Schedule 11 to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622), with reference to section 141D of the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.32) and for no other purpose. We do not assume responsibility towards or accept liability to any other person for the contents of this report."
"Report on other matters under section 77 of Schedule 11 to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) with reference to section 141D of the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32)" |
|
|
|
|
| IV. | If the modified auditor's report refer to sections 141(4) and 141(6) |
|
An auditor is required to report by exception on matters stated in sections 141(4) and 141(6) of the predecessor CO. As mentioned in II. above and with reference to the specific requirements, any audit report that would have referred to sections 141(4) and (6) explicitly needs to be reworded if covering a cross over period.
For example, the auditor should refer to section 80(1) of Schedule 11 to the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) in their auditor's report, because sections 141(4) and (6) of the predecessor CO only continue to have life through that section. In addition, the auditor should also refer to the specific sections of 141(4) and (6) of the predecessor CO in their auditor's report for which the auditor specifically reports on.
Consequently, the title for this reporting in the auditor's report can read as follows:
"Report on matters under section 80(1) of Schedule 11 to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622), with reference to sections 141(4) and 141(6) of the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.32)" |
| Q43. | Question E3 – For financial years ended on or after 3 March 2014 but before 3 March 2015 ("cross over periods") (e.g. financial year ended on 31 March 2014, year ending on 30 June 2014 or 31 December 2014 or 28 February 2015) How should an auditor make reference to the CO in their auditor's report on the summary financial statements for cross over periods ended on or after 3 March 2014 but before 3 March 2015 (e.g. year ended on 31 March 2014, year ending on 30 June 2014 or 31 December 2014 or 28 February 2015)? |
Answer
Section 141CF(1) of the predecessor CO (Cap. 32) and section 5 of the predecessor Hong Kong Companies (Summary Financial Reports of Listed Companies) Regulation (Cap.32M) ("Regulation") were repealed effective from 3 March 2014. It is therefore incorrect to simply continue referring to these two sections in a report for a cross over period that ended on or after 3 March 2014 but before 3 March 2015. This means that any audit report that would have referred to them explicitly needs to be reworded if covering a cross-over period.
For example, the auditor should refer to section 83 of Schedule 11 to the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) in their auditor's report, because both section 141CF of the predecessor CO and the predecessor Regulation only continue to have life through that section. In addition, the auditor should also refer to the specific sections of 141CF(1) of the predecessor CO and section 5 of the predecessor Regulation in their auditor's report for which the summary financial report specifically complies with.
Consequently, the paragraph under the "directors' responsibility" section can read as follows:
"Under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance, the directors are responsible for the preparation of a summary financial report in accordance with section 83 of Schedule 11 to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622), with reference to section 141CF(1) of the predecessor Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.32) (referred to as "section 141CF(1) of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance" thereafter). In preparing the summary financial report, section 141CF(1) of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance requires that the summary financial report be derived from the annual financial statements and the auditor’s report thereon and the directors' report for the year ended 31 December 20X1, be in such form and contain such information and particulars as specified in section 83 of Schedule 11 to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622), with reference to section 5 of the Hong Kong Companies (Summary Financial Reports of Listed Companies) Regulation (Cap.32M) (referred to as "section 5 of the Hong Kong Companies (Summary Financial Reports of Listed Companies) Regulation" thereafter), and be approved by the board of directors "
There is no change to the wording in the "Opinion" paragraph.
Questions and Answers relating to consolidated and company level financial statements prepared under Part 9 of the the new Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622)
These Questions and Answers ("Q&As") have been developed by the Institute's Companies Ordinance Application Issues (Financial Reporting) Working Group (Working Group) and are endorsed by the Institute's Financial Reporting Standards Committee (FRSC). These Q&As will be updated from time to time to provide guidance on emerging financial reporting related application issues on the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap.622).
These Q&As have been developed by the Working Group to cover a range of issues in relation to the preparation of consolidated and company-level financial statements that may arise as companies adopt the requirements of Part 9 for the first time i.e. in financial statements for financial years beginning on or after 3 March 2014 (such as for the year ended 31 December 2015). The intention is to provide certainty on the application of the requirements of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance and their interaction with certain requirements of HKFRS Accounting Standards.
These Q&As are non-mandatory in nature and intended for general guidance only. Users of these Q&As should consider taking their own legal advice if in doubt as to their obligations under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance.
The Institute, the FRSC and the Working Group do not accept responsibility or liability, and disclaim all responsibility and liability, in respect of the Q&As and any consequences that may arise from any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any materials in the Q&As.
All references to Parts, Divisions, Sub-divisions, Schedules and sections in the questions and answers are to the new CO, unless otherwise indicated.
Last revision date: June 2025
| Q44. | Question 1.1: Whether consolidated financial statements are required when a holding company does not have any material subsidiaries If a reporting entity has subsidiaries but none of its subsidiaries are material is it still necessary to prepare consolidated financial statements? |
Answer
It depends. The Companies Registry’s FAQ confirms that if all of the company’s subsidiaries are collectively immaterial in accordance with section 381(3) then the company is not required to comply with section 379(2) (preparation of consolidated financial statements). In order for this to be the case when the holding company has more than one subsidiary, then the company’s subsidiaries must be immaterial when taken together in accordance with section 381(3)(b). It is not sufficient for each subsidiary to be individually judged to be immaterial.
| Q45. | Question 1.2: Application of section 379 to holding companies which are wholly owned subsidiaries of another body corporate If the reporting entity is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate but chooses to prepare consolidated financial statements will this satisfy section 379 of the CO? |
Answer
The requirement to prepare either company-level or consolidated financial statements is set out in section 379 of the CO. The Companies Registry’s FAQ clarifies that the intention of sections 379(2) and 379(3) is as follows:
(a) If a holding company is required to prepare consolidated financial statements then it is not required to prepare company-level financial statements; and
(b) If a holding company is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate (or a partially-owned subsidiary and its shareholders do not object to the preparation of company-level financial statements) then the company is not required to prepare consolidated financial statements.
(c) A wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate may prepare annual consolidated financial statements so long as the annual consolidated financial statements comply with sections 380 and 383 and in every respect with the requirements applicable to annual consolidated financial statements, in which event no company-level financial statements are required to be prepared by it.
