{"id":1630,"date":"2020-04-02T18:00:53","date_gmt":"2020-04-02T18:00:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/prathamconsult.com\/za\/?page_id=1630"},"modified":"2023-04-21T05:37:31","modified_gmt":"2023-04-21T05:37:31","slug":"faq","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/prathamconsult.com\/za\/faq\/","title":{"rendered":"FAQ"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

FAQ<\/h2>\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

SOUTH AFRICA<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

FILING OF ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TO THE CIPC IN XBRL<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

This document aims to address questions received from various stakeholders about the CIPCs XBRL Programme<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

\u00a0<\/p>

Table of Contents<\/span><\/p>

Revisions<\/span><\/p>

Introducing the most efficient and effective way of digital reporting \u2013 iXBRL<\/span><\/p>

  1. Legislative Mandate<\/span><\/li>
  2. What are the benefits of using XBRL?<\/span><\/li>
  3. Why are we going the XBRL route?<\/span><\/li>
  4. Who stands to benefit?<\/span><\/li>
  5. Where is XBRL applicable?<\/span><\/li>
  6. When are we rolling out XBRL?<\/span><\/li>
  7. Which Data Elements need to be submitted via XBRL?<\/span><\/li>
  8. What about the additional IFRS data elements?<\/span><\/li>
  9. What is the estimated value required to implement the software at clients?<\/span><\/li>
  10. How does XBRL work? How does XBRL do this? How can you be sure to get the correct information using XBRL?<\/span><\/li>
  11. For which set of Annual Financial Statements will XBRL reporting apply?<\/span><\/li>
  12. Which Entities will be using XBRL for submission of AFSs?<\/span><\/li>
  13. How will Close Corporations be affected by the Roll-out of XBRL?<\/span><\/li>
  14. How do I know whether the Entity I belong to needs to Comply with the XBRL Determination of the CIPC?<\/span><\/li>
  15. Is CIPC planning to differentiate tagging\/ submission requirements by size of entity\/ industry or other factors?<\/span><\/li>
  16. How do entities determine when their first AFSs will be due via XBRL?<\/span><\/li>
  17. Which reports are subject to XBRL submission?<\/span><\/li>
  18. How detailed data should be tagged?<\/span><\/li>
  19. Will one report be required per one submission or will multiple reports be possible to submit in one package?<\/span><\/li>
  20. Will extensions to the CIPC XBRL taxonomy be required or allowed?<\/span><\/li>
  21. How will CIPC organise\/ accept revisions and corrections to the taxonomy?<\/span><\/li>
  22. Will CIPC taxonomy be updated to the latest IFRS every year?<\/span><\/li>
  23. How will new IFRS standards and their effective dates impact the CIPC taxonomy?<\/span><\/li>
  24. Where can I find the CIPC XBRL taxonomy?<\/span><\/li>
  25. Will XBRL files be required to be audited?<\/span><\/li>
  26. Is CIPC going to organise conferences \/ seminars \/ webinars to prepare industry?<\/span><\/li>
  27. Is CIPC going to certify software compliant with XBRL taxonomy?<\/span><\/li>
  28. Is CIPC going to supply reporting toolkits \/ software to filers?<\/span><\/li>
  29. Who can I ask XBRL-related questions at the CIPC?<\/span><\/li>
  30. What will be the non-compliance fees and consequences?<\/span><\/li>
  31. The XBRL taxonomy requirements will be effective in 2018. When would it be applicable for entities with financial years beginning on or after 1 January 2018 or those entities with financial years ending on or after 1 January 2018?<\/span><\/li>
  32. Will only listed entities be required to lodge the separate entity AFSs and\/or consolidated AFSs in this format?<\/span><\/li>
  33. What will be the interaction between AFSs to be lodged and the annual returns required to be lodged by the entities?<\/span><\/li>
  34. Is it true that the IASB\u2019s IFRS Taxonomy is used as the basis for the IFRS disclosures included in the AFSs and that the relevant requirements of the Companies Act have been incorporated into the taxonomy?<\/span><\/li>
