Minutes, February 15, 2017 Amsterdam F2F

Posted on February 22, 2017 by admin
  • Points of attentions
    • 6 months is not enough to introduce new XBRL specifications in taxonomy after their ratification
    • EBA has introduced new labels for its filing rules : EIOPA should use labels too, and these labels must be the same than EBA’s ones
  • Sub-consolidation groups
    • Concerns about the way the data can be visualized with option 4
    • Option 1/2/3 would change the key identifier of an instance (entrypoint/lei/reference date)
    • Sub-consolidation could be achieved with a defined aggregation
    • No ideal proposition, maybe a mixed solution.
  • Use of Instance Generator
    • The WG members are enthusiastic to use it
    • UK taxonomy already asks this information in the form of a fact
    • An attribute ‘@settings’ could be added. Some providers have a lot of ways to generate instances
    • The filing rule is a ‘should’. Some members showed concerns about the fact that some countries interpret a ‘should’ as a ‘must’, and ask for only ‘must’ rules.
  • Provider certification by XBRL International
    • Members didn’t show enthusiasm for this subject
      • XBRL is an open standard, incompatible with certification
      • Software provider could fail certification for personal/technical choices
      • Certification could take long
      • Who, how, with which cost?
      • Nevertheless, it could bring attention on XBRL
  • Ideas
    • Create a processing instruction ‘taxonomy-generator’ for taxonomies on the model of the ‘instance-generator’
    • Encourage collaboration of the various entities defining their own filing rules, specifications
    • Encourage dialogue between software providers about encountered problems
    • Feedback on supervisory consultations
      • Software providers are sometimes disappointed by the return given to them by authorities, they feel like their opinion is not taken into account
      • Supervisory WorkingGroup/Eurofiling could be a good channel to express concerns and speak about problems found by members to the authorities
    • Taxonomy generators could be invited to our meetings
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.