(d) However, if the annual consolidated financial statements do not comply in every respect with the requirements applicable to annual consolidated financial statements, then the wholly owned subsidiary should prepare company-level financial statements for the purposes of compliance with section 379(1) and should regard any additional consolidated financial statements or consolidated financial information which it chooses to prepare in respect of the full financial year as “non statutory accounts” within the meaning of section 436. Further guidance on “non statutory accounts” can be found in Accounting Bulletin 6 issued by the HKICPA.
| Q46. | Question 1.3: Application of section 379 when the holding company was a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate for only part of the financial year If a holding company is wholly owned at the end of the year but was not wholly owned throughout the whole of the year is it required to prepare consolidated financial statements under the CO? [UPDATED] |
Answer
The requirement to prepare consolidated financial statements set out in section 379(2) applies to companies which are holding companies as at the end of the year. Section 379(3), as amended by the Companies (Amendment) (No. 2) Ordinance 2018 confirms that the holding company should be a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the end of the financial year. In practice this means that:
(a) If the company is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the end of the financial year then it can prepare company level financial statements to satisfy section 379(1) as per section 379(3)(a);
(b) If the company is not a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the end of the financial year then it must prepare consolidated financial statements in order to satisfy section 379(2) unless it is a partially owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the year-end date and the requirements of sections 379(3)(b) or 379(3)(c) have been satisfied in respect of notifying the shareholders with none of them objecting or obtaining all members' agreement in writing.
So far as compliance with section 379 is concerned, it is irrelevant whether or not the company was wholly owned or partially owned at any other time in the financial year.
| Q47. | Question 1.4: Consequences of the directors of a partially owned subsidiary of another body corporate missing the “six months before the year-end” deadline Section 379(3)(b) requires the directors of a partially owned subsidiary of another body corporate to notify members in writing at least 6 months before the end of the financial year if they do not intend to prepare consolidated financial statements and to allow a period for members to object. What should the directors and members do if the directors miss this deadline but the members still wish to support the directors’ intentions not to prepare consolidated financial statements? [UPDATED] |
Answer
Before 1 February 2019, if the directors miss the “six months before the year-end” deadline, then they must comply with the full requirements for that financial year i.e. they must prepare consolidated financial statements or seek legal advice on the consequences of failing to comply with the relevant statutory requirements. Failure to meet the six months deadline cannot be excused by the members as this is a statutory requirement.
After 1 February 2019, if the directors miss the "six months before the year-end" deadline under section 379(3)(b), the company is still entitled to the exemption if all the members agree in writing before the year-end that the company will not prepare consolidated financial statements (section 379(3)(c)).
Failing to meet this deadline in one financial year does not preclude the directors from taking steps to meet it in good time for the next financial year. However, it should be noted that the notification that is required under section 379(3)(b) and the agreement in writing that is required under section 379(3)(c) in order to claim exemption from the preparation of consolidated financial statements can only apply to one financial year. Therefore, every year either a fresh notification no later than 6 months before the end of the year or an agreement in writing is required if the directors are seeking to take advantage of section 379(3)(b) or section 379(3)(c) respectively.
| Q48. | Question 1.5: Identifying the relevant accounting standards when a holding company prepares company level financial statements in accordance with section 379(3) As discussed in questions 1.2 to 1.4, section 379(3) of the CO states that section 379(2) (being the requirement to prepare consolidated financial statements and the exemption from preparing company level financial statements) does not apply to a holding company in the following cases: “(a) if the company is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the end of the financial year; or (b) if— (i) the company is a partially owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the end of the financial year; (ii) at least 6 months before the end of the financial year, the directors notify the members in writing of the directors’ intention not to prepare consolidated statements for the financial year, and the notification does not relate to any other financial year; and (iii) as at a date falling 3 months before the end of the financial year, no member has responded to the notification by giving the directors a written request for the preparation of consolidated statements for the financial year; or (c) if— (i) the company is a partially owned subsidiary of another body corporate at the end of the financial year; and (ii) all members agree in writing before the end of the financial year that consolidated statements will not be prepared for the financial year, and the agreement does not relate to any other financial year. Paragraph 4(a) of HKFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements also sets out exemption criteria in respect of which entities are exempt from preparing consolidated financial statements. The criteria set out in paragraphs 4(a)(i)-(iii) of HKFRS 10 are typically met by any intermediate holding company which satisfies s379(3) of the CO. However, the criteria set out in paragraph 4(a)(iv) of HKFRS 10, which are that the company’s ultimate or any intermediate parent produces consolidated financial statements that are available for public use and comply with HKFRS Accounting Standards or IFRS Accounting Standards, may, or may not, be met depending on the situation of the company’s parent entity For example, the criteria in HKFRS 10.4(a)(iv) would not be met in the following situations: (a) the company is a wholly owned subsidiary of a private Hong Kong incorporated company which is not required to file its financial statements on public record; or (b) the company is a wholly owned subsidiary of a US parent which issues US GAAP financial statements but does not issue IFRS financial statements. In such cases which accounting standards are the “applicable accounting standards” for the purposes of complying with s380(4)(b) of the CO if the company follows the requirements of s379(3)? [UPDATED] |
Answer
As explained in the answers to questions 1.2 and 1.3 above, section 379 of the CO is explicit on which companies should prepare company level financial statements and which should prepare consolidated financial statements and these requirements take precedence over s380. That is, s379 determines which type of financial statements need to be prepared (company level or consolidated), and s380 then contains the “general requirements for financial statements” being the requirements for the contents of those financial statements (company level or consolidated) as are required to be prepared under s379.
On this basis, the “accounting standards applicable to the financial statements” referred to in s380(4)(b) are those relevant to the type of financial statements (company level or consolidated) required by s379. This is supported by the definition of “accounting standards applicable to the financial statements” set out in s357(4)(a):
“a reference to accounting standards applicable to any financial statements is a reference to accounting standards as are, in accordance with their terms, relevant to the company’s circumstances and to the financial statements”.
This means that the company, as a holding company, shall account for investments in subsidiaries either at cost or in accordance with HKFRS 9 in its company level financial statements if the company does not elect to account for the investments using the equity method as permitted by paragraph 10(c) of HKAS 27 Separate Financial Statements. In addition, as the financial statements are prepared in respect of the holding company only, the disclosures required by HKFRS 12 Disclosures of Interests in Other Entities are not applicable1.
In the case of a holding company preparing company level financial statements to satisfy section 379(1), the statement of compliance included in the financial statements in accordance with section 4 of Schedule 4 to the CO and paragraph 16 of HKAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements should clearly state that the financial statements comply with the accounting standards applicable to the company level financial statements only. For the avoidance of doubt, it is also advisable for the statement of compliance to explain why the company is not required to prepare consolidated financial statements and the disclosures required by HKFRS 12 are not made1 .
For example, the financial statements could include the following wording as the statement of compliance in the basis of preparation note (e.g. which is typically disclosed as note 1 to the financial statements):
Statement of compliance and basis of preparation
For the purposes of compliance with sections 379 and 380 of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), these financial statements have been prepared to present a true and fair view of the financial position and financial performance of the company only. Consequently, they have been prepared in accordance with all applicable HKFRS Accounting Standards (which term collectively includes Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards, Hong Kong Accounting Standards (HKASs) and Interpretations) issued by the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants, accounting principles generally accepted in Hong Kong and the requirements of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) that are relevant to the preparation of company level financial statements by an intermediate parent company.
