The Financial Accounting Standards Board issued an invitation to comment Thursday asking for feedback on whether it should pursue a project on accounting for intangible assets and providing additional disclosures about them.

Some examples of intangibles include brand recognition, copyrights, patents, trademarks, trade names, customer relationships and customer lists. There are already several areas of U.S. GAAP that provide guidance on intangibles, FASB noted. An entity currently evaluates the specific facts and circumstances and nature of the intangible — such as the intangible’s purpose and how it was obtained or developed — to determine the relevant areas within GAAP. The recognition of an intangible can vary according to the basis of the nature of the intangible, its stage of development, and whether it was acquired in a business combination or an asset acquisition. That means some intangibles are recognized as assets either in whole or in part, while others are not recognized as assets at all. In some cases, the costs incurred to create an intangible that’s not recognized as an asset are considered to be R&D efforts, while, in other cases, those costs are considered to be normal operating expenses (both general and administrative). If it’s indeed recognized, the subsequent accounting for an intangible asset can include amortization, impairment and remeasurement (such as remeasurement of certain crypto assets to fair value).

The invitation to comment is being issued as part of FASB’s research project on the accounting for and disclosure of intangibles. The ITC aims to explore ways to improve this area of financial reporting, which includes the accounting for acquired and internally developed intangibles. An ITC is a staff document prepared at the direction of the FASB chair in which the board does not express any preliminary views. Responses to the questions in this ITC will help inform the board as it considers whether to add a project to its technical agenda on intangibles.

The ITC uses the term intangibles to include both (1) intangibles recognized as assets in the financial statements and (2) intangibles and related costs not recognized as assets in the financial statements.

Specifically, FASB would like to understand:

• Whether there is a pervasive need to improve GAAP related to the accounting for and disclosure of intangibles (that is, is there a case for change);
• What intangibles, or groups of intangibles, FASB should consider addressing;
• What potential solution(s) FASB should consider — including whether the potential solution or solutions are narrow for a specific intangible or could be applied broadly to a group of intangibles — and the expected benefits and expected costs of the potential solution(s);
• Whether different accounting for intangibles should exist depending on how the asset is obtained (internally developed, acquired in a business combination, or acquired in an asset acquisition); and,
• What information about intangibles an investor utilizes (or would utilize) for its analysis and how that information influences the investor’s capital allocation decisions.

FASB is asking for comments on the ITC by May 30, 2025.

The optional standard mileage rate for automobiles driven for business will increase 3 cents in 2025, the Internal Revenue Service said Thursday, but the mileage rates for vehicles used for other purposes will stay unchanged from this year. 

Optional standard mileage rates are employed to compute the deductible costs of operating vehicles for business, charitable and medical purposes, in addition to active-duty members of the Armed Forces who are moving. 

Starting Jan. 1, 2025, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car, van, pickup or panel truck will be: 

• 70 cents per mile driven for business use, up 3 cents from 2024;
• 21 cents per mile driven for medical purposes, the same as in 2024;
• 21 cents per mile driven for moving purposes for qualified active-duty members of the Armed Forces, unchanged from last year; and,
• 14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations, equal to the rate in 2024. 

The rates apply to fully electric and hybrid automobiles, in addition to gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles. 

While the mileage rate for charitable use is set by statute, the mileage rate for business use is based on an annual study of the fixed and variable costs of operating an automobile. The rate for medical and moving purposes, meanwhile, is based on only the variable costs from the annual study. 

Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, taxpayers cannot claim a miscellaneous itemized deduction for unreimbursed employee travel expenses. And only taxpayers who are members of the military on active duty may claim a deduction for moving expenses incurred while relocating under orders to a permanent change of station. 

Use of the standard mileage rates is optional. Taxpayers can instead choose to calculate the actual costs of using their vehicle. 

Taxpayers using the standard mileage rate for a vehicle they own and use for business must opt to use the rate in the first year the automobile is available for business use. Then, in later years, they’re allowed to choose to use the standard mileage rate or actual expenses. 

For a leased vehicle, taxpayers using the standard mileage rate must employ that method for the entire lease period, including renewals. 

Notice 2025-05 provides the optional 2025 standard mileage rates for taxpayers to use in computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, charitable, medical, or moving expense purposes. The notice also includes the amount taxpayers need to use in calculating reductions to basis for depreciation taken under the business standard mileage rate, and the maximum standard automobile cost that can be used in computing the allowance under a fixed and variable rate plan. In addition, the notice provides the maximum fair market value of employer-provided automobiles first made available to employees for personal use in calendar year 2025 for which employers may use the fleet-average valuation rule in Section 1.61-21(d)(5)(v) or the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule in Section 1.61-21(e). 

