• Home
  • About
  • Subscribe
  • LATIF
  • Conferences
  • Dashboard
  • Edit My Profile
  • Log In
  • Logout
  • Register
  • Edit this post

Room 151

  • 151 BRIEF

    What's New?

  • Inflation ‘biggest concern for LGPS professionals’

    May 20, 2022

  • LGA calls for government support as regulators face staffing issues

    May 19, 2022

  • WMCA signs £4bn investment agreement with L&G

    May 18, 2022

  • Bill will give UK Infrastructure Bank power to lend directly to councils

    May 18, 2022

  • £400bn pension group collaborates on climate transition initiative

    May 17, 2022

  • CIPFA rejects proposal for vote on publication of fraud hub report

    May 17, 2022

  • Treasury
  • Technical
  • Funding
  • Resources
  • LGPS
  • Development
  • 151 News
  • Blogs
    • David Green
    • Agent 151
    • Dan Bates
    • Richard Harbord
    • Stephen Sheen
    • James Bevan
    • Steve Bishop
    • Cllr John Clancy
    • David Crum
    • Graham Liddell
    • Ian O’Donnell
    • Jackie Shute
  • Interviews
  • Briefs

Back to basics: What’s the point of accounting for depreciation?

0
  • by Guest
  • in Blogs · Resources · Technical
  • — 14 Nov, 2018

Local authorities, just like private businesses, have to account for the depreciation of their assets. Conrad Hall asks whether the current rules dictate inappropriate financial reporting.

What (with apologies to Monty Python) has accounting for depreciation ever done for local government?

Not much, one might argue.

Apart from compliance with accounting standards, and hence the corresponding unqualified opinions on our accounts.

Apart from the generally high regard in which financial management in the sector is held – which flows in part from following proper accounting practices.

Apart from, you could even try to argue, helping to sort out the mess back in the 1980s and early 90s, when some authorities almost routinely had years of unaudited accounts lying open.

Anyway, complying with the standards is a necessary but not sufficient condition for proper accounting.

If you really want proper accounting, then you should also want really proper accounting.

That means not just that you follow the standards – you also have to be satisfied that the standards are the right ones to apply.

As fixed asset accounting – and the associated depreciation charges and their subsequent reversal – takes time to calculate and tends to obscure the clarity of the presentation of local authority financial statements, it is fair to ask why we do it, not in the narrow sense of “because we have to” but by going back to first principles.

Distorted aims

This principles-based approach is necessary and, I would argue, overdue.

The discussion around the simplification of local authority accounts has to date largely focused on important but ultimately marginal improvements.

I don’t mean to decry the excellent work that has been done.

De-cluttering, removing notes, writing clear narrative statements and thinking more about presentation are all important in themselves, and have focused attention on an area that had previously received too little attention.

However, I now want to argue that our next step as a sector should be to build on these important improvements and collectively to pitch for a more radical approach.

Part of the underlying problem is that the framework for the local authority accounting regime is essentially based on private sector standards, although there have been some amendments and adaptations to these.

To make matters worse, legislative overrides have been introduced to avoid what have been perceived as adverse impacts on council tax.

The problem with this is made readily apparent by considering matters from the auditor’s perspective.

When you audit the accounts of a company, you are fundamentally concerned with two cardinal questions: is it a going concern, and do the accounts fairly present the value of the company?

The questions and the answers to them are driven by the needs of investors, and from the principles they represent flow the standards we all follow.

In the case of capital accounting you therefore depreciate your assets to help tell investors what your company is worth.

This could be either as a going concern, since it ensures that there’s provision for the replacement of necessary capital and hence that the profit accurately reflects this, or in an acquisition scenario so that the asset values reflect what a purchaser of the business might be able to sell them for.

You can’t buy a local authority and for practical purposes the going concern question is answered by reference to financial sustainability, the level of reserves and similar matters.