[As the company is a holding company that is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate, it satisfies the exemption criteria set out in section 379(3)(a) of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), and is therefore not required to prepare consolidated financial statements.] OR [As the company is a holding company that is a partially owned subsidiary of another body corporate and has satisfied the exemption criteria set out in section 379(3)(b) of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), it is not required to prepare consolidated financial statements].
Given the above, these financial statements are not prepared for the purposes of compliance with HKFRS 10, Consolidated Financial Statements, so far as the preparation of consolidated financial statements is concerned. As a consequence, the financial statements do not give all the information required by HKFRS 10 about the economic activities of the group of which the company is the parent. Furthermore, as these financial statements are prepared in respect of the company only, HKFRS 12, Disclosures of Interests in Other Entities, does not apply to the financial statements1 .
The measurement basis used in the preparation of the financial statements is … [continue with the normal basis of preparation note]
Note that the illustrative wording directly above is only applicable if (a) the company falls within s379(3) of the CO; and (b) the company has complied with those HKFRS Accounting Standards which are applicable to the preparation of company level financial statements. It should be noted that if the company fails to prepare consolidated financial statements when required to do so under s379 and/or the financial statements that it prepares fail to comply with sections 380, 381(if applicable) or 383, then each director may be held to have committed an offence. Specifically;
• s379(4) states that a director has committed an offence and is liable to a fine of $300,000 if the director fails to take all reasonable steps to secure compliance with these sections; and
• s379(5) states a director has committed an offence and is liable to a fine of $300,000 and imprisonment for 12 months if the director wilfully fails to take all reasonable steps to secure compliance with these sections.
It should also be noted that the above approach to the statement of compliance is applicable only in the circumstances when the requirements of section 379 of the CO to prepare company level financial statements take precedence over the requirements of HKFRS 10.4(a). It is not expected that analogies to this guidance may be drawn to justify other departures from the requirements of HKFRS Accounting Standards, given the requirements of section 380(4)(b) of the CO and paragraphs 15 to 24 of HKAS 1.
Implications for the auditor’s report
Section 406(1) requires the auditor to state the auditor’s opinion on the following matters:
(a) whether the financial statements have been properly prepared in compliance with the CO; and
(b) in particular, whether the financial statements –
(i) in the case of annual financial statements of a company that does not fall within the reporting exemption for the financial year, give a true and fair view of the financial position and financial performance of the company as required by section 380; or
(ii) in the case of annual consolidated financial statements of a company that does not fall within the reporting exemption for the financial year, give a true and fair view of the financial position and financial performance of the company and all the subsidiary undertakings as required by section 380.
Therefore, although there may appear to be a difference in the criteria between HKFRS 10.4(a) and s379(3) as to which entities should prepare consolidated financial statements, it follows from s406(1) that it is not necessary for the auditor to qualify the auditor’s report on the financial statements of a Hong Kong incorporated company for non compliance with HKFRS 10 in this specific situation if all of the following conditions are met:
(a) the company falls within s379(3) of the CO and is therefore not required by the CO to prepare consolidated financial statements;
(b) the company has followed the requirements of s379(3) and has therefore prepared company level financial statements; and
(c) those company level financial statements comply with those HKFRS Accounting Standards which are applicable to the preparation of company level financial statements, as well as all other requirements of the CO relating to the contents of company level financial statements as set out in sections 380 and 383.
Consistent with this approach, an example unqualified auditor’s report under s405 of the CO would be as follows:
Independent auditor’s report to the members of [name of company]
(incorporated in Hong Kong with limited liability)
We have audited the financial statements of [name of company] (“the company”) set out on pages ........ to ........, which comprise the company’s statement of financial position as at [reporting date], the company’s statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income, statement of changes in equity and cash flow statement for the year then ended and a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information.
Directors’ responsibility for the financial statements
The directors of the company are responsible for the preparation of financial statements that give a true and fair view in accordance with applicable Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards issued by the HKICPA that are relevant to these financial statements and the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance and for such internal control as the directors determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Auditor’s responsibility
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. This report is made solely to you, as a body, in accordance with section 405 of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), and for no other purpose. We do not assume responsibility towards or accept liability to any other person for the contents of this report.
We conducted our audit in accordance with Hong Kong Standards on Auditing issued by the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Those standards require that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement.
An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgement, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation of the financial statements that give a true and fair view in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by the directors, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion.
Opinion
In our opinion, the financial statements give a true and fair view of the financial position of the company as at [reporting date] and of its financial performance and cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with the applicable Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards relevant to these financial statements and have been properly prepared in compliance with the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance.
1 According to paragraph 6(b) of HKFRS 12, HKFRS 12 does not apply to an entity’s separate financial statements to which HKAS 27 applies. However, if an entity has interests in unconsolidated structured entities and prepares separate financial statements as its only financial statements, it shall apply the requirements in paragraphs 24–31 of HKFRS 12 when preparing those separate financial statements.
| Q49. | Question 1.6: Identifying the relevant accounting standards when a holding company prepares company level financial statements in accordance with section 379(3) and the holding company has investments in joint ventures and/or associates If a holding company as described in question 1.5 has also investments in joint ventures and/or associates, which accounting standards are the “applicable accounting standards” for the purposes of complying with section 380(4)(b) of the CO if the company follows the requirements of section 379(3)? [UPDATED] |
Answer
As discussed in question 1.5, section 379(2) (being the requirement to prepare consolidated financial statements and the exemption from preparing company level financial statements) does not apply to a holding company that satisfies the requirements of section 379(3). For such a holding company that has also investments in joint ventures and/or associates and the criteria set out in paragraph 4(a)(iv) of HKFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements (being the exemption from preparing consolidated financial statements) are not met, on the same basis as described in question 1.5, the “accounting standards applicable to the financial statements” referred to in sections 380(4)(b) and 357(4)(a) are those relevant to the company’s circumstances and type of financial statements (company level or consolidated) required by section 379.
In the case of such a holding company that has also investments in joint ventures and/or associates and prepares company level financial statements to satisfy section 379(1), the “accounting standards applicable to the financial statements” referred to in sections 380(4)(b) and 357(4)(a) includes paragraph 10 of HKAS 27 Separate Financial Statements. This means that the company, as a holding company, shall account for investments in subsidiaries, joint ventures and/or associates either at cost or in accordance with HKFRS 9 Financial Instruments in its company level financial statements if the company does not elect to account for the investments using the equity method as permitted by paragraph 10(c) of HKAS 27. In such circumstances, HKAS 28 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures is not a relevant standard for a holding company’s company level financial statements. Furthermore, as the financial statements are prepared in respect of the holding company only, the disclosures required by HKFRS 12 Disclosures of Interests in Other Entities are not applicable1. For the avoidance of doubt, in these circumstances, it is advisable for the statement of compliance as illustrated in question 1.5 to expand by explaining why the company is also not required to account for its investments in joint ventures and/or associates using the equity method in the company level financial statements. For the same reason, the statement of compliance may also explain why the disclosures required by HKFRS 12 are not made1 .
