Provisi & Liabilitas Kontinjensi

Berikut penjelasan mengenai provisi dan kontinjensi (ada di PSAK 57 revisi 2009):

Provisi diakui sebagai liabilitas (dengan asumsi dapat dibuat estimasi andal) karena provisi tersebut merupakan kewajiban masa kini dan kemungkinan besar (probable) mengakibatkan arus keluar sumber daya yang mengandung manfaat ekonomi untuk menyelesaikan kewajiban tersebut.

Liabilitas kontinjensi yang tidak diakui sebagai liabilitas karena liabilitas kontinjensi merupakan salah satu dari:
- kewajiban potensial karena belum pasti apakah entitas memiliki kewajiban kini yang akan menimbulkan arus keluar sumber daya yang mengandung manfaat ekonomi; atau
- kewajiban kini yang tidak memenuhi kriteria pengakuan karena tidak besar kemungkinan terjadinya (not probable). Karena estimasi memadai yang andal mengenai jumlah kewajiban tidak dapat dibuat.

Oleh karena itu, provisi masuk ke dalam laporan posisi keuangan (neraca) sebagai bagian dari liabilitas dengan nama akun provisi (dahulu kewajiban diestimasi – bagian dari liabilitas jangka pendek/current liabilities), sedangkan kontinjensi harus diungkapkan (disclose) dalam catatan atas laporan keuangan (notes to financial statement).

5 thoughts on “Provisi & Liabilitas Kontinjensi

  1. jadi pak contoh yg termasuk kewajiban masa kini apa?
    setau saya sih cuma ada yang probable sama possible.
    bedanya ya probable kemungkinan terjadinya lebih besar sedangkan possible kemungkinan terjadi lebih kecil.
    lalu probable dibagi 2 lagi yang bisa di estimasi dan tidak bisa diestimasi…
    untuk yang bisa diestimasi baru dicatat sebagai contigency liabilities.(contoh warranty yang tahun lalu sudah pernah terjadi sehingga bisa di lakukan estimasi)
    sedangkan yang tidak bisa di estimasi (perusahaan yang baru membuat adanya warranty terhadap produk barunya) dan possible semua di disclose di financial statement.(contoh litigation case)
    maka dari itu saya bingung atas kewajiban masa kini…

    • Definisi kewajiban kini (present obligation) cek di PSAK 57 (revisi 2009) paragraf 15-16. Tapi sebetulnya, liabilitas adalah kewajiban kini (present obligation) dari suatu entitas yang muncul karena kejadian di masa lalu, asalkan dapat diukur dengan andal, kalau tidak dapat diukur dengan andal masuk ke liabilitas kontinjen. Contoh berikut saya ambil dari buku wiley practical implementation & workbook:

      Excellent Inc. is an oil entity that is exploring oil off the shores of Excessoil Islands. It has employed oil exploration experts from around the globe. Despite all efforts, there is a major oil spill that has grabbedthe attention of the media. Environmentalists are protesting and the entity has engaged lawyers to advise it about legal repercussions. In the past, other oil entities have had to settle with the environmentalists, paying huge amounts in out-of-court settlements. The legal counsel of Excellent Inc. has advised it that there is no law that would require it to pay anything for the oil spill; the parliament of Excessoil Islands is currently considering such legislation, but that legislation would probably take another year to be finalized
      as of the date of the oil spill. However, in its television advertisements and promotional brochures, Excellent Inc. often has clearly stated that it is very conscious of its responsibilities toward the environment and will make good any losses that may result from its exploration. This policy has been widely publicized, and the chief executive officer has acknowledged this policy in official meetings when members of the public raised questions to him on this issue.
      Required
      Does the above give rise to an obligating event that requires Excellent Inc. to make a provision for the
      cost of making good the oil spill?
      Solution
      (a) Present obligation as a result of a past obligating event. The obligating event is the oil spill. Because there is no legislation in place yet that would make cleanup mandatory for any entity operating in Excessoil Islands, there is no legal obligation. However, the circumstances surrounding the issue clearly indicate that there is a constructive obligation since the company,
      with its advertised policy and public statements, has created an expectation in the minds of the public at large that it will honor its environmental obligations.
      (b) An outflow of resources embodying economic benefits in settlement. Probable.
      (c) Conclusion. A provision should be recognized for the best estimate of the cost to clean up the
      oil spill.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s