  35. Were the requirements of the JSE listing requirements and the SAICA Guides and Financial Reporting Pronouncements issued by the FRSC been incorporated into the taxonomy? Specific standards issued in SA which would not be covered by the IASB taxonomy are related, for example, to BBBEE transactions<\/span><\/li>
  36. The FRSC is currently working on a project to potentially develop a Reduced Disclosure Framework. This project is currently in the research phase and a discussion paper is expected to be circulated for public comment in 2017. The objective of the project is envisaged to reduce the disclosure burden on certain entities within the Framework\u2019s scope, i.e. entities with limited public accountability. Will this project be considered when developing the Taxonomy?<\/span><\/li>
  37. The amendments to the JSE Listing requirements as issued in September 2016 which, amongst other matters, will require issuers to distribute annual financial statements within four months after the end of each financial year. This amendment is effective for issuers with years ending on or after 30 September 2017. Has the CIPC considered this amendment in its timeline for requesting XBRL reporting from companies?<\/span><\/li>
  38. What would be the role of the FRSC, if any, in terms of the rollout of XBRL by the CIPC?<\/span><\/li>
  39. There is a concern shared with the FRSC regarding divergent interpretations of the Companies Act s30 requiring and entity to prepare AFSs. What is to be done with the practice whereby an entity that prepares consolidated AFSs takes the view that it is not required to prepare separate AFSs?<\/span><\/li>
  40. As for now, the CIPC XBRL Taxonomy Framework Architecture provides architectural diagrams, tables and code examples. Could XBRL SA elaborate on the more visual representation part of the comment? Shall we include a graphic representation of the taxonomy hierarchies?<\/span><\/li>
  41. Could examples of what could be included in \u201cOut of Scope\u201d be provided and how this information should be described in order not to confuse the user?<\/span><\/li>
  42. Does the CIPC XBRL taxonomy cater for inclusion of the IFRS standardsfor SME\u2019s?<\/span><\/li>
  43. When a review is done, is there a \u201creport\u201d similar to what currently existsfor auditors?<\/span><\/li>
  44. After the analysis of the taxonomy contents, it was discovered that there are a lot of itemscontained compared to what is reported as part of the current annual return process. Will theadditional information with regards to coverage of taxonomy elements within the submittedreport, personal information being subject of the POPI legislation or public interest scorecomponents, be provided?<\/span><\/li>
  45. Will the CIPC provide the users with different technical options for the data submissionrather than going with only one single format approach?<\/span><\/li>
  46. How and when will external auditors be signing-off the financial statements before submission to the CIPC?<\/span><\/li>
  47. The data modelling approach applied in the CIPC XBRL Taxonomy seems to be logical(specifically the distinction on the entry point schema level). Does this mean the CIPC financialsubmissions could be followed by other regulators in South Africa?<\/span><\/li>
  48. A concern was raised that not all of the statements defined in the taxonomy are clearlystructured. Will this create confusion among the taxonomy users? As an example, the reviewerspointed to the extended link role 510 statement of cash flows, direct method that lists elementCash and cash equivalents (identified as ifrs-full_CashAndCashEquivalents) two times within thetree structure while other elements have only single instance inthe hierarchy<\/span><\/li>
  49. Will software vendors of major enterprise software packages\/solutions be engaged toupdate their software for XBRL compliance?<\/span><\/li>
  50. How will the CIPC system provide assurance with regards to the correctness of AFS datasubmitted?<\/span><\/li><\/ol>

