Revenue recognition for prior-period operating transactions based on objective evidence
First written in FY2016-Q3. 4 of 5 entries say "Reframed", first in FY2021. Latest entry: FY2023.
Asulina moved to the "Worse" side of this theme in 2022.
0 other companies' latest entry also says "Reframed".
- FY2023ReframedAnnual report
「The performance obligation is satisfied at a point in time when the property is delivered, and revenue is recognized at the time of delivery.」
The explanation has been organized around the current accounting policy, which defines the performance obligations and timing of revenue recognition for solar power plant sales, electricity sales and product sales, rather than the prior-period revenue recognition issue. - FY2022-Q2ReframedAnnual report
「Only the former representative director and president understood the overall solar power generation business and failed to make appropriate reports to the Board of Directors.」
The issue became more specific as an accounting and transaction-control problem, changing from the previous explanation of revenue recognition for prior-period transactions based on objective evidence to one involving inadequate reporting on the solar power generation business and inappropriate accounting, including recognition of sales that did not meet the requirements for realization of revenue. - FY2022-Q1ReframedAnnual report
「We received the investigation report from the committee dated 28 January 2022 and corrected prior-period financial results on 18 February 2022 to reflect facts identified by the committee's investigation.」
The explanation changed from the previous account of recognizing revenue for prior-period transactions based on objective evidence to an explanation that prior-period financial results were corrected to reflect the findings of the Special Investigation Committee's investigation. - FY2021ReframedAnnual report
「After receiving an external indication that, for ¥280 million in revenue from the sale of rights to an idle solar power plant sold by the company in the fiscal year ended August 2017, the timing of revenue recognition should have been the fiscal year ended August 2019, the company established a Special Investigation Committee comprising 3 independent outside experts. The resulting investigation found that the accounting treatment for the timing of revenue recognition was incorrect.」
The explanation changed from the previous account of recognizing revenue for prior-period transactions based on objective evidence to an explanation that an error in the timing of revenue recognition had been identified through an external indication and investigation, requiring correction of prior-period financial results. - FY2016-Q3First statedAnnual report
「For the operating transactions concerned, revenue had been recognized by the third quarter of the fiscal year ended August 2016 for transactions involving the sale destination and final power generator that were deemed complete based on objective evidence, including product delivery status, real estate registration information and confirmation of contracts.」
The company described its practice of recognizing revenue for completed transactions based on objective evidence such as product delivery status, real estate registration information and contracts.