For example, the financial statements could include the following illustrative wording as the statement of compliance in the basis of preparation note (e.g. which is typically disclosed as note 1 to the financial statements):
Statement of compliance and basis of preparation
For the purposes of compliance with sections 379 and 380 of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), these financial statements have been prepared to present a true and fair view of the financial position and financial performance of the company only. Consequently, they have been prepared in accordance with all applicable HKFRS Accounting Standards (which term collectively includes Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards, Hong Kong Accounting Standards (HKASs) and Interpretations) issued by the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants, accounting principles generally accepted in Hong Kong and the requirements of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622) that are relevant to the preparation of company level financial statements by an intermediate parent company.
[As the company is a holding company that is a wholly owned subsidiary of another body corporate, it satisfies the exemption criteria set out in section 379(3)(a) of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), and is therefore not required to prepare consolidated financial statements.] OR [As the company is a holding company that is a partially owned subsidiary of another body corporate and has satisfied the exemption criteria set out in section 379(3)(b) of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), it is not required to prepare consolidated financial statements].
Given the above, these financial statements are not prepared for the purposes of compliance with HKFRS 10, Consolidated Financial Statements, so far as the preparation of consolidated financial statements is concerned. In addition, for the purposes of preparation of company level financial statements, investments in joint ventures and associates have not been accounted for using the equity method which would otherwise be required by HKAS 28, Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures, in the preparation of consolidated financial statements and company level financial statements of a company that is not a holding company. As a consequence, the financial statements do not give all the information required by HKFRS 10 and HKAS 28 about the economic activities of the group of which the Company is the parent and investor. Furthermore, as these financial statements are prepared in respect of the company only, disclosures required by HKFRS 12, Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities, have not been made1 .
The measurement basis used in the preparation of the financial statements is … [continue with the normal basis of preparation note]
Note that the illustrative wording directly above is only applicable if (a) the company falls within section 379(3) of the CO; and (b) the company has complied with those HKFRS Accounting Standards which are applicable to the preparation of company level financial statements.
It should also be noted that the above approach to the statement of compliance is applicable only in the circumstances when the requirements of section 379 of the CO for a holding company to prepare company level financial statements take precedence over the requirements of HKFRS 10.4(a) and HKAS 28. It is not expected that analogies to this guidance may be drawn to justify other departures from the requirements of HKFRS Accounting Standards , given the requirements of section 380(4)(b) of the CO and paragraphs 15 to 24 of HKAS 1.
Implications for the auditor’s report
On the same basis as explained in question 1.5, although there may appear to be a difference in the criteria between HKFRS 10.4(a) and section 379(3) as to which entities should prepare consolidated financial statements, it follows from section 406(1) that it is not necessary for the auditor to qualify the auditor’s report on the financial statements of a Hong Kong incorporated company for non compliance with HKFRS 10 in this specific situation if all of the following conditions are met:
(a) the company falls within section 379(3) of the CO and is therefore not required by the CO to prepare consolidated financial statements;
(b) the company has followed the requirements of section 379(3) and has therefore prepared company level financial statements; and
(c) those company level financial statements comply with those HKFRS Accounting Standards which are applicable to the preparation of company level financial statements, as well as all other requirements of the CO relating to the contents of company level financial statements as set out in sections 380 and 383.
Consistent with this approach, an example unqualified auditor’s report under section 405 of the CO would be the one as illustrated in question 1.5.
1 According to paragraph 6(b) of HKFRS 12, HKFRS 12 does not apply to an entity’s separate financial statements to which HKAS 27 applies. However, if an entity has interests in unconsolidated structured entities and prepares separate financial statements as its only financial statements, it shall apply the requirements in paragraphs 24–31 of HKFRS 12 when preparing those separate financial statements.
| Q50. | Question 1.7: Identifying the relevant accounting standards when a company that is not a holding company prepares financial statements in accordance with section 379(1) and the company has direct investments in joint ventures and/or associates If a company that has no subsidiary undertakings and is, therefore, not a holding company, which accounting standards are the “applicable accounting standards” for the purposes of complying with section 380(4)(b) of the CO, so far as the accounting for investments in joint ventures and/or associates is concerned? [UPDATED] |
Answer
As the company is not a holding company, it does not fall within the scope of sections 379(2) and (3) of the CO. Instead, the company falls within the scope of section 379(1) and has to prepare company level financial statements. Paragraphs 10(a) and (b) of HKAS 27 Separate Financial Statements (being investments in joint ventures and associates accounted for at cost or in accordance with HKFRS 9 Financial Instruments) are not applicable to the company level financial statements of a company that is not a holding company. Accordingly, the approach to the statement of compliance as discussed in questions 1.5 and 1.6 cannot be applied by analogy. The “accounting standards applicable to the financial statements” referred to in sections 380(4)(b) and 357(4)(a) include HKAS 28 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures, which requires the company (which is not a holding company) to account for its investments in joint ventures and associates using the equity method, unless the exemption criteria as set out in paragraphs 17 to 19 of HKAS 28 are met.
| Q51. | Question 2.1: Signing of company level statement of financial position in consolidated financial statements Does section 387 of the CO (“Statement of financial position to be approved and signed”) apply to company level statement of financial position of the holding company included in the notes to its consolidated financial statements in accordance with Schedule 4 to the CO? |
Answer
The Companies Registry’s FAQ confirms that the answer is yes. Section 387 of the CO states that the directors must sign a statement of financial position that “forms part of any financial statements”. As Schedule 4 to the CO requires the company level statement of financial position of the holding company to be included in the notes to its consolidated financial statements, it follows that this is a statement of financial position that falls under the scope of section 387. It must therefore be approved by the directors and signed on their behalf by 2 directors, or in the case of a company having only one director, by that director, despite the fact that the directors have already approved the entire set of consolidated financial statements (which includes notes to the consolidated financial statements) by signing on the consolidated statement of financial position.
| Q52. | Question 2.2: Location of the company level statement of financial position of the holding company in its consolidated financial statements Can the company level statement of financial position of the holding company continue to be shown as a primary statement in its consolidated financial statements? |
Answer
No, Schedule 4 to the CO requires the company level statement of financial position of the holding company to be included in the notes to its consolidated financial statements.
