How is past service cost handled differently under IFRS versus US GAAP?
My CFA Level II study notes say that past service cost from pension plan amendments is treated differently under IFRS and US GAAP. IFRS expenses it immediately while GAAP amortizes it. Can someone explain the mechanics of each approach and how it affects earnings comparability?
Past service cost (also called prior service cost under US GAAP) arises when a company amends its pension plan — for example, by increasing the benefit formula — and the amendment grants benefits for services already rendered by employees.
IFRS (IAS 19R) — Immediate Recognition:
Under IFRS, past service cost is recognized entirely in P&L in the period of the plan amendment. There is no deferral or amortization.
US GAAP (ASC 715) — Amortization:
Under US GAAP, prior service cost is initially recognized in OCI and then amortized to pension expense over the average remaining service period of the employees expected to receive the benefits.
Worked Example:
On January 1, 2026, Pemberton Manufacturing amends its pension plan, increasing the benefit multiplier. The amendment increases the PBO by $3,000,000 (past service cost). The average remaining service period of affected employees is 12 years.
IFRS treatment:
- 2026 P&L: $3,000,000 pension expense (full amount)
- 2027 onward: No further past service cost impact
US GAAP treatment:
- 2026 OCI: $3,000,000 recognized
- Annual amortization to P&L: $3,000,000 / 12 = $250,000 per year
- 2026 P&L: $250,000
- 2027 P&L: $250,000
- ... continuing for 12 years
Impact comparison:
| Metric | IFRS | US GAAP |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 pension expense impact | $3,000,000 | $250,000 |
| Year 2-12 annual impact | $0 | $250,000 |
| Total P&L impact over 12 years | $3,000,000 | $3,000,000 |
| OCI impact at amendment | None | $3,000,000 (then amortizes out) |
| Earnings volatility | Higher (spike in year 1) | Lower (spread over 12 years) |
Negative past service cost (plan curtailment):
If the plan is amended to reduce benefits, the treatment follows the same logic:
- IFRS: Gain recognized immediately in P&L
- US GAAP: Negative prior service cost in OCI, amortized as a reduction to pension expense
Analytical implications:
When comparing companies cross-border:
- An IFRS reporter that amends its pension plan will show a large one-time pension expense hit
- A GAAP reporter with the same amendment will show a smooth, smaller annual increase
- Analysts should adjust for this when computing core or normalized earnings
Exam tip: This IFRS vs. GAAP difference is a classic CFA Level II item set question. You may be given a plan amendment amount and asked to compute pension expense under each standard. Remember: IFRS = immediate P&L, GAAP = OCI first, then amortize to P&L.
Explore our CFA Level II employee compensation module for more pension scenarios.
Master Level II with our CFA Course
107 lessons · 200+ hours· Expert instruction
Related Questions
What exactly is the Capital Market Expectations (CME) framework and why does it matter for asset allocation?
How do business cycle phases affect asset class return expectations?
Can someone explain the Grinold–Kroner model step by step with numbers?
How do you forecast fixed-income returns using the building-blocks approach?
PPP vs Interest Rate Parity for forecasting exchange rates — when do I use which?
Join the Discussion
Ask questions and get expert answers.