FASB Releases Not-for-Profit Examples for Proposed Pension Statement
May 16, 2006
The Financial Accounting Standards Board staff has prepared several examples to help readers of FASB proposed statement "Employers' Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans" understand how its guidance would be applied by not-for-profit organizations.The examples--which illustrate the retrospective application of statement provisions and reporting of actuarial gains or losses and prior service costs or credits--include application by higher education institutions. One example illustrates presentation in the statement of activities of a university that chooses to present an intermediate measure of operations. Another example, of a voluntary health and welfare organization, illustrates presentation in an organization that chooses not to present an intermediate measure of operations and is applicable for colleges and universities that do not present such a measure.
The illustrations are not part of the proposed Statement but FASB encourages readers to consider them in connection with Issue 5 regarding guidance for reporting actuarial gains and losses and prior service costs and credits when responding to the Exposure Draft. Written comments are due May 31. NACUBO encourages members to comment directly to FASB and copy NACUBO.
The proposed statement and illustrations are available on the FASB Web site.
NACUBO contact: Sue Menditto, director, accounting policy
- Comments on Form 1098-T Reporting Due Soon
- New ITIN Procedures For Certifying Acceptance Agents and International Students
- Higher Education Community Offers Comments on Web Accessibility Proposal
- 2016 Intermediate Accounting and Reporting Fall
October 24-25, 2016
- ON-DEMAND: The CBO's Role in Diversity and Inclusion on Campus
- ON-DEMAND: The Clery Act: Strategic Planning to Mitigate Institutional Risk
- ON-DEMAND: Title IX: Key Issues Surrounding Institutional Compliance
- ON-DEMAND: NACUBO Live! Higher Education Accounting Forum
- ON-DEMAND: Responsibility Center Management: Two Different Perspectives