Note: Schedule 4 is not explicit as to where in the notes the company level statement of financial position should be placed. If the directors wish to draw attention to the company level statement of financial position of the holding company and yet comply with a literal interpretation of Schedule 4, they would be advised to include the statement as note 1 or otherwise in a prominent position in the notes to the consolidated financial statements.
| Q53. | Question 2.3: Meaning of “company” in the Companies (Disclosure of Information about Benefits of Directors) Regulation (C(DIBD)R or Cap. 622G) When preparing consolidated financial statements, what is the meaning of “the company” in the C(DIBD)R? Is it just the holding company or does it also include the subsidiary undertakings? |
Answer
The reference to “the company” in the C(DIBD)R refers to the company preparing the financial statements. For example, section 15 of the C(DIBD)R refers to financing transactions (i.e. loans, quasi-loans, credit transactions etc) “entered into by a subsidiary undertaking of the company for a person who was at any time during the year a director of the company” (emphasis added). In this requirement, the reference is to transactions benefiting a person who is a director of the company that is preparing the financial statements. It is not referring to directors of that company’s subsidiary undertaking, even if the company is preparing consolidated financial statements. There is therefore no need to extend the requirements in the C(DIBD)R to transactions involving subsidiary undertakings of the company or their directors unless explicitly required to do so by the C(DIBD)R.
| Q54. | Question 2.4: Meaning of “director” in the Companies (Disclosure of Information about Benefits of Directors) Regulation (C(DIBD)R or Cap. 622G) When preparing consolidated financial statements, what is the meaning of “director” in the C(DIBD)R? Is it just the directors of the holding company or does it also include the directors of subsidiary undertakings? |
Answer
The C(DIBD)R sets out explicit disclosure requirements relating to directors’ benefits which should be interpreted literally. For example, Part 2 of the C(DIBD)R refers to a person’s services as a director of the company or, while a director of the company, as a director of a subsidiary undertaking. In these requirements the reference to “the company” refers to the company preparing the financial statements and references to “director” should be construed as a references to a director of that company only. There is no requirement to extend these disclosures to directors of subsidiary undertakings of the company unless explicitly required to do so by the C(DIBD)R, even if the company is preparing consolidated financial statements.
| Q61. | Question 5.1: Whether to consolidate subsidiary undertakings of an investment entity in order to comply with section 381(1) of the CO Paragraphs 31-32 of HKFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements prohibit an investment entity from consolidating its non-service subsidiaries and require instead that these investments are recognised at fair value through profit or loss (FVTPL). Is it acceptable under the CO for the reporting entity to comply with this requirement in HKFRS 10, given that section 381(1) of the CO states that the annual consolidated financial statements must include all subsidiary undertakings of the company (unless immaterial in accordance with section 381(3))? |
Answer
Yes, but it requires invoking the true and fair override in section 380(6) of the CO to override the requirement to comply with section 381(1), as follows:
Section 380(4)(b) of the CO gives statutory backing to HKFRS Accounting Standards by requiring the financial statements to comply with accounting standards issued by the HKICPA. In addition, section 380(6) states that if compliance with s380(4)(a) (i.e. compliance with any other requirements of the CO) would be inconsistent with giving a true and fair view then the financial statements must depart from those requirements to the extent necessary for the financial statements to give a true and fair view.
Given this, it is therefore both acceptable and necessary for an investment entity to exclude its non-service subsidiary undertakings from consolidation when required to do so by HKFRS 10 but in order to do so it is necessary for that entity to override section 381(1) by invoking the true and fair override set out in section 380(6).
When the true and fair override is invoked, section 380(6) requires the financial statements to provide the reasons for, and the particulars and effect of, the departure. For example, in order to satisfy this requirement the consolidated financial statements of an investment entity could include the following disclosure in the statement of compliance note (e.g. which is typically disclosed in note 1 to the financial statements):
Statement of compliance
These annual consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with all applicable HKFRS Accounting Standards, which collective term includes all applicable individual Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards, Hong Kong Accounting Standards (HKASs) and Interpretations issued by the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants (HKICPA) and accounting principles generally accepted in Hong Kong.
These financial statements also comply with the applicable requirements of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), with the exception of section 381 which requires a company to include all its subsidiary undertakings (within the meaning of Schedule 1 to Cap. 622) in the company's annual consolidated financial statements. Section 381 is inconsistent with the requirements of HKFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements so far as they apply to non-service subsidiaries of an investment entity, which are specifically required to be excluded from the consolidated financial statements and should instead be measured at fair value through profit or loss. For this reason, under the provisions of section 380(6) the company has departed from section 381 and has excluded certain subsidiary undertakings from the consolidated financial statements as disclosed in note yy.*
A summary of the significant accounting policies adopted by the group is set out below.
* The additional note disclosure would need to satisfy the requirement in section 380(6) to give particulars and the effect of the departure from section 381(1) – in this regard, the disclosure of the fair value of the investee(s) and the amounts recognized in the statement of comprehensive income for the year for the investee(s), in addition to the disclosures which have been made which satisfy paragraphs 9A and 19A to 19G of HKFRS 12 Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities and paragraphs 91 to 99 of HKFRS 13 Fair Value Measurement should generally be sufficient.
Note: there is no need for the auditor to refer to a true and fair override under section 380(6) in the auditor’s report, unless the auditor disagrees with the basis of the override or considers that the disclosures are deficient compared to the requirements of section 380(6). Provided that the auditor is satisfied in respect of these matters, then the override will have no impact on the auditor’s ability to provide an unqualified opinion on compliance with the Companies Ordinance.
| Q62. | Question 5.2: True and fair override disclosures to be made by an investment entity with no service subsidiaries The answer to question 5.1 refers to over-riding section 381 by excluding one or more subsidiaries from the consolidated financial statements. But what if an investment entity with material subsidiaries carried at FVTPL does not have any subsidiaries which provide services that fall under paragraph 32 of HKFRS 10 and therefore does not prepare consolidated financial statements? What disclosures should be made in this case under section 380(6) in respect of invoking the true and fair override of the CO? |
Answer
In this case, the true and fair override is an override of section 379(2) (preparation of consolidated financial statements) of the CO, rather than section 381(1) (subsidiary undertakings included in annual consolidated financial statements), and the disclosures to satisfy section 380(6) will need to reflect this circumstance. For example, in order to satisfy this requirement the company-level financial statements of an investment entity could include the following disclosure in the statement of compliance note (e.g. which is typically disclosed in note 1 to the financial statements):
Statement of compliance
These annual financial statements have been prepared in accordance with all applicable HKFRS Accounting Standards, which collective term includes all applicable individual Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards, Hong Kong Accounting Standards (HKASs) and Interpretations issued by the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants (HKICPA) and accounting principles generally accepted in Hong Kong.
These financial statements also comply with the applicable requirements of the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622), with the exception of section 379(2) which requires a company that is a holding company to prepare consolidated financial statements. Section 379(2) is inconsistent with the requirements of HKFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements so far as they apply to non-service subsidiaries of an investment entity, which are specifically required to be excluded from the consolidated financial statements and should instead be measured at fair value through profit or loss. For this reason, under the provisions of section 380(6) the company has departed from section 379(2) and has not prepared consolidated financial statements because all of its subsidiaries are excluded. The investments in all of its subsidiaries are measured at fair value through profit or loss, as disclosed in note yy.*
A summary of the significant accounting policies adopted by the company is set out below.
