We're a headhunter agency that connects US businesses with elite LATAM professionals who integrate seamlessly as remote team members — aligned to US time zones, cutting overhead by 70%.
We’ll match you with Latin American superstars who work your hours. Quality talent, no time zone troubles. Starting at $9/hour.
Start Hiring For FreeMost business professionals would agree that understanding joint arrangements can be confusing.
This article clearly defines key terminology, explains how to classify joint arrangements, and provides real-world examples to help demystify joint arrangements.
You'll learn the difference between joint operations and joint ventures, how each arrangement impacts accounting and reporting, as well as solutions for common joint arrangement challenges.
A joint arrangement is an agreement between two or more parties to share control over an economic activity, as defined under IFRS 11 Joint Arrangements. There are two types of joint arrangements - joint operations and joint ventures.
A joint arrangement exists when two or more parties have joint control. Joint control means contractually agreed sharing of control of an arrangement, with decisions about relevant activities requiring unanimous consent of the parties sharing control.
IFRS 11 classifies joint arrangements as either joint operations or joint ventures:
A joint operation exists when the parties have rights to the assets and obligations for the liabilities of the arrangement. Parties account for their share of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses.
A joint venture exists when the parties have rights to only the net assets of the arrangement. Joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method under IAS 28 or at fair value under IFRS 9.
The two types of joint arrangements have key differences:
Joint Operation:
Joint Venture:
Determining the type of joint arrangement depends on the legal form, contractual terms and other facts.
If a joint arrangement is classified as a joint operation, parties account for their share of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, such as:
For example: Company A and B have a joint operation. A and B each have 50% share. If the joint operation has $100,000 of inventory, $50,000 of payables, $200,000 of revenue and $80,000 of expenses in a period - Company A would recognize $50,000 of inventory, $25,000 of payables, $100,000 of revenue and $40,000 of expenses.
If a joint arrangement is classified as a joint venture, parties account for it as an investment using the equity method under IAS 28 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures or at fair value under IFRS 9 Financial Instruments.
Under the equity method, a party recognizes its initial investment at cost. The carrying amount is then increased or decreased to recognize the party's share of the joint venture's profits or losses after the acquisition date. IAS 28 sets out requirements for applying the equity method.
Alternatively, a party can elect to measure its investment at fair value through profit or loss under IFRS 9, recognizing changes in fair value in net income.
IFRS 11 replaced IAS 31 Interests in Joint Ventures. When first adopting IFRS 11, an entity is required to reassess all its joint arrangements based on the new criteria for classification.
Amendments to IFRS 10 Consolidated Financial Statements provide transition relief by grandfathering previous assessments of control. This impacts whether a party consolidates a joint operation that is structured through a separate vehicle.
Disclosure requirements are set out in IFRS 12 Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities. Entities are required to provide information about the nature, risks and effects of interests in joint arrangements and associates.
A joint arrangement refers to an arrangement where two or more parties have joint control. Joint control exists only when decisions about the relevant activities of the arrangement require unanimous consent of the parties sharing control.
There are two types of joint arrangements under IFRS 11 Joint Arrangements:
Some key characteristics of joint arrangements:
Parties to a joint arrangement recognize their respective share of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses of the joint operation. Joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method as specified in IAS 28 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures.
In summary, a joint arrangement provides joint control and unanimous decision making to the parties bound by the arrangement's contract. The specific accounting treatment depends on whether it is structured as a joint operation or joint venture.
Joint arrangements are classified as either joint operations or joint ventures based on the rights and obligations of the parties involved.
In a joint operation, the parties that share joint control have rights to the assets and obligations for the liabilities relating to the arrangement. For example, two oil companies that jointly operate an oil rig would each recognize their share of the assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses from that operation.
In contrast, a joint venture involves the establishment of a separate entity over which the parties have joint control. The parties have rights to the net assets of the arrangement, but do not have direct rights to assets or obligations for liabilities. For example, two companies that jointly control and operate a retail store through a separate legal entity would each recognize their investment in that entity using the equity method of accounting.
The key difference lies in whether a separate vehicle is established. Joint operations do not establish a separate vehicle, while joint ventures do. Proper classification is essential, as it impacts the accounting treatment. Joint operations recognize their share of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses directly, while joint ventures recognize an investment in the jointly controlled entity.
In summary:
Proper classification of joint arrangements requires analysis of the legal form and contractual terms between the parties sharing control. Getting this right is vital for accurate financial reporting.