The Financial Accounting Foundation released a report that found the Private Company Council has been performing its duties effectively in representing the views of privately held companies and advising the Financial Accounting Standards Board and should continue to operate.

The FAF, which oversees FASB and the PCC, as well as the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, began reevaluating the role of the PCC in February. The PCC emerged in 2012 after the FAF, which oversees both FASB and the Government Accounting Standards Board, heard feedback from private companies that they would like more of a voice in standard-setting at FASB.

Previously, FASB and the American Institute of CPAs had operated a joint committee known as the Private Company Financial Reporting Committee. The FAF, the AICPA and the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy set up a Blue-Ribbon Panel on Standard Setting for Private Companies in 2009 to study the issue of allowing greater input from private companies, and the panel issued a plan in 2011 calling for establishment of a separate council under the oversight of the FAF that would hold its own votes. However, within a few years, it became more of an advisory committee to FASB, much like the Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Council, but not a standard-setter in its own right. The PCC still meets regularly, including  this week, and FASB continues to report on its meetings.

The PCC uses a Private Company Decision-Making Framework to advise FASB on the appropriate accounting treatment for private companies for items under active consideration on the FASB’s technical agenda. The PCC also advises the FASB on possible alternatives within GAAP to address the needs of users of private company financial statements. Any proposed changes to GAAP are subject to endorsement by FASB.

Led by the Standard-Setting Process Oversight Committee of the FAF Board of Trustees, the review elicited input from stakeholders vita surveys, virtual meetings, and letters in response to a request for public comment.

The FAF trustees determined that, overall, the PCC is fulfilling its mission and duties effectively and that it should maintain its current mission, remit and structure. The trustees also affirmed the PCC’s current meeting operations and culture. However, the report did point to opportunities for positive change, including ramping up the PCC’s communications activities, publishing a PCC annual report, and enhancing recruiting activities to identify and select new PCC members in the future.

“Good governance prompts us to conduct periodic reviews of our important advisory councils,” said FAF trustee and co-chair of the Standard-Setting Process Oversight Committee Timothy Ryan, head of technology and business enablement at Citigroup, in a statement Wednesday. “I am pleased that stakeholders largely expressed support for the PCC while making excellent suggestions for potential improvements to make it an even more effective body.”

Many stakeholders agreed the PCC is effectively fulfilling its advisory role to FASB, striking the right balance between reducing complexity and ensuring relevant and reliable information to stakeholders, according to the report. They also expressed views that the PCC has been successful in addressing the needs of the users of private company financial statements, indicating they have observed wide adoption of private company alternatives and practical expedients. 

“Overall, the sentiments focused on the positive impact the PCC has had on financial reporting for private companies and their stakeholders since its establishment in 2012, with a recognition that the PCC is the optimal vehicle to continue this important work,” said the report. 

Several stakeholders said the PCC has successfully educated FASB on issues where private companies operate differently than how public companies operate. For example, the PCC provided feedback to FASB on certain aspects of the leasing standard, and on areas that resulted in GAAP alternatives for private companies for goodwill, intangibles, hedge accounting and variable interest entity consolidation standards. 

“We are grateful to the many stakeholders who freely shared their diverse perspectives about the PCC,” added FAF trustee and co-chair of the Standard-Setting Process Oversight Committee Manju Ganeriwala, the former treasurer of the Commonwealth of Virginia, in a statement. “We are confident that the PCC can sustain its excellent track record of providing thoughtful, expert advice and counsel to the FASB for many years to come.”

The AICPA praised the findings of the report. “The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants appreciates the thoroughness of the Financial Accounting Foundation’s review of the Private Company Council, and we share the report’s findings that the council has been effective in its mission,” stated AICPA vice president of financial reporting Daniel Noll. “The AICPA has observed all of the PCC meetings since its inception and notes that it has fulfilled its role well, both in  suggesting changes to existing GAAP and in advising on prospective GAAP. As the FAF’s report notes, there are thousands of public companies in the United States but millions of private companies, so this is a critical advisory role for our capital markets. We look forward to more important work by the PCC and its continued advocacy for stakeholders who depend on financial reporting by private companies.”