* The additional note disclosure would need to satisfy the requirement in section 380(6) to give particulars and the effect of the departure from section 379(2). In this regard, the disclosure of the fair value of the investee(s) and the amounts recognized in the statement of comprehensive income for the year for the investee(s), in addition to the disclosures which have been made which satisfy paragraphs 9A and 19A to 19G of HKFRS 12 Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities and paragraphs 91 to 99 of HKFRS 13 Fair Value Measurement should generally be sufficient.
Note: there is no need for the auditor to refer to a true and fair override under section 380(6) in the auditor’s report, unless the auditor disagrees with the basis of the override or considers that the disclosures are deficient compared to the requirements of section 380(6). Provided that the auditor is satisfied in respect of these matters, then the override will have no impact on the auditor’s ability to provide an unqualified opinion on compliance with the Companies Ordinance.
These Q&As have been developed by the HKICPA's Companies Ordinance Project Advisory Panel and are endorsed by the HKICPA's Financial Reporting Standards Committee (FRSC). These Q&As will be updated from time to time to provide references on financial reporting related application issues pertaining to the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance Cap. 622.
These Q&As are non-mandatory in nature and intended for general reference only. Users of these Q&As should consider taking their own legal advice if in doubt as to their obligations under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance.
The HKICPA, the FRSC and the Panel do not accept responsibility or liability, and disclaim all responsibility and liability, in respect of the Q&As and any consequences that may arise from any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any materials in the Q&As.
All references to Parts, Divisions, Sub-divisions, Schedules and sections in the questions and answers are to the CO Cap. 622, unless otherwise indicated.
Last revision date: 21 September 2018
| Q63. | Sections 678 to 686 of the CO Cap. 622 allow two or more companies to be amalgamated into a single legal entity without involving the court ("court-free amalgamation") in the following cases: (a) A holding company may amalgamate with one or more of its wholly owned subsidiaries (a vertical amalgamation) and continue as one company (amalgamated company). (b) Two or more wholly-owned subsidiaries of a holding company may amalgamate (a horizontal amalgamation) and continue as one company (amalgamated company). In a vertical amalgamation, the shares of each of the amalgamating subsidiaries will be cancelled (section 680). In a horizontal amalgamation, the shares of all but one of the amalgamating companies will be cancelled (section 681) only leaving in issue the shares of the amalgamated company. Section 678(2) of the CO Cap. 622 states that “A cancellation of shares under this Division is not a reduction of share capital for the purposes of Part 5.” What would be the share capital of the amalgamated company after the amalgamation? |
Answer
The Companies Registry’s FAQ confirms that there is no requirement under Division 3 of Part 13 of the CO Cap. 622 for an amalgamated company to increase its share capital upon amalgamation. In other words the CO Cap. 622 does not require the amalgamated company to increase the amount of its share capital by the amount of the share capital of the amalgamating companies whose shares are cancelled and which cease to exist as entities separate from the amalgamated company. Therefore, the share capital of the amalgamated company will be the amount of share capital of the company whose shares are not cancelled.
If the amalgamated company chooses to increase its share capital above this amount by, for example, capitalizing any of the reserves that have arisen as a result of the amalgamation, then this should be regarded as an increase in accordance with section 170(2)(c) and therefore the notification and filing requirements of section 171 apply.
If the amalgamated company does not choose to increase its share capital then the impact of the amalgamation on the amalgamated company’s statement of financial position is illustrated in the following examples:
Vertical Amalgamation
Using example 1 below, assume Company A wholly owns two subsidiaries, Company B and Company C, since the date that these subsidiaries were incorporated. Company A decides to amalgamate with Company B and continue as one company. Before amalgamation, Company A has $1 share capital and Company B has $1 million share capital. Upon amalgamation1 , the share capital of the amalgamated company is $1, as the $1 million Company B share capital is eliminated against the cost of investment in Company B which was previously recorded in Company A’s statement of financial position. Company B ceases to exist as an entity separate from the amalgamated Company A and its shares are cancelled.
(i) Before amalgamation: Consolidation
| Holding company A $ |
Subsidiary company B $ |
Subsidiary company C $ |
Consolidation adjustments $ |
Consolidated group $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiaries | 1,000,100 | - | - | (1,000,100) | - |
| Other net assets | 800,000 | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | 2,050,000 | |
| Total net assets | 1,800,100 | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | (1,000,100) | 2,050,000 |
| Share capital | 1 | 1,000,000 | 100 | (1,000,100) | 1 |
| Retained earnings | 1,800,099 | 200,000 | 49,900 | 2,049,999 | |
| Total equity | 1,800,100 | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | (1,000,100) | 2,050,000 |
To achieve the amalgamation, Company A needs to make the same journal entries into its own books to absorb B as it would have done on consolidation immediately prior to the amalgamation. As court-free amalgamation is a new concept for Hong Kong, there is no specific accounting guidance. However, as all court-free amalgamations can only occur within wholly-owned groups under the CO Cap. 622, the most relevant guidance is found in Accounting Guideline 5 Merger Accounting for Common Control Combinations issued by the HKICPA. This Guideline sets out a generally accepted methodology for accounting for two or more entities as if they had always been part of the same group as from the date that common control of these entities first occurred. This includes bringing in all assets and liabilities at their carrying amounts in the previous financial statements and restating the comparative amounts to include the combined history of the entities. This can be seen from the following amalgamation workings:
(ii) Amalgamation: Workings
| Before amalgamation: Holding company A $ |
Before amalgamation: Subsidiary company B $ |
Amalgamation adjustments $ |
After amalgamation: Amalgamated holding company A $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiaries | 1,000,100 | - | (1,000,000) | 100 |
| Other net assets | 800,000 | 1,200,000 | 2,000,000 | |
| Total net assets | 1,800,100 | 1,200,000 | (1,000,000) | 2,000,100 |
| Share capital | 1 | 1,000,000 | (1,000,000) | 1 |
| Retained earnings | 1,800,099 | 200,000 | 2,000,099 | |
| Total equity | 1,800,100 | 1,200,000 | (1,000,000) | 2,000,100 |
(iii) After amalgamation: Consolidation
| Amalgamated holding company A $ |
Subsidiary company C $ |
Consolidation adjustments $ |
Consolidated group $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiary | 100 | - | (100) | - |
| Other net assets | 2,000,000 | 50,000 | 2,050,000 | |
| Total net assets | 2,000,100 | 50,000 | (100) | 2,050,000 |
| Share capital | 1 | 100 | (100) | 1 |
| Retained earnings | 2,000,099 | 49,900 | 2,049,999 | |
| Total equity | 2,000,100 | 50,000 | (100) | 2,050,000 |
Horizontal Amalgamation
Using the same facts as in example 1, assume that instead of a vertical amalgamation, Companies B and C decide to amalgamate horizontally, where the shares of Company B will be cancelled and the shares of Company C will not be cancelled. Before the amalgamation, Company B has $1 million share capital and Company C has $100 share capital. Upon amalgamation2 , the share capital of the amalgamated company is $100, as the shares of Company B are cancelled. The $1 million Company B share capital is credited to the reserves of the amalgamated Company C which represents a capital contribution from Company A as the amalgamated Company C receives the net assets of Company B for nil consideration. From the effective date of amalgamation, Company B ceases to exist as an entity separate from the amalgamated Company C.