A joint operation is a joint arrangement whereby the parties that have joint control of the arrangement have rights to the assets and obligations for the liabilities, relating to the arrangement.
An example of a joint operation is a shared service center set up as a separate vehicle by two companies, Company A and Company B, each holding a 50% interest. The shared service center, Company C, provides accounting and administrative services to Companies A and B.
Company C would be classified as a joint operation under IFRS 11 Joint Arrangements because:
Companies A and B have joint control over Company C based on their equal 50% ownership and voting rights.
Company C's activities primarily provide services to Companies A and B. Its purpose is to serve their operating needs rather than to generate profits for itself.
Companies A and B have rights to the assets and obligations for the liabilities of Company C relating to the arrangement, by virtue of their ownership interests. For example, they would be entitled to a share of any equipment or property owned by C and be responsible for a share of C's costs and liabilities.
Therefore, Company C meets the criteria set out in IFRS 11 for classification as a joint operation. Companies A and B would recognize their share of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses of C in their own financial statements.
A joint arrangement is an arrangement where two or more parties have joint control. Joint control exists only when decisions about relevant activities require unanimous consent of the parties sharing control.
There are two types of joint arrangements under IFRS 11:
In a joint operation, each joint operator recognizes in its financial statements:
For example, Oil Company A and Oil Company B have a joint arrangement to operate an oil pipeline. The binding arrangement establishes that both companies have rights to the assets, and obligations for the liabilities, relating to the joint operation.
Company A would recognize in its financial statements:
In contrast, joint ventures only require recognizing the investment using the equity method as per IAS 28. Joint operations account for assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses directly.
Joint arrangements require the unanimous consent of the parties sharing control in order to make decisions about relevant activities. Determining if joint control exists is critical for classifying the arrangement and applying the appropriate accounting treatment under IFRS 11 Joint Arrangements.
Joint control exists only when decisions about relevant activities require the unanimous consent of the parties sharing control. Some factors to consider when assessing joint control include:
Ownership percentage - No single party controls the arrangement solely through ownership percentage. Joint control typically exists when each party owns 50%.
Contractual agreements - The contractual terms explicitly state that unanimous consent is required from all parties sharing control for decisions over relevant activities.
Veto rights - Each party sharing control has veto rights over decisions, indicating joint control.
For example, Company A and Company B set up a separate entity where each owns 50% ownership interest. The entity's Articles of Incorporation state that at least 75% of voting rights are needed to make decisions over relevant activities. This indicates Company A and Company B share joint control.
There are certain nuances around some factors that can impact the joint control assessment:
If an arrangement includes veto rights, confirm whether those rights apply only to operational decisions or if they extend to strategic/relevant activities requiring unanimous consent between the parties sharing control.
When ownership percentages are not equal between the parties, assess if there are other contractual terms that require unanimous consent that establish joint control.
The level of involvement of each party in the arrangement's ongoing decision-making and relevant activities should align with the joint control assessment.
Once joint control is determined to exist, the next step is assessing whether the arrangement is a joint operation or joint venture:
Joint operations - parties have direct rights and obligations to underlying assets/liabilities. Parties recognize their share of assets/liabilities/revenues/expenses.
Joint ventures - arrangement is structured through a separate vehicle where parties have rights only to the net assets. Joint ventures are equity accounted.
The structure through a separate vehicle alone does not necessarily mean it is a joint venture. An assessment of other rights and obligations under contractual arrangements is required to determine the appropriate classification.
Properly assessing joint control and classifying the arrangement is crucial, as the accounting treatment differs significantly:
Joint operations - parties directly recognize their share of underlying assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses.
Joint ventures - equity method is applied. Parties recognize their share of the joint venture's net assets/profit or loss.
Misclassifying a joint arrangement can lead to inaccurate financial reporting. Performing a detailed joint control assessment and classification analysis is key to ensuring IFRS compliance.
Joint arrangements can take various legal forms depending on factors like taxation, governance needs, flexibility, and exit options. Here we'll outline common structures used for joint operations and joint ventures.
Some typical structures include:
The structure impacts the accounting treatment - whether joint operations or joint ventures.
Factors to consider when selecting a legal structure include:
The best structure balances control, risk, and flexibility for all parties involved.
Creating a separate legal entity for a joint venture simplifies accounting but requires:
Challenges include upfront costs, complex transfers, and aligning different shareholders.
The legal structure profoundly impacts the economics and accounting of the joint arrangement.
