-
Business consulting services
Our business consulting services can help you improve your operational performance and productivity, adding value throughout your growth life cycle.
-
Business process solutions
We can help you identify, understand and manage potential risks to safeguard your business and comply with regulatory requirements.
-
Business risk services
The relationship between a company and its auditor has changed. Organisations must understand and manage risk and seek an appropriate balance between risk and opportunities.
-
Cybersecurity
As organisations become increasingly dependent on digital technology, the opportunities for cyber criminals continue to grow.
-
Forensic and investigation services
At Grant Thornton, we have a wealth of knowledge in forensic services and can support you with issues such as dispute resolution, fraud and insurance claims.
-
Mergers and acquisitions
Globalisation and company growth ambitions are driving an increase in M&A activity worldwide. We work with entrepreneurial businesses in the mid-market to help them assess the true commercial potential of their planned acquisition and understand how the purchase might serve their longer- term strategic goals.
-
Recovery and reorganisation
Workable solutions to maximise your value and deliver sustainable recovery
-
Transactional advisory services
We can support you throughout the transaction process – helping achieve the best possible outcome at the point of the transaction and in the longer term.
-
Valuations
We provide a wide range of services to recovery and reorganisation professionals, companies and their stakeholders.
-
IFRS
The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are a set of global accounting standards developed by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) for the preparation of public company financial statements. At Grant Thornton, our IFRS advisers can help you navigate the complexity of financial reporting from IFRS 1 to IFRS 17 and IAS 1 to IAS 41.
-
Audit quality monitoring
Having a robust process of quality control is one of the most effective ways to guarantee we deliver high-quality services to our clients.
-
Global audit technology
We apply our global audit methodology through an integrated set of software tools known as the Voyager suite.
-
Corporate and business tax
Our trusted teams can prepare corporate tax files and ruling requests, support you with deferrals, accounting procedures and legitimate tax benefits.
-
Direct international tax
Our teams have in-depth knowledge of the relationship between domestic and international tax laws.
-
Global mobility services
Through our global organisation of member firms, we support both companies and individuals, providing insightful solutions to minimise the tax burden for both parties.
-
Indirect international tax
Using our finely tuned local knowledge, teams from our global organisation of member firms help you understand and comply with often complex and time-consuming regulations.
-
Innovation and investment incentives
Dynamic businesses must continually innovate to maintain competitiveness, evolve and grow. Valuable tax reliefs are available to support innovative activities, irrespective of your tax profile.
-
Private client services
Our solutions include dealing with emigration and tax mitigation on the income and capital growth of overseas assets.
-
Transfer pricing
The laws surrounding transfer pricing are becoming ever more complex, as tax affairs of multinational companies are facing scrutiny from media, regulators and the public
-
Tax policy
Tax policies are constantly evolving and there are a number of complex changes on the horizon that could significantly affect your business.
-
Outsourcing Changes to the Outsourcing legislation, specifically when offshoringSignificant changes to the dynamic of the financial services sector in recent years have shifted the paradigms in how we work. The increased digitisation of the workforce, changes in business models, globalisation, and remote working capabilities have led to a new approach to the delivery of services.
-
Asset management Inflation and tax planningThe recent onset of rapid inflation is an unwelcome development that is having a widespread impact on US businesses and tax planning.

In forming this vote the IASB reconsidered the arguments in favour of reintroducing goodwill amortisation to improve information:
- The impairment test is not working as intended—the IASB’s decision to move to the impairment-only approach was contingent on a sufficiently rigorous and operational impairment test and evidence suggests it is not—this is the compelling case for change.
- Goodwill is a wasting asset. There is now evidence that it is feasible for entities to make reliable estimates of the useful life of goodwill and an amortisation expense based on the useful life of goodwill can provide useful information.
- Amortisation would result in recognising an expense in the Statement of Profit or Loss that would reflect consumption of the benefits associated with the goodwill.
- Amortisation can hold management to account better than the impairment-only model.
- Unlike the impairment-only model, amortisation would directly target goodwill.
- Disclosure should not be a tool to solve what is essentially a measurement issue—that is, limitations of the impairment test.
These arguments were contrasted to those arguments in favour of retaining the impairment-only model:
- A compelling case for change has not been identified.
- Stakeholder views continue to be strongly held and divergent.
- Both the impairment-only model and an amortisation-based model have their limitations.
- Eeach model suits a different view of the nature of goodwill.
- Reintroducing amortisation would not resolve concerns about impairment losses not being recognised on a timely basis.
- Reintroducing amortisation would not represent a significant improvement in financial reporting that justifies the disruption and cost of change.
The Agenda Paper 18b for the IASB meeting in November 2022 presented these two opposite positions very clearly and summarised the current situation:
“The conceptual debate of what is the most appropriate model for accounting for goodwill remains. There are valid views, supported by well thought out evidence, on both sides. These reflect different perspectives of the nature of goodwill and therefore the appropriate model for the subsequent accounting for goodwill. The evidence suggests that these views continue to be divergent and strongly held and are unlikely to be reconciled rather than suggesting a compelling case for change.”
Where to go to from here?
I do not believe it makes sense to regularly change fundamental accounting rules. In this respect, the retention of the impairment-only model is fully justified in my view.
Furthermore, the IASB's position on retaining the impairment-only model has shown that the proponents of reintroducing scheduled goodwill amortisation were unable to formulate a robust transition solution.
If goodwill were to by systematically amortised it would have had to answer the question of retrospective or prospective application. The answer to this question is crucial insofar as the resulting equity effects have consequences not only on the structure of the statement of financial position, but also on existing financing covenant arrangements, earnings forecasts and evaluating the economic success of business combinations.
In addition, there are considerations regarding additional disclosures in the notes to the financial statements, which should make it possible to assess the success of a business combination for a foreseeable period after the acquisition date. It is noteworthy that this assessment period is almost always significantly shorter than any discussed period associated with the useful life of goodwill.
In some jurisdictions around the world, the acceptance of scheduled goodwill amortisation has always been dependent on (a) the resulting charges to earnings and (b) aligning with legislative requirements that specify what the useful life of a goodwill needs to be. The price paid for this, however, has been putting to one side the business model and processes that have been put in place to preserve the value of the reporting entity.
To summarise, I believe a perfect answer for goodwill accounting is not possible today and it will not be possible in the foreseeable future. Given this, my preference is to accept an imperfect but stable compromise rather than to repeatedly question the fundamental aspects of the IFRS framework. Ultimately, accounting is a language that does not live from being conceptually perfect, but from being generally accepted and 'understandable'.
If you would like to disccuss this topic in further detail, please contact myself or your local Grant Thornton location.