Is EBITDAC a thing? Yes, according to the FT. This article describes the use of a new non-GAAP metric: "earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, amortisation-and coronavirus." Applying the new metric, a few companies have actually added back profits they contend they would have earned but for the mandatory lockdowns resulting from COVID-19. Hmmm. While, according to the article, the add-back has "bemused some observers," it does raise the question: how should companies employ non-GAAP financial measures (NGFMs) in the context of COVID-19? How should audit committees conduct oversight of the use of NGFMs that have been adjusted for coronavirus-related effects? Auditors weigh in on the question.

First, the Center for Audit Quality has posted "COVID-19 Considerations for Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Performance Metrics," which, as the title suggests, looks at NGFMs in the context of COVID-19 and provides some suggestions to help audit committees navigate the rocky terrain. Through roundtable discussions, the CAQ found that NGFMs were generally viewed by companies and investors to be useful "when they are calculated and presented consistently, transparently disclosed, and comparable to measures disclosed by other companies." Adjustments made to reflect coronavirus-related factors may affect consistency and comparability initially and, to help investors understand the impact of COVID-19 on the company, will require transparent disclosure regarding the calculation and the reasons why management finds these metrics meaningful.

SideBar

In Disclosure Guidance Topic No. 9, issued by Corp Fin in March, the staff raised the issue of NGFMs and KPIs in the context of COVID-19. Specifically, the staff advised that companies using NGFMs or KPIs "to adjust for or explain the impact of COVID-19" should address "why management finds the measure or metric useful and how it helps investors assess the impact of COVID-19 on the company's financial position and results of operations."

In addition, the staff reminded

"companies that we do not believe it is appropriate for a company to present non-GAAP financial measures or metrics for the sole purpose of presenting a more favorable view of the company. Rather we believe companies should use non-GAAP financial measures and performance metrics for the purpose of sharing with investors how management and the Board are analyzing the current and potential impact of COVID-19 on the company's financial condition and operating results..We similarly understand that companies may consider presenting metrics related to COVID-19, or changing the method by which it calculates a metric as a result of COVID-19. In these cases, we remind companies of the principles explained in recent Commission guidance related to metrics." (See this PubCo post.)

The SEC guidance the staff invokes above was issued in February, focusing on the disclosure of KPIs and other metrics in MD&A. In the guidance, the SEC cautioned that, because prior guidance instructs a company to "provide a narrative that enables investors to see a company 'through the eyes of management,' so these metrics should not deviate materially from metrics used to manage operations or make strategic decisions." [Emphasis added.] Depending on the facts and circumstances, when a company presents KPIs, the SEC expects to see:

  • "A clear definition of the metric and how it is calculated;
  • A statement indicating the reasons why the metric provides useful information to investors; and
  • A statement indicating how management uses the metric in managing or monitoring the performance of the business.

The company should also consider whether there are estimates or assumptions underlying the metric or its calculation, and whether disclosure of such items is necessary for the metric not to be materially misleading."

If a company changes the method of calculation or presentation, the guidance advises that the company

"should consider the need to disclose, to the extent material:

(1) the differences in the way the metric is calculated or presented compared to prior periods,

(2) the reasons for such changes,

(3) the effects of any such change on the amounts or other information being disclosed and on amounts or other information previously reported, and

(4) such other differences in methodology and results that would reasonably be expected to be relevant to an understanding of the company's performance or prospects."

The guidance also recommends that companies consider the need to "recast prior metrics to conform to the current presentation and place the current disclosure in an appropriate context," depending on the significance of the change. (See this PubCo post.)

In particular, the CAQ focuses its discussion on the responsibilities of the audit committee to oversee the financial reporting process on behalf of company shareholders. The CAQ advises that the audit committee can

"act as a bridge between management and investors by:

  • assessing management's reasons for presenting non-GAAP financial measures and performance metrics;
  • considering the sufficiency of management's related disclosures; and
  • evaluating whether the measures present a fair and balanced view of the company's performance."

