BC30 The Board proposed that an entity apply the amendments retrospectively. However, some respondents disagreed. They said that retrospective application might be impossible for some entities without the use of hindsight, or could be complex and burdensome in some situations - for example, in determining the exact point at which there was evidence of a change in use in prior periods, or in obtaining fair values at transfer dates in the past. Those respondents suggested either prospective application or, alternatively, retrospective application with some practical expedients.

BC31 In considering the comments, the Board observed the following:

(a) the amounts recognised on the date of initial application would be unaffected by the transition approach for some previous changes in use, for example, transfers between investment property and owneroccupied property for entities that use the cost model.

(b) applying the amendments retrospectively could be complex or may require the use of hindsight for some previous changes in use, for example, transfers from investment property measured using the fair value model to owner-occupied property that occurred some considerable time ago.

(c) a prospective approach would require entities to apply the amendments only to changes in use that occur on or after the date of initial application. Such an approach might prevent an entity from reclassifying some property to reflect the conditions that exist on the date of initial application.