    Questions Received During Pilot Phase<\/span><\/p>

    1. Mandatory Tags: What are we supposed to do when the accounts we are tagging do notcontain the information required by some of the mandatory tags? A more recent example is a setof accounts from a client we are tagging. They do not disclose the total liabilities anywhere in theiraccounts. They have separate values for current and non-current liabilities, but nowhere is there atotal that I can tag<\/span><\/li>
    2. Formula linkbase error messages: The messages programmed in the formula linkbase formissing mandatory tags give neither the label of the missing tag, nor the technical name which make it difficult to rectify<\/span><\/li>
    3. Broad Block Tags: Very broad block tags is problematic for software that segments adocument. For example, there are block tags for each accounting policy, but then a block tag forall accounting policies and then a bock tag for the entire notes to the accounts. The challenge forus is that we usually encourage our users to split their accounting policies into separate segments -each segment would contain an accounting policy. The segmentation functionality is very usefulwhen creating templates in order to standardise content across many documents. Ourunderstanding is an individual accounting policy will be encapsulated within three spare blocktags. Why such broad and overlapping tags are necessary when all the information contained inthe document will be available in the xHTML even without a block tag spanningthe content?<\/span><\/li>
    4. Please would you clarify if the transformationrule \u201cixt:numcommadecimal\u201d from the Transformation Registry 3 can transform both \u201c1.000,23\u201dAND \u201c1 000,23\u201d into the correct number? In the sample XBRL files provided by the CIPC \u2013 formonetary elements, all values were given as 1 ZAR so it cannot help me clarify this question<\/span><\/li>
    5. Do the colours used when highlighting facts that have been XBRL tagged on the CIPC portalhave any significance? Should I be concerned that some are green but others red potentiallyindicating an issue?<\/span><\/li>
    6. The Revenue concept is in R millions. If a client is reporting in ones or thousands, how doyou want the user to address this? We can place the value in millions in a hidden section, but itwill not match the presentation of the document and it will not provide an accurate calculation<\/span><\/li>
    7. If a client is reporting both the Income Statement and Statement of Comprehensive Incomein the same table, do you want the table to be tagged with both “Income Statement Explanatory”and “Statement of Comprehensive Income Explanatory?”<\/span><\/li>
    8. Do you want every note to have the text block concept, “Disclosure of Notes and OtherExplanatory Information,” applied?<\/span><\/li>
    9. If there is a note that does not have a relevant text block, what is the appropriate way toaddress this?<\/span><\/li>
    10. What does it mean to compile AFS internally vs compiled by an independent party? Is thisseparate to having the AFS audited\/reviewed by an independent external auditor?<\/span><\/li>
    11. If your PI score is between 100 and 350 and your AFS is not audited and not required to interms of the MOI \u2013 what is required in terms of XBRL?<\/span><\/li>
    12. We have noticed that in the files that we have received, we can search for the entire IFRStaxonomy, not limited to CIPC’s taxonomy. If a user selects a concept that isn’t part of the CIPCtaxonomy, will this impact the filing in any way?<\/span><\/li>
    13. A prospective client presents many equity values in the Directors’ Report, which they list inthe table of contents as a Primary Financial Statement, but they do not have a primary financialstatement for Statement of Changes in Equity. In this particular scenario, would the values thatcan be tagged from this section of the taxonomy be tagged in the Directors’ Report? If detailedtagging in the above scenario is required, then can you please further elaborate on other scenarios that will elicit this response?<\/span><\/li>
    14. Are the financial reports that the CIPC members will be filing with XBRL be available forpublic consumption through CIPC?<\/span><\/li>
    15. If individual applicable facts are tagged on the Primary Financial Statements, is it requiredto block tag the statements as well, do we need to do both?<\/span><\/li>
    16. We noticed that not all tags are being displayed when we view the tagged report from theCIPC Portal and that if you have block tagged, you cannot view the individual tags. How will we beable to check if the portal renders the tags correctly?<\/span><\/li>
    17. If the financial values are in the AFS and already reported on\/tagged in there, do they alsoneed to be repeated i.e. tagged with the same tag, in the mandatory elements? My understandingwas, they are tagged within the same role, so it would not be necessary to repeat them, in themandatory elements? If they do need to be repeated in mandatory elements, are they labelleddifferently and to which role?<\/span><\/li>
    18. We have a number of dormant companies for which we need to submit Annual FinancialStatements. Please can you advise whether the XBRL tagging requirements for dormantcompanies (for which there is very little information in the AFS) are handled differentlyfrom\u201cactive\u201d companies, or whether the requirements are exactly the same?<\/span><\/li>
    19. May all the mandatory information be submitted in a separate sheet\/template to thedocument itself, thereby creating a document which differs from the original source document?<\/span><\/li>
    20. When I upload my XBRL data file, I receive \u201cWarning\u201d messages. Does this mean my filingwill not be accepted by the CIPC?<\/span><\/li>
    21. I already have a customer code for the CIPCs E-services portal. Do I need to obtain adifferent customer code to upload AFSs via XBRL?<\/span><\/li>
    22. My organization has several clients who are entities required to submit AFSs to the CIPC.Can I register as an intermediary and upload AFSs ontheir behalf?<\/span><\/li>
    23. There has been a number of updates to the taxonomy after the original release date of 31-03-2016, yet, the namespace (xmlns:cipc=”http:\/\/xbrl.cipc.co.za\/taxonomy, as well as file namesare still dated with 2016-08-31. Why is this?<\/span><\/li>
    24. We have some entities which do not need to be audited since their PI scores are farbelow100. The MOI\u2019s also do not require audits. The directors and\/or shareholders however decided tohave them audited since we submit the financial statements to the bank and to help the auditorsto get assurance for the group numbers. My understanding is that we will not be required tosubmit the financial statements in iXBRL format for these entities since they are not \u201crequired\u201d to be audited. Am I correct?<\/span><\/li>
    25. Would the registered auditor who performed the audit of a company\u2019s financialstatements, where the audit is required by meeting the requirements set out in the Act (PI Score,keeping of assets in a fiduciary capacity and inclusion of audit in the MOI) be prohibited in termsof section 90 of the Companies Act to tag the audited financial statements for submission to the CIPC via iXBRL?<\/span><\/li><\/ol>

