Provisions and Contingent Liabilities in a Product Recall
Tasman Appliances Ltd sold 50,000 kettles during 20X5. In November 20X5 a design defect was identified that can cause overheating. At 31 December 20X5, 1,200 units had been returned and repaired at a cost of $60 each. Actuarial estimates suggest 4% of the remaining units will fail, with repair costs of $65 per unit. A class action has been filed by three customers seeking $2,000,000 in damages; Tasman's lawyers assess the probability of an outflow as possible but not probable, and estimate the likely settlement at $400,000 if it occurs. Tasman also offers a two-year warranty. The CFO wants to recognise the class action at $400,000 and to recognise the repair provision only for returned units.
1. Determine whether Tasman should recognise a provision for the repair costs and calculate the amount.
Read the worked answer
A provision is recognised when: (1) there is a present obligation from a past event; (2) an outflow of economic benefits is probable; and (3) the amount can be reliably estimated. All three are met: the defect arose from past sales, failures are probable (4% estimate), and costs are reliably estimable.
The CFO is wrong to provide only for returned units. Tasman must provide for the expected future repairs on sold units under the warranty and the constructive obligation created by the recall:
- Units expected to fail: 50,000 − 1,200 = 48,800 remaining × 4% = 1,952 units.
- Provision = 1,952 × $65 = $126,880.
This is in addition to the $72,000 already incurred on returned units (1,200 × $60), which is expensed as incurred. The provision is measured at the best estimate of the expenditure required to settle the obligation at reporting date, and should be discounted if the effect is material (likely not material here given the short timeframe).
2. Explain the treatment of the class action and the disclosure requirements.
Read the worked answer
Class action: A provision is recognised only if an outflow is probable (more likely than not). Tasman's lawyers assess the outflow as possible but not probable, so no provision is recognised. The CFO's proposal to recognise $400,000 is incorrect.
Instead, Tasman discloses a contingent liability, unless the possibility of outflow is remote:
- The nature of the contingency (product defect class action).
- An estimate of the financial effect ($2,000,000 claimed; likely settlement $400,000 if it occurs).
- Any uncertainties relating to the amount or timing.
- The fact that no provision has been recognised.
Disclosures for the repair provision:
- The carrying amount at the beginning and end of the period.
- Additional provisions recognised during the period.
- Amounts used and reversed.
- A description of the nature of the obligation and the expected timing of outflows.
If the class action becomes probable before the financial statements are authorised for issue, it becomes an adjusting event and a provision should be recognised.
3. Discuss the measurement uncertainties and how they affect the reliability of the estimates.
Read the worked answer
Both estimates involve significant judgement:
- Repair provision: The 4% failure rate is actuarial but may be refined as more data emerges. If the rate rises to 6%, the provision increases to 48,800 × 6% × $65 = $190,320 - a $63,440 increase. Tasman should disclose the nature of the estimate and any key assumptions about failure rates and repair costs.
- Class action: The $400,000 settlement estimate is highly uncertain and depends on litigation outcomes. Because it is not probable, it is disclosed as a contingent liability with the uncertainties highlighted.
Tasman should also consider whether the defect indicates an onerous contract or triggers impairment of related inventory. The financial statements should include a critical judgement disclosure explaining that the repair provision is based on management's best estimate of failure rates, and that actual costs may differ.