IAS 36 CGUs, Goodwill Allocation, Impairment Testing and Reversal

IAS 36 CGUs, Goodwill Allocation, Impairment Testing and Reversal

By Sai Manikanta Pedamallu (ACCA, CMA US, CSCA US, CGMA, ACMA, Dip IFRS, M.Com, MBA, MA)

Lead Instructor, Global Fin X | www.globalfinx.in/manikanta

---

Post 39 covered the foundations of IAS 36: indicators, recoverable amount, and the mechanics of VIU versus FVLCD. This post works through the three areas where IAS 36 becomes operationally and examationally demanding: identifying cash-generating units correctly, allocating goodwill to those units, and applying the full impairment test with its specific loss allocation sequence.

CGU identification is where most real-world IAS 36 errors begin. Define the CGU too broadly and impairments are masked. Define it too narrowly and the test becomes impractical. Getting this right matters because the CGU boundary determines everything that follows.

---

What a CGU Is and Why It Exists

Most assets cannot generate cash flows on their own. A machine in a factory produces output only when connected to other machines, a power supply, raw materials, and labour. Its cash flows are not independent of those other assets. If you impaired the machine in isolation, you would be testing the wrong unit.

A cash-generating unit is the smallest identifiable group of assets that generates cash inflows that are largely independent of the cash inflows from other assets or groups of assets.

The key phrase is "largely independent." IAS 36 does not require perfect independence. An asset group whose cash inflows are substantially self-determined, not wholly dependent on the cash flows of other asset groups, qualifies as a CGU.

The practical test: if you could sell the group of assets separately from the rest of the entity and a buyer would pay for the cash flows that group generates, you have a CGU.

---

Identifying CGUs in Practice

The Independence Test

Cash inflows from a group of assets are independent when those inflows are not materially affected by decisions about how other groups of assets are operated. A retail store that generates its own revenue from customers, pays its own costs, and could in principle be sold or transferred as a standalone business is a CGU. A support function (HR department, IT infrastructure) that provides services to other parts of the business does not generate independent cash inflows and is not a CGU.

For a multi-location business, each location is typically a separate CGU if it generates cash from its own customers independently of other locations. A chain of Shoppers Stop stores would typically treat each store as a separate CGU, because each store's revenue from customers is independent of what the other stores earn, even though the brand and central supply chain are shared.

The shared brand and supply chain are corporate assets or common infrastructure that benefit multiple CGUs. They are allocated to CGUs for impairment testing purposes but do not define the CGU boundary themselves.

Management Monitoring as a Guide

IAS 36 notes that how management monitors operations is relevant evidence for CGU identification. The way internal reports are structured, how performance is measured, and how decisions about continuing or discontinuing operations are made all provide evidence of what constitutes an independently operating asset group.

If Tata Motors monitors its commercial vehicles division and its passenger vehicles division as separate businesses with separate management teams, separate P&Ls, and separate capital allocation, those are likely separate CGUs or groups of CGUs. If the same factory produces both vehicle types and management treats it as a single operation, the factory may be a single CGU.

Geographic Segments vs Individual Units

For Indian conglomerates with operations across multiple countries, the CGU question has a geographic dimension. An IT services company's operations in India, the US, and Europe each generate revenue from different customer bases. Are they separate CGUs or one global CGU?

The answer depends on interdependence. If the India operation can be separately sold and generates cash flows from Indian clients that do not depend on the European operation's performance, India is a separate CGU. If the delivery model is globally integrated (projects staffed from India, managed from the US, invoiced from Europe), the distinction becomes murkier.

In practice, most large Indian IT companies define CGUs at a higher level (geography or business line) rather than at individual delivery centre or project level, because cash flows from individual offices or practice groups are not independently generated.

---

Carrying Amount of a CGU

The carrying amount of a CGU includes the carrying amounts of all assets that generate the CGU's cash inflows, including any goodwill allocated to the CGU and any share of corporate assets allocated to it.

Current assets (trade receivables, inventory, cash) are generally excluded from the CGU carrying amount and the VIU cash flow calculation, because working capital is managed at a level above individual CGUs and because including it creates consistency problems between the carrying amount and the recoverable amount.

Liabilities are also generally excluded, with an important exception: where the recoverable amount cannot be determined without deducting the associated liability (for example, a provision for decommissioning costs that a buyer of the CGU would assume), the liability is included in both the carrying amount and the recoverable amount calculation consistently.

Financing liabilities (borrowings, lease liabilities representing financing) are excluded from CGU carrying amounts. Their cost is captured in the discount rate used for VIU, not in the carrying amount. Including financing liabilities in the carrying amount without a corresponding adjustment to the VIU cash flows (which already exclude interest payments) would double-count the financing cost.

---

Goodwill: Why It Cannot Be Tested Alone

Goodwill is an asset that represents future economic benefits from unidentifiable assets acquired in a business combination. It does not generate cash flows on its own. It contributes to the cash flows of other assets.

Because goodwill generates no independent cash flows, its recoverable amount cannot be determined in isolation. Testing goodwill alone would always produce a VIU of zero or close to zero. That is not the purpose of the test.

