How Financial Statements are structured under IFRS and US GAAP

Financial statements provide the essential foundation for evaluating an organization’s financial position, performance, and cash flows. Accounting standards such as International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (US GAAP) prescribe the structure, presentation, and disclosure requirements. While both frameworks aim to present a true and fair view, they differ in terminology, layout, and certain recognition principles. A detailed understanding of these differences is crucial for companies operating internationally and for professionals analyzing financial reports.

Financial statements serve as a complete framework for reporting an entity’s position and performance.

Both IFRS and US GAAP define financial statements as a structured representation of an entity’s financial information. The goal is to enable investors, creditors, regulators, and other stakeholders to evaluate the resources, obligations, and performance of the company.

Under IFRS, the primary guidance comes from IAS 1 – Presentation of Financial Statements. This standard defines a complete set of financial statements as including:

• Statement of financial position

• Statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income

• Statement of changes in equity

• Statement of cash flows

• Notes, including accounting policies and disclosures

• Comparative information for prior periods

Under US GAAP, financial statement presentation is addressed primarily in the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 205. While the components are broadly similar, US GAAP emphasizes a more rigid classification of items, and companies often provide additional schedules, particularly for regulatory or SEC reporting purposes.

The statement of financial position differs in structure and classification between IFRS and US GAAP.

The statement of financial position (or balance sheet) summarizes an entity’s assets, liabilities, and equity at a point in time.

• IFRS Approach: IAS 1 allows flexibility in presentation. Companies may choose either a current/non-current classification or present items in order of liquidity. IFRS generally favors a vertical format showing total assets first, followed by liabilities and equity.

• US GAAP Approach: GAAP requires the current vs non-current classification, making it less flexible than IFRS. US registrants typically adopt a classified balance sheet showing current assets, non-current assets, current liabilities, non-current liabilities, and equity separately.

Component	IFRS (IAS 1)	US GAAP (ASC 205)
Flexibility	Choice between classified or liquidity-based formats	Classified format required
Order of presentation	Often assets → liabilities → equity	Usually assets → liabilities → equity
Comparative info	Required	Required, but presentation format may differ
Terminology	“Statement of financial position”	“Balance sheet”

This flexibility in IFRS is especially useful for financial institutions, which often present assets and liabilities in liquidity order rather than using strict current/non-current breakdowns.

The statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income introduces a critical distinction between IFRS and US GAAP.

The income statement (or statement of profit or loss) under IFRS can be presented as either:

1. A single statement combining profit or loss and other comprehensive income (OCI), or

2. Two separate statements — one showing profit or loss, and the other showing OCI.

US GAAP, under ASC 220, permits similar formats but differs in classification and terminology:

• IFRS uses the term “other comprehensive income” consistently.

• US GAAP often distinguishes between net income and comprehensive income, leading to slightly different layouts.

Aspect	IFRS (IAS 1)	US GAAP (ASC 220)
Single vs two statements	Permitted, both options available	Permitted, but “net income” is highlighted
OCI presentation	Explicitly defined	Disclosed separately, terminology may differ
Flexibility	Higher	More prescriptive

For example, IFRS typically includes unrealized gains on equity investments and foreign currency translation adjustments in OCI. Under GAAP, similar items are included, but classification rules are more detailed and industry-specific.

The statement of changes in equity highlights ownership movements and distribution policies.

Both IFRS and US GAAP require companies to disclose a statement of changes in equity, but the presentation requirements differ:

• IFRS (IAS 1) mandates a comprehensive reconciliation showing opening balances, total profit or loss, OCI items, transactions with owners, and closing balances for each component of equity.

• US GAAP requires similar disclosures but often integrates them within the footnotes rather than presenting a fully separate statement, depending on SEC filing requirements.

This statement is critical for understanding dividends, share buybacks, retained earnings movements, and other capital adjustments.

The statement of cash flows differs mainly in classification and flexibility of reporting methods.

The statement of cash flows under IAS 7 and ASC 230 follows a broadly similar structure:

• Operating activities

• Investing activities

• Financing activities

However, IFRS and GAAP diverge in key areas:

• Operating vs financing interest classification: IFRS allows entities to classify interest paid and interest received as either operating or financing activities. GAAP generally requires interest paid and received to be classified as operating.

• Taxes paid: IFRS permits income taxes paid to be classified under any category where appropriate, whereas GAAP typically requires them in operating activities.

• Direct vs indirect method: IFRS encourages the direct method for presenting operating cash flows, but allows the indirect method. GAAP allows both but overwhelmingly uses the indirect method in practice.

Aspect	IFRS (IAS 7)	US GAAP (ASC 230)
Interest paid	Operating or financing	Operating only
Interest received	Operating or investing	Operating only
Taxes paid	Flexible classification	Usually operating
Preferred method	Direct method encouraged	Indirect method common

Notes and disclosures provide essential context for understanding financial statements.

Both IFRS and US GAAP require extensive disclosures within the notes to financial statements. However, IFRS demands more detailed, principle-based disclosures compared to GAAP’s rules-based approach. Under IFRS, companies must explain:

• The accounting policies adopted

• Key assumptions and judgments

• Significant estimates affecting reported amounts

• Information about risk exposures, particularly for financial instruments

GAAP requires similar disclosures but often prescribes specific templates, especially for SEC-registered entities. This structural difference results in IFRS disclosures typically being longer and more narrative-based, whereas GAAP disclosures tend to be structured and tabular.

Key differences between IFRS and US GAAP presentation formats remain highly relevant for global reporting.

Financial Statement Component	IFRS Approach	US GAAP Approach
Balance sheet flexibility	Classified or liquidity-based	Classified required
Income statement format	Single or two-statement option	Single or two-statement, but “net income” emphasized
OCI presentation	Broad categories, fewer rules	More prescriptive categories
Equity statement	Always separate and detailed	Sometimes integrated into notes
Cash flow classification	More flexibility	Prescriptive classification
Disclosures	Principles-based, often longer	Rules-based, more structured

____________

FOLLOW US FOR MORE.

DATA STUDIOS

datastudios.org