      Questions Received after Roll-out of XBRL on 1 July 2018<\/span><\/p>

      1. Must Directors’ Emoluments be tagged and submitted along with the AFS? The issue is thatin large corporates the financial managers do not have sight of the Directors’ Emoluments (onlylegal), therefore it means the business would need to separately send off the AFS from theDirectors’ Emoluments to the XBRL vendor to tag. Also then it means the submission to CIPCwould need to be made by the legal department and not the financial managers – in order to limitsight of the confidential directors emoluments document<\/span><\/li>
      2. As a bank it has been agreed we would block tag banks and insurance entities primaryfinancials, but we rather tried to make them fit in to the taxonomy. So what you will note in ourSOCI is anything that is revenue is tagged as revenue, for example if its fee and commissionincome, or insurance income, we tagged it as revenue to ensure the total revenue value on yourside can be validated against the Annual Return Turnover, instead of getting the classificationcorrect. So even if a tag exists we did not use that tag, unless it rolls up into revenue, but onlyinterest income rolls up into revenue so we couldn\u2019t really use the others as revenue. Doesthismake sense?<\/span><\/li>
      3. Please could you assist us with feedback in terms of the requirement of Social and EthicsCommittee reports becoming mandatory when the Public Interest Score (PIS) is more than 500?<\/span><\/li>
      4. We received a validation error that our Public Interest Score (PIS) is more than 500 and thata Social and Ethics Report is therefore required to be included in the XBRL filing. How is thispossible, since our PIS is calculated to be lessthan 500?<\/span><\/li>
      5. Please could you assist with regards to the question about the number of individuals with abeneficial interest in the securities of a company? This is particularly as it applies to listedcompanies. Would we need to request a BND download from STRATE to arrive at the number, oris there a simpler\/quick and easy way of noting that a listed company has multipleshareholders?<\/span><\/li><\/ol>

        Do we need to request the BND as at the date of the financial year end so that we can make surethat the share register for that month is kept to hand to ensure that we have the informationwhen we need it?<\/span><\/p>

        1. What is included in the definition of Turnover for the calculation of Annual Return, anddoes this include interest and recoveries?<\/span><\/li>
        2. What does it mean when I upload a XBRL file and I get a message that errors occurred, butwhen I view the errors, I see a blank screen?<\/span><\/li><\/ol>

          Revisions<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

          \u00a0<\/p>

          Author<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Version<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Date<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Status\/ Comments<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V1.0<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          11\/08\/2017<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Original<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V2.0<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          20\/09\/2017<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Various changes to mostparagraphs and newadditional paragraphs<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V2.1<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          02\/10\/2017<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Removed references toFASs via XBRL<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V2.2<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          23\/10\/2017<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Removed references To specific organizations who submitted queries to the CIPC<\/span>
          Corrected incorrect statement about role of IFRS International<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V2.3<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          14\/11\/2017<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Elaborated on consolidated AFSs and CCs requirements of submission<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V2.4<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          14\/12\/207<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          In line with taxonomy updates: Removal of the word \u201cNotes\u201d from \u201cSub-classifications of assets, liabilities and equities\u201d and \u201cAnalysis of income and expense\u201d from tagging requirements.<\/span>
          Changed references to 61 mandatory elements to 46 mandatory elements.<\/span>
          List data elements that require an explanation when not reportable Mentioned \u201cexplanatory text block\u201d for block tagging<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V2.5<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          06\/02\/2018<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Significant changes to paragraph \u201cWhich data elements need to be submitted via XBRL?\u201d for clarification, e.g. with examples<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V2.6<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          09\/03\/2018<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Updated number of mandatory data elements<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.0<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          20\/04\/2018<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Added a number of new questions received during pilot phase (Q51 onwards), and updated cover page to be consistent with format of other published documents<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.1<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          04\/05\/2018<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Updated references of 33 mandatory elements to 31<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.2<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          05\/06\/2018<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Updated link to mandatory data elements<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.3<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          27\/06\/2018<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Updated answer of question 14 to provide better clarity on independent reviews<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.4<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          03\/07\/2018<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Added question 75 to address Section 90 of the Companies Act<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.5<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          23\/10\/2018<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Added questions 76-81<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Hennie Viljoen<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.6<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          24\/10\/2018<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Added question 82<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Maphuthumane Masilela<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.7<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          06\/02\/2019<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Updated answer to question 74 to provide better clarity on submissions<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Maphuthumane Masilela<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.8<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          14\/02\/2019<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Updated answer to question 14 to correctly state the requirement of the Act with regards to audited financials.<\/span>
          Further updated answer to question 74 to provide better clarity on submissions.<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Stephen Motseki<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.9<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          26\/09\/2019<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Updates dues to changes in the most recent taxonomy<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

          Maphuthumane Masilela<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          V3.10<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          26\/02\/2020<\/span><\/p><\/td>

          Update question 68 with an appropriate response<\/span><\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>

          Introducing the most efficient and effective way of digitalreporting – iXBRL<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

          \u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

          1. Legislative Mandate<\/strong><\/span><\/li><\/ol>