Dissent of Anthony T Cope, Philippe Danjou and Robert P Garnett

DO1 The Board's decision to require the capitalisation of borrowing costs relating to qualifying assets will cause a significant change in accounting for the many preparers that currently apply the benchmark treatment of recognising borrowing costs as an expense. Messrs Cope, Danjou and Garnett believe that such a change will require the establishment of cumbersome measurement processes and monitoring of capitalised costs over a long period. This is likely to involve considerable accounting work and incremental auditing costs.

DO2 Users of financial statements responding to the exposure draft did not support the change because they saw no informational benefit in a model that capitalises costs, other than the capitalisation of the actual economic cost of capital of the investment. In addition, Messrs Cope, Danjou and Garnett believe that a standard requiring the capitalisation of borrowing costs should discuss more extensively which assets qualify for the purpose of capitalising which borrowing costs.

DO3 As a consequence, Messrs Cope, Danjou and Garnett dissent because, in their view, the costs of this particular change will far outweigh the benefits to users.