(i) Before amalgamation: Consolidation
| Holding company A $ |
Subsidiary company B $ |
Subsidiary company C $ |
Consolidation adjustments $ |
Consolidated group $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiaries | 1,000,100 | - | - | (1,000,100) | - |
| Other net assets | 800,000 | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | 2,050,000 | |
| Total net assets | 1,800,100 | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | (1,000,100) | 2,050,000 |
| Share capital | 1 | 1,000,000 | 100 | (1,000,100) | 1 |
| Retained earnings | 1,800,099 | 200,000 | 49,900 | 2,049,999 | |
| Total equity | 1,800,100 | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | (1,000,100) | 2,050,000 |
To achieve the amalgamation, Company C needs to make the journal entries into its own books to absorb the net assets of B. This can be seen from the following amalgamation workings:
(ii) Amalgamation: Workings
| Before amalgamation: Subsidiary company B $ |
Before amalgamation: Subsidiary company C $ |
Amalgamation adjustments $ |
After amalgamation: Amalgamated subsidiary company C $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiaries | - | - | - | |
| Other net assets | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | 1,250,000 | |
| Total net assets | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | 1,250,000 | |
| Share capital | 1,000,000 | 100 | (1,000,000) | 100 |
| Other reserves | - | - | 1,000,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Retained earnings | 200,000 | 49,900 | 249,900 | |
| Total equity | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | 1,250,000 |
(iii) After amalgamation: Consolidation
| Holding company A $ |
Amalgamated subsidiary company C $ |
Consolidation adjustments $ |
Consolidated group $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiary | 1,000,100 | - | (1,000,100) | - |
| Other net assets | 800,000 | 1,250,000 | 2,050,000 | |
| Total net assets | 1,800,100 | 1,250,000 | (1,000,100) | 2,050,000 |
| Share capital | 1 | 100 | (100) | 1 |
| Other reserves | - | 1,000,000 | (1,000,000) | - |
| Retained earnings | 1,800,099 | 249,900 | 2,049,999 | |
| Total equity | 1,800,100 | 1,250,000 | (1,000,100) | 2,050,000 |
Extended Question 1 (modified): What if the shares of Company C, instead of Company B, will be cancelled in the horizontal amalgamation?
Example 2 above shows the impact on the financial statements if Company B’s shares will be cancelled in a horizontal amalgamation with Company C. If instead Company C’s shares are cancelled (i.e. Company B’s shares are not cancelled) and, consequently, Company C ceases to exist as an entity separate from the amalgamated Company B, the amalgamation workings would be the same as example 2 but the results would be different. Example 3 below illustrate the amalgamation workings if Company C's shares are cancelled as follows:
(i) Amalgamation: Workings
| Before amalgamation: Subsidiary company B $ |
Before amalgamation: Subsidiary company C $ |
Amalgamation adjustments $ |
After amalgamation: Amalgamated subsidiary company B $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiaries | - | - | - | |
| Other net assets | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | 1,250,000 | |
| Total net assets | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | 1,250,000 | |
| Share capital | 1,000,000 | 100 | (100) | 1,000,000 |
| Other reserves | - | - | 100 | 100 |
| Retained earnings | 200,000 | 49,900 | 249,900 | |
| Total equity | 1,200,000 | 50,000 | 1,250,000 |
(ii) After amalgamation: Consolidation
| Holding company A $ | Amalgamated subsidiary company B $ |
Consolidation adjustments $ |
Consolidated group $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiary |
1,000,100 |
- | (1,000,100) | - |
| Other net assets | 800,000 | 1,250,000 | 2,050,000 | |
| Total net assets | 1,800,100 | 1,250,000 | (1,000,100) | 2,050,000 |
| Share capital | 1 | 1,000,000 | (1,000,000) |
1 |
| Other reserves | - | 100 | (100) | - |
| Retained earnings | 1,800,099 | 249,900 | 2,049,999 | |
| Total equity | 1,800,100 | 1,250,000 | (1,000,100) | 2,050,000 |
Footnote:
1 In accordance with section 685(3)(c) of the CO Cap. 622, on the effective date of an amalgamation, the amalgamated company succeeds to all the property, rights and privileges, and all the liabilities and obligations, of each amalgamating company. Consequently, the net assets of each of the amalgamating company or companies as at the effective date of amalgamation will be included in the amalgamated company’s statement of financial position.
2 In accordance with section 685(3)(c) of the CO Cap. 622, on the effective date of an amalgamation, the amalgamated company succeeds to all the property, rights and privileges, and all the liabilities and obligations, of each amalgamating company. Consequently, the net assets of each of the amalgamating company or companies as at the effective date of amalgamation will be included in the amalgamated company’s statement of financial position.
| Q64. | In a horizontal amalgamation, the share capital of each of the amalgamating company or companies whose shares are cancelled and which cease to exist as separate entities after the amalgamation is recorded in a reserve in shareholders’ funds outside share capital of the amalgamated company. Is this reserve, arising from amalgamation, available for distribution? |
Answer
Per section 678(2) of the CO Cap. 622, a cancellation of shares under Division 3 of Part 13 of the CO Cap. 622 is not a reduction of share capital for the purposes of Part 5. As a result, section 214(1) of Part 53 (Transactions in relation to Share Capital) of the CO Cap. 622 does not apply to amalgamations under Division 3 of Part 13. Instead, the general principles of Part 6 of the CO Cap. 622 (Distribution of Profits and Assets) apply when determining whether a reserve arising from cancellation of shares under Division 3 of Part 13 or court-free amalgamation can be regarded as realised profit and therefore available for distribution.
For example, if the share capital amount of an amalgamating company whose shares are cancelled was originally recorded on the issue of shares for cash, then the amount of reserve in the amalgamated company’s statement of financial position after amalgamation, which is derived from that original transaction, would be regarded as realised. In example 2 this would mean that $1,000,000 would be available for distribution, whereas in example 3 the amount is only $100, assuming in each case that the share capital was originally contributed in the form of cash or other qualifying forms of consideration.