Furthermore, there’s a statutory framework – minimum revenue provision (MRP) – that provides assurance to taxpayers and government that a prudent approach is taken to ensure that debt is repaid, which is also important to financial sustainability.

Going further, whilst MRP is not the same as depreciation, one could argue that in several important respects it fulfils broadly the same accounting purpose.

Essentially, just like depreciation it ensures that there is provision for the replacement of capital, albeit it approaches the issue from the perspective of debt repayment rather than asset valuation.

Time for change?

So, is depreciation accounting necessary or even appropriate for local authorities?

If you had a completely free hand in designing the accounting standards that applied to the sector would you include it at all?

You spend considerable time creating capital accounting entries and reflecting them in the accounts.

There should be a reason for that.

I think most of us would agree that it doesn’t help with the clarity of the financial statements.

Some of us tried making the charges feel real by counting them against services’ cash limited budgets, but that approach was largely abandoned, I think because everyone knew in their heart of hearts that they were reversed out elsewhere in the accounts and so weren’t really real.

So, is the only remaining answer to my question “because we have to follow accounting standards”?

I’m certainly not arguing that we should ignore accounting standards.

As long as they exist we must and should follow them.

However, standards aren’t set in stone.

They can be changed – or at least their application to local authorities can, provided we can make a strong enough collective case to the relevant regulatory bodies.

You may not agree with me about capital accounting, but my wider point is that this principles-based approach is the one to take to make more dramatic progress on the accounts.

How about all the PFI notes about future cash flows?

They would be highly relevant if you were thinking about investing in a private company to know how much of its future revenue streams were committed to paying long-term contracts.

However, in a local authority you could argue that this is a bad case of measuring what can be measured rather than understanding what needs to be measured.

For authorities with social care responsibilities, any PFI commitments (which we analyse to death) are likely to be dwarfed by the social care commitments (which we don’t mention).

Whilst the contractual nature of those commitments is different, we are still guilty of allowing the standard to dictate inappropriate financial reporting rather than arguing for a standard that would require appropriate reporting.

I think that by applying this approach to each of the problematic areas of local authority financial statements and by focusing on principles, we can really improve local authority financial reporting.

It will take time and effort, and close working with the relevant regulatory bodies to demonstrate that we are on the same side.

We can win lots of incremental and individually-important battles in the long campaign to improve local authority accounts.

But if we focus solely on disclosures, notes and similar points, we might end up losing the war.

Conrad Hall is chief financial officer at London Borough of Brent

Get the Room151 Newsletter

Share

You may also like...

  • Thriving in the pandemic: Avoiding the stragglers 12th Jan, 2021
  • Impact Awards: Shortlist revealed 2nd Jun, 2021
  • Local authority accounts: embrace the complexity 28th Mar, 2022
  • Room151’s 10th Anniversary: A decade has seen systemic change to funding while core values are more important than ever 8th Nov, 2021

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • Register to become a Room151 user

  • Latest tweets

    Room151 20 hours ago

    2022 LGPS valuations: difficult discussions in uncertain times: Michelle Doman looks at the impact of inflationary pressures, the war in Ukraine, climate risk and Covid-19 on employer contributions. At the start of 2022, for Local Government Pension… dlvr.it/SQlvy9 pic.twitter.com/Dd0lrHjWNb

    Room151 23 hours ago

    Investing today: nowhere to hide: Partner Content: Alex Stanley from Ardea Investment Management suggests that investors have few places to hide amid a synchronised sell-off in both bonds and equities. However, there are catalysts that[...] dlvr.it/SQlNVC pic.twitter.com/KkGGnduzPL

    Room151 2 days ago

    Treasury to restrict PWLB loans to councils at risk of non-repayment: The Treasury has released new guidance that restricts local authorities’ access to Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) advances if there is a “more than negligible risk” of a council’s… dlvr.it/SQhLTV pic.twitter.com/vBsS7xMJdb

