How to account for Government Grants under IAS 20 and US GAAP ASC 958
- Graziano Stefanelli
- 6 days ago
- 3 min read

Government grants can materially affect an entity’s financial performance and position, especially in industries dependent on public subsidies or development support. Accounting for these grants varies significantly between IFRS (IAS 20) and US GAAP (ASC 958 and ASC 450). While IFRS provides a structured model for both recognition and presentation, US GAAP distinguishes between not-for-profit and for-profit entities and relies on a patchwork of standards, often requiring judgment in classification, timing, and income recognition.
Government grants are defined differently under IFRS and US GAAP.
Under IAS 20, government grants are defined as transfers of resources in return for past or future compliance with specific conditions. These may include:
Cash subsidies
Forgivable loans
Asset-related grants (e.g., to purchase machinery)
Income-related grants (e.g., wage support or operating subsidies)
In US GAAP, no unified standard governs government grants for for-profit entities. Instead:
ASC 958 applies to not-for-profit organizations.
ASC 450 (Contingencies) and SEC guidance are commonly used by public companies.
Entities must classify grants as contributions, revenue, or gain contingencies, depending on nature and conditions.
The difference in conceptual basis leads to different income timing and presentation choices.
IFRS provides clear guidance on recognition and classification of grants.
IAS 20 divides grants into two main types:
1. Grants related to income
Recognized in the profit and loss statement systematically over the periods in which the related costs are incurred.
Example:
Dr. Cash 200,000
Cr. Other income 200,000
Or:
Dr. Cash 200,000
Cr. Government grants deferred 200,000
[Then amortized]
Dr. Government grants deferred 50,000
Cr. Other income 50,000
2. Grants related to assets
Presented in one of two ways:
Deferred income approach: recognize grant as a liability and amortize over the asset’s useful life.
Netting off: deduct the grant from the carrying amount of the asset.
Choice of method affects depreciation and reported asset values.
Option | Impact on balance sheet | Impact on P&L |
Deferred income | Shows full asset cost + liability | Recognized as other income over time |
Netting off | Lower asset base, lower depreciation | No separate income line item |
Under US GAAP, treatment differs sharply between not-for-profit and for-profit entities.
For not-for-profit entities (ASC 958)
Grants are usually treated as nonreciprocal contributions and recognized when:
The conditions are met, and
The barriers to entitlement are overcome.
Revenue recognition follows ASC 958-605 and can involve:
Conditional contributions (recognized once conditions are met)
Unconditional contributions (recognized immediately)
For for-profit entities
No specific standard. They typically follow:
ASC 450 (gain contingency): Recognize only when grant is received or virtually certain
SEC SAB Topic 13: Can follow IAS 20-like treatment (if consistently applied and disclosed)
ASC 606: If grant resembles a contract with a customer
Entity Type | Recognition trigger | Standard |
Not-for-profit | Conditions met; barrier cleared | ASC 958 |
Public company | Contingency resolved or payment received | ASC 450 / SEC SAB |
Government contract | Performance obligation satisfied | ASC 606 |
Forgivable loans require judgment under both frameworks.
IFRS (IAS 20): Forgivable loans are treated as grants once reasonable assurance exists that conditions will be met.
US GAAP: Often treated as gain contingencies, recognized only when forgiven unless the entity qualifies for an ASC 958-type model.
Treatment | IFRS (IAS 20) | US GAAP (ASC 450 / 958) |
Forgivable loan not yet forgiven | Liability until conditions are met | Liability until formally forgiven |
Forgiveness probable | Reclassified as grant income | Recognized only if virtually certain |
Disclosures differ in focus but aim to provide transparency on grant effects.
IFRS (IAS 20) requires:
Nature and extent of grants
Unfulfilled conditions or contingencies
Accounting policy chosen (netting vs deferred income)
Income recognized in the period
US GAAP disclosures depend on applied guidance:
ASC 958: Contribution classes, conditional vs unconditional, timing
ASC 450: Nature of contingencies, probability assessments
SEC guidance: Consistency with IFRS-like disclosure if adopted
Key differences between IFRS and US GAAP in government grant accounting.
Area | IFRS (IAS 20) | US GAAP |
Standard applicability | All entities | ASC 958 (nonprofits), no unified guidance for for-profits |
Recognition threshold | Reasonable assurance of compliance | Contingency resolved or cash received |
Presentation methods | Deferred income or asset reduction | Revenue, gain, or other income depending on judgment |
Forgivable loans | Recognized when forgiveness is likely | Recognized only when forgiven |
Timing differences | May lead to earlier recognition | Generally more conservative timing |
Both IFRS and US GAAP aim to reflect the economic substance of government support, but IFRS provides a clearer framework for all entity types, while US GAAP remains fragmented and more conservative. Entities must ensure consistent application, robust documentation of conditions, and transparent disclosures—especially when government assistance materially affects reported earnings or cash flows.
____________
FOLLOW US FOR MORE.
DATA STUDIOS