However, if the amalgamating company’s share capital amount originated from the issue of shares for a non-cash asset, which continues to be held by the amalgamated company after the amalgamation, then the amount of the reserve attributable to the amalgamating company’s share capital will not be regarded as realised until that non-cash asset is impaired, depreciated or disposed of for qualifying consideration.
More guidance on forms of qualifying consideration and determining whether a profit is realised or unrealised can be found in Accounting Bulletin 4 issued by the HKICPA.
Footnote:
3 Section 214(1) states that "If a company reduces its share capital in accordance with this Division, a reserve arising from the reduction is to be regarded for the purposes of Part 6 as realized profit"
| Q65. | In a horizontal amalgamation should the original retained earnings of each of the amalgamating company or companies, whose shares are cancelled and which cease to exist as separate entities after the amalgamation, continue to be a source of profits available for distribution? |
Answer
In a horizontal amalgamation, the original retained earnings of the amalgamating company or companies, whose shares are cancelled, continue to be a source of realised profit under Part 6, to the extent the amount of the retained earnings were realised prior to amalgamation.
However, as a reminder, distributable reserves are assessed on a collective basis at the company level. If one of the amalgamating companies had accumulated realised losses at the date of the amalgamation, and the other amalgamating company had accumulated realised profits at that date, then the distributable reserves of the amalgamated company would need to be computed on a net basis. This is in accordance with section 297 of the CO Cap. 622.
For example, Companies F and G are fellow subsidiaries and decide to amalgamate. Company F's shares are not cancelled and Company G ceases to exist as an entity separate from the amalgamated Company F. At the time of the amalgamation, Company F had retained earnings of $50,000, all of which were realised and Company G had accumulated losses of $20,000, all of which were realised. On the effective date of the amalgamation, the distributable reserves of the amalgamated Company F will be only $30,000 plus any amount of the “other reserve” arising from the amalgamation, which is distributable per the answer to question 2 above.
More guidance on determining whether a profit is realised or unrealised can be found in Accounting Bulletin 4 issued by the HKICPA.
Answer
In a vertical amalgamation, the answer depends on whether at the time of the amalgamation the reserves were pre-acquisition reserves or post-acquisition reserves.
Pre-acquisition reserves of a subsidiary are reserves that are eliminated against the cost of investment whenever the holding company prepares consolidated financial statements, which include the wholly owned subsidiary. Post-acquisition reserves of a subsidiary are those reserves which are not eliminated on consolidation.
The answer to question 3 applies only in respect of post-acquisition reserves in a vertical amalgamation. Any pre-acquisition reserves will be eliminated as part of the journals to be made at the time of the amalgamation to eliminate the cost of investment. This is illustrated in the following example:
Company H acquired 100% of Company S’s shares three years ago for a consideration of $1,000,000. At the date of acquisition Company S’s statement of financial position was as follows:
| Company S $ | |
|---|---|
| Total net assets (at fair value) | 800,000 |
| Share capital | 1,000 |
| Retained earnings | 799,000 |
| Total equity | 800,000 |
For the purpose of this illustration the fair values and book amounts of Company S’s identifiable assets and its liabilities are assumed to be the same. Consequently, the consolidation journal to reflect the acquisition of subsidiary Company S into Company H’s consolidated financial statements at the date of acquisition is as follows:
(i) Before Amalgamation: Consolidation immediately after acquiring Company S
| Holding company H $ |
Subsidiary company S $ |
Consolidation adjustments $ |
Consolidated group $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiary | 1,000,000 | - | (1,000,000) | - |
| Goodwill | - | - | 200,000 | 200,000 |
| Other net assets | 2,000,000 | 800,000 | 2,800,000 | |
| Total net assets | 3,000,000 | 800,000 | (800,000) | 3,000,000 |
| Share capital | 100,000 | 1,000 | (1,000) | 100,000 |
| Retained earnings | 2,900,000 | 799,000 | (799,000) | 2,900,000 |
| Total equity | 3,000,000 | 800,000 | (800,000) | 3,000,000 |
In the three years since acquisition, subsidiary Company S accumulated $300,000 of retained profits (all of which were realised for the purpose of this illustration); none of which were distributed to Company H.
Company H decides to vertically amalgamate with subsidiary Company S. Immediately prior to the amalgamation the financial position of the group was as follows:
(ii) Before amalgamation: Consolidation three years after acquisition
| Holding company H $ |
Subsidiary company S $ |
Consolidation adjustments $ |
Consolidated group $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiary | 1,000,000 | - | (1,000,000) | - |
| Goodwill | - | - | 200,000 | 200,000 |
| Other net assets | 2,000,000 | 1,100,000 | 3,100,000 | |
| Total net assets | 3,000,000 | 1,100,000 | (800,000) | 3,300,000 |
| Share capital | 100,000 | 1,000 | (1,000) | 100,000 |
| Retained earnings | 2,900,000 | 1,099,000 | (799,000) | 3,200,000 |
| Total equity | 3,000,000 | 1,100,000 | (800,000) | 3,300,000 |
To achieve the amalgamation, Company H needs to make the same journal entries into its own books to absorb subsidiary Company S as it would have done on consolidation immediately prior to the amalgamation. This can be seen from the following amalgamation workings:
(iii) Amalgamation: Workings
| Before amalgamation: Holding company H $ |
Before amalgamation: Subsidiary company S $ |
Amalgamation adjustments $ |
After amalgamation: Amalgamated company H $ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in subsidiary | 1,000,000 | - | (1,000,000) | - |
| Goodwill | - | - | 200,000 | 200,000 |
| Other net assets | 2,000,000 | 1,100,000 | 3,100,000 | |
| Total net assets | 3,000,000 | 1,100,000 | (800,000) | 3,300,000 |
| Share capital | 100,000 | 1,000 | (1,000) | 100,000 |
| Retained earnings | 2,900,000 | 1,099,000 | (799,000) | 3,200,000 |
| Total equity | 3,000,000 | 1,100,000 | (800,000) | 3,300,000 |
After the amalgamation, Company H no longer needs to prepare consolidated financial statements as it is no longer a holding company. The amounts in the last column of the table above ("After amalgamation: Amalgamated company H") are reported in amalgamated Company H's standalone financial statements, including the goodwill recognised on acquisition of Company S, as if it had acquired an unincorporated business. The realised profits of amalgamated Company H immediately after the amalgamation consist of the accumulated earnings of Company H ($2,900,000) and the post-acquisition accumulated earnings of Company S ($300,000) i.e. a net amount of $3,200,0004 as shown above.
Footnote:
4 For the purposes of this illustration, it is assumed that all the retained earnings of Company H and the post-acquisition earnings of Company S are realised profits. In reality this may not be the case. Therefore, an analysis may be needed to determine the extent to which profits and losses within amalgamated Company H’s retained earnings are realised in accordance with the guidance in Accounting Bulletin 4 issued by the HKICPA.