There are a few common governance models that can be implemented for joint arrangements, depending on the number of partners and desired level of control:
Equal partnership - All partners have equal ownership and votes. Simple but can lead to deadlocks if there are disagreements. Best for arrangements with 2 partners.
Weighted partnership - Ownership percentages and votes are proportional to investment. Gives greater control to larger stakeholders.
Rotating leadership - Partners take turns leading the arrangement for set periods of time. Allows shared but shifting operational control.
Hierarchical structure - Larger partners have greater control and oversight, smaller partners operate more independently. Works for arrangements with many partners.
The key is finding the right balance of responsibility, control, and flexibility suitable for your specific partners and objectives. Formal agreements should outline governance processes including financial reporting, audits, dispute resolution, leadership appointments, etc.
To prevent disputes in joint arrangements:
If disputes do occur, first seek mediation through discussion and compromise. Alternatives like arbitration, buying out partners, or dissolving the arrangement can be costly.
To handle transitions in joint arrangements over time:
Update legal agreements and communicate changes across the partnership to facilitate adjustments while protecting current partners.
Leading practices for monitoring joint operations:
Ongoing performance monitoring ensures you can course-correct issues early and capitalize on opportunities.
In this final section, we'll discuss dissolution and disposal considerations - outlining termination clauses, exit mechanisms, disposal procedures, and accounting treatment.
We'll start by identifying common triggers that can lead partners to dissolve a joint operation or joint venture, whether voluntarily or involuntarily:
Any of these triggers can lead partners to exit a joint arrangement, either through mutual agreement or through built-in termination clauses.
Next, we'll analyze the exit mechanisms and termination clauses typically built into joint arrangement contracts to facilitate the dissolution process when needed:
Building clear termination triggers and exit mechanisms into joint arrangement contracts provides clarity on the dissolution process if partners need to separate in the future due to irreconcilable differences or changing business priorities.
We'll then explain recommended step-by-step procedures for divesting interest in or exiting a joint arrangement to ensure all legal, financial, operational, and accounting matters are handled appropriately:
Undertaking this structured exit process ensures interests are divested properly amidst the complexity of jointly operated businesses.
Finally, we'll discuss the accounting treatment and impacts on financial reporting when disposing of an interest in a joint operation or joint venture:
Following through on these accounting implications ensures the unwinding and disposal of the former joint arrangement interest is properly presented in financial statements during this transitional event.
Joint arrangements can present several common challenges, including disagreements over control and decision-making, improperly structured agreements, uneven investment or profit sharing, and issues around exiting the arrangement.
To overcome these problems, it's important to clearly define responsibilities, rights, and procedures upfront in a joint arrangement agreement. Building in flexibility for evolving situations, addressing dispute resolution proactively, and fostering open communication channels between partners can also help avoid pitfalls. Regularly reviewing performance and renegotiating terms as needed keeps the arrangement on track.
Company A ran into problems several years into a joint operation when their partner wanted to increase investment but Company A lacked funds. By amending the original agreement's terms to allow additional external investors, Company A avoided dissolving a profitable operation.
Company B and their joint venture partner encountered cultural clashes around decision-making approaches. Establishing a protocol for constructive discussion and conflict resolution introduced more flexibility, enabling compromises.
Company C's joint venture partner went bankrupt. Having structured the original agreement to allow buying the partner's share, Company C could quickly take full control without disrupting ongoing operations.
Under IFRS 11, a joint operator that sells output on behalf of the joint operation recognizes their share of revenue, expenses, assets and liabilities like any other party. Joint operations are not separate entities.
Specific accounting considerations around the sale of output include recognizing expenses in relation to obligations for unsold output, measurement principles for revenue and corresponding receivables, and any assets or liabilities related to output purchase arrangements.
The post-implementation review found that by clarifying control principles, IFRS 10 and 11 have improved accounting for joint arrangements and the quality of disclosures. Some challenges remain around certain implementation issues and assessing joint control. IFRS 12 has enhanced transparency but disclosure overload is a concern. Work to address these issues continues.
IFRS 12 specifies disclosure requirements for subsidiaries, joint arrangements, associates and structured entities. Topics covered include judgments made, risks posed, interests held, and reconciling financial statement amounts. Applying IFRS 12 ensures users understand an entity's interests in other entities. Further standards may continue improving consolidation and disclosure practices.
See how we can help you find a perfect match in only 20 days. Interviewing candidates is free!
Book a CallYou can secure high-quality South American for around $9,000 USD per year. Interviewing candidates is completely free ofcharge.
You can secure high-quality South American talent in just 20 days and for around $9,000 USD per year.
Start Hiring For Free