In evaluating NGFMs and performance metrics, such as KPIs, used to reflect the impact of COVID-19, the CAQ suggests that audit committees:

  • Try to evaluate the NGFMs, metrics and related disclosure from the perspective of the investors to gauge whether the NGFMs, metrics and disclosure will actually help investors understand how management and the audit committee see the business.
  • Discuss with management the coronavirus-related changes made to the NGFMs and metrics, particularly why the changes were made and whether the disclosure adequately captures the changes and the rationale for them.
  • Discuss with management their compliance with the SEC's rules and guidance regarding NGFMs and other metrics, particularly the guidance related to adjustments for COVID-19.
  • Discuss with the outside auditors their responsibilities regarding NGFMs and performance metrics.

Audit firm EY has also provided its views on appropriate use of NGFMs to present the effects of the COVID-19, offering advice on which types of coronavirus-related adjustments are appropriate. EY indicates that the SEC staff's prior guidance and comment letters on the use of NGFMs are instructive in offering a framework to help companies evaluate the acceptability of coronavirus-related adjustments. Looking to that framework as a guide, EY advises that adjustment to NGFMs for the effects of COVID-19 should be limited to items directly attributable to COVID-19 and that are both:

  • "Incremental to charges incurred prior to the outbreak and not expected to recur once the crisis has subsided and operations return to normal
  • Clearly separable from normal operations."

EY also advises that, to the extent that common adjustments, such as asset impairments or restructuring charges, are made for the first time, companies should retrospectively adjust their NGFMs for prior periods if the item also materially affected those periods. In addition, companies are cautioned to keep in mind the SEC staff's guidance that an NGFM "can be misleading if it excludes nonrecurring charges but does not exclude nonrecurring gains."

Assuming that charges or gains are attributable to COVID-19 and are incremental to and separable from normal operations, as noted above, EY believes that the following types of adjustments may be acceptable:

  • "Temporarily paying a premium to compensate employees for performing their normal duties at increased personal risk (e.g., hazard pay)
  • Cleaning and disinfecting facilities more thoroughly and/or more frequently
  • Terminating contracts or complying with contractual provisions invoked directly due to the events of the pandemic (e.g., contract termination fees or penalties)
  • Insurance recoveries"

In the absence of further guidance from the staff, EY advises that companies avoid COVID-19-related adjustments regarding the following items, as inconsistent with the framework above:

  • "Paying idled employees
  • Rent and other recurring expenses (e.g., security, utilities, insurance, maintenance) related to temporarily idled facilities
  • Excess capacity costs expensed in the period due to lower production
  • Paying employees for increased hours required to perform their normal duties
  • Paying more for routine inventory costs (e.g., shipping costs)"

Moreover, EY cautions not to "use a non-GAAP measure that includes adjustments to normalize operations, such as including estimates of lost revenue to show what results would have been without the effects of the pandemic."

However, even if it is inadvisable to adjust NGFMs to reflect certain items, companies can still convey the information about the impact of coronavirus-related items just by providing additional disclosure about the unusual expense or other item. For example, EY suggests, companies can show the effect of payroll expenses related to employees idled during the pandemic simply by disclosing that "payroll paid to employees idled due to the COVID-19 pandemic of approximately $xx million are included within cost of revenue, selling, general and administrative and research and development expenses." Disclosure of that nature is not considered an NGFM.

Although slightly more tentative, audit firm Deloitte appears to take similar positions. According to Deloitte, companies may present NGFMs that adjust for "unusual, direct, and incremental costs due to COVID-19 as well as any related economic uncertainty, such as asset or goodwill impairments." However, adjusting for "estimated lost revenues or profits is likely to be inappropriate because the SEC may view it to be a tailored accounting principle." Similarly, adjusting for unusual items, such as restructuring charges, may be acceptable but adjusting "revenues or eliminate recurring cash operating expenses may be viewed as potentially misleading and therefore may be prohibited."

With regard to adjustments for salary continuation while operations are suspended or closed (referred to as idled employees by EY above), even though salary continuation would be unusual, those expenses would be recurring cash operating expenses, with the result that NGFMs reflecting those adjustments could be subject to challenge by the SEC. Addressing KPIs and similar metrics, Deloitte advises that, if they change as a result of COVID-19 or for any reason, companies should provide "clear and transparent disclosure of the change" and update definitions of the affected metrics. Companies should also consider whether they will need to "recast prior periods to conform to the current presentation if the changes are significant."

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.