On BP’s balance sheet as of December 31, 2009 are present such types of long-term receivables as trade receivables, receivables from jointly controlled entities, and receivables from associates (BP 150). The key items mentioned in the notes to the financial statements which relate to long-term receivables were from trade (BP 150). The information presented in the notes appear to be in accordance with GAAP. This position can be explained by the fact that the information corresponds with GAAP guideline (FABS para. 3). As compared to the BP’s 2009 balance sheet, the 2009 Shell Annual Report is less detailed (Royal Dutch Shell plc 3).
Financial reporting for long-term receivables differs for GAAP and IFRS. When presented for GAAP, it is reflected in the “Current assets” section (FABS para. 6). When presented for IFRS, it is added to the balance by an additional line (IFRS para. 4). I think FABS requires more comprehensive information. This position can be justified by the fact that long-term accounts receivable in FABS are shown separately. For example, a separate line indicates accounts receivable, payments for which are expected more than 12 months after the reporting date (FABS para. 8).
If I had the opportunity to choose between using GAAP and IFRS, purely for long-term receivables, I would choose FABS. My choice would be due to the fact that if the amount of the debt for goods sold, products, work performed and services rendered is significant in the total amount of the receivable, it would be more convenient if the amount should be shown separately in the balance sheet. In FABS, in contrast to IFRS, the amount of the debit for the advances issued is presented in the balance sheet separately with the materiality of such an indicator.
Works Cited
BP. “Annual Report and Accounts” 2009, Web.
FABS. “FABS Home” 2022, Web.
IFRS. “IFRS Accounting Standards Navigator” 2022, Web.
Royal Dutch Shell plc. “Delivery & Growth Report.” United States Securities and Exchange Commission, Web.