    Room151 2 days ago

    Mixed reaction to proposed government intervention powers: There has been a mixed reaction to the government’s legislative plans to strengthen its intervention powers over local authority finances. The Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill has proposed… dlvr.it/SQhLMB pic.twitter.com/50foWxpPGs

    Room151 2 days ago

    Post-Brexit struggles for national and local government regulators. @LGAcomms @NAOorguk Click the link below to read 🔻🔻 room151.co.uk/brief/lga-call… #Brexit #government pic.twitter.com/s3c8ySGy5G

    Room151 2 days ago

    CIPFA: a question of transparency: Roman Haluszczak’s campaign for publication of the independent report into the collapse of CIPFA’s London Counter Fraud Hub has been rejected again by the institute. He is now calling for[...] dlvr.it/SQgC5V pic.twitter.com/08fWsHFF4g

    Room151 3 days ago

    Back to the future for the PWLB: The Public Works Loan Board is tightening its lending criteria to ensure that loans will be repaid by local government borrowers. But, asks Peter Findlay, shouldn’t they have been doing[...] dlvr.it/SQcmmm pic.twitter.com/bVv4fe0Xlv

    Room151 3 days ago

    Great piece from Peter Findlay on the PWLB’s tightening of its lending criteria. He raises some pointed questions for the Treasury and explains why the ‘casino council’ characterisation was simplistic and inaccurate. #PWLB #localgov room151.co.uk/treasury/back-…

    Room151 3 days ago

    The Queen's speech highlighted the need for accelerating UK infrastructure investment into levelling up projects and cutting emissions. @UKInfraBank #QueensSpeech #ClimateAction #emissions Click the link below to read 🔻🔻 room151.co.uk/brief/bill-wil… pic.twitter.com/hFmF2veVIa

    Room151 3 days ago

    Huge funding heading to the @WestMids_CA from @landg. @andy4wm #LevellingUp #netzero #regeneration Click the link below to read 🔻🔻 room151.co.uk/brief/wmca-sig… pic.twitter.com/ajhZhia6mx

    Room151 3 days ago

    LGPS governance, Cagney and Lacey style: What regulatory response can be expected following the publication of the Good Governance project’s Phase 3 report and the closure of the Single Code of Practice consultation? Susan Black offers[...] dlvr.it/SQbfXf pic.twitter.com/xwqHOEu2AP

    Room151 4 days ago

    More evidence of the importance of emerging markets in the journey to net-zero. @BordertoCoast @BrunelPP @northernlgps @EAPensionFund @WYPF_LGPS Click the link below to read 🔻🔻 #LGPS #NetZero #NetZeroCarbon #EmergingMarkets room151.co.uk/brief/400bn-pe… pic.twitter.com/qCm0EGxzLn

  • Categories

    • 151 News
    • Agent 151
    • Audit
    • Blogs
    • Business rates
    • Chris Buss
    • Cllr John Clancy
    • Council tax
    • Dan Bates
    • David Crum
    • David Green
    • Development
    • Education
    • Forum
    • Funding
    • Governance
    • Graham Liddell
    • Housing
    • Ian O'Donnell
    • Infrastructure
    • Interviews
    • Jackie Shute
    • James Bevan
    • Jobs
    • Levelling up
    • LGPS
    • Mark Finnegan
    • Net Zero
    • Private markets
    • Recent Posts
    • Regulation
    • Resources
    • Responsible investing
    • Richard Harbord
    • Risk management
    • Social care
    • Stephen Fitzgerald
    • Stephen Sheen
    • Steve Bishop
    • Technical
    • Transport
    • Treasury
    • Uncategorized
    • William Bourne
  • Archives

    • 2022
    • 2021
    • 2020
    • 2019
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2016
    • 2015
    • 2014
    • 2013
    • 2012
    • 2011
  • Previous story Taking stock: equity investment within the LGPS
  • Next story Brunel selects Colmore for private markets admin support

© Copyright 2022 Room 151. Typegrid Theme by WPBandit.

0 shares
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website.OK