Instead, goodwill is allocated to CGUs (or groups of CGUs) that are expected to benefit from the synergies of the combination from which the goodwill arose. The goodwill is tested as part of the CGU's total carrying amount, which includes both the identifiable assets and the goodwill.

Allocation Rules

Goodwill must be allocated to the lowest level within the entity at which the goodwill is monitored for internal management purposes, and that level must not be larger than an operating segment (as defined under IFRS 8 before aggregation).

The operating segment ceiling prevents entities from allocating all goodwill to one giant segment, which would mask impairment in underperforming individual CGUs. If an Indian IT conglomerate has five operating segments, goodwill must be allocated separately to each segment or to CGUs within segments.

Goodwill is allocated on a basis that reflects which CGUs are expected to benefit from the acquisition's synergies. An acquisition of a US-based IT firm whose client relationships are expected to benefit both the India delivery centres and the US sales team requires judgment about how to split the goodwill between those CGUs.

Groups of CGUs

Where it is not possible to allocate goodwill to individual CGUs on a non-arbitrary basis, goodwill is allocated to groups of CGUs. The group of CGUs cannot be larger than an operating segment.

This flexibility is important but also creates a risk: allocating to a large group of CGUs can mask impairment in individual underperforming units that would be visible if goodwill were allocated at a lower level.

---

The Full CGU Impairment Test: A Worked Example

Wipro acquires a US-based analytics company for Rs. 1,800 crore. The acquisition is expected to benefit Wipro's data analytics CGU in India and the acquired US business as a single integrated CGU. Goodwill recognised: Rs. 300 crore, allocated entirely to the combined data analytics CGU.

CGU carrying amount at 31 March 2025:

Impairment indicator: Revenue from the acquired US clients has declined materially, and the analytics market has seen significant competitive disruption from AI-native competitors entering the market.

VIU calculation:

Pre-tax discount rate: 16% (reflecting the technology sector risk).

Management projects 8 years of cash flows, declining from Rs. 180 crore in Year 1 to Rs. 120 crore by Year 8 due to competitive pressure.

Terminal value: Rs. 250 crore (based on steady-state cash flows at Year 8 capitalised at the discount rate less terminal growth of 3%).

Simplified VIU calculation: Rs. 850 crore (discounted cash flows + terminal value at 16%).

FVLCD: A strategic buyer has indicated interest at approximately Rs. 900 crore. Disposal costs: Rs. 20 crore.

FVLCD: Rs. 880 crore.

Recoverable amount: Higher of Rs. 850 crore (VIU) and Rs. 880 crore (FVLCD) = Rs. 880 crore.

Impairment loss: Rs. 1,140 – Rs. 880 = Rs. 260 crore.

Allocating the Impairment Loss

IAS 36 specifies the order of allocation:

Step 1: Reduce goodwill first to zero.

Goodwill carrying amount: Rs. 300 crore.

Impairment loss available: Rs. 260 crore.

Rs. 260 crore is less than Rs. 300 crore, so goodwill absorbs the entire Rs. 260 crore.

Goodwill reduced from Rs. 300 crore to Rs. 40 crore.

If the impairment loss had exceeded the goodwill carrying amount (say the loss was Rs. 400 crore):

Step 1: Goodwill reduced to zero: Rs. 300 crore allocated.

Step 2: Remaining loss of Rs. 100 crore allocated pro rata across other assets, based on their carrying amounts:

Note: the pro rata allocation has a floor for each individual asset. No individual asset can be reduced below the highest of: its FVLCD, its VIU, and zero. If pro rata allocation would take an asset below this floor, that asset is not reduced further, and the remaining loss is reallocated to the other assets within the CGU.

---

Corporate Assets: The Allocation Problem

Corporate assets are assets that contribute to the cash flows of multiple CGUs but cannot be directly assigned to any one of them on a reasonable and consistent basis. Examples: a group headquarters building, a shared IT infrastructure platform, a central research facility.

IAS 36 requires corporate assets to be included in impairment testing, but not by simply allocating them all to one CGU. The approach depends on whether a reasonable allocation basis exists.

Where allocation is possible on a reasonable and consistent basis: Corporate assets are allocated to individual CGUs or groups of CGUs, and the impairment test includes the allocated corporate asset carrying amount.

Where allocation is not possible for individual CGUs but is possible for a group: The smallest group of CGUs to which the corporate asset can be allocated is identified. The test is performed at that group level, including the corporate asset.

Where no reasonable allocation is possible: A two-step test is required. First, test each individual CGU without the corporate asset. If no individual CGU is impaired, proceed to test the smallest group of CGUs that includes the corporate asset. The carrying amount of this group includes the unallocated corporate asset.

This two-step approach avoids both masking impairment (by forcing an arbitrary allocation to a healthy CGU) and over-testing (by triggering a group test only when necessary).

---

The Partial Goodwill Problem

IAS 36 contains a known inconsistency when goodwill is recognised on a partial basis (the proportionate share method under IFRS 3). If an acquirer recognises only 70% of the goodwill (its own proportionate share of the subsidiary's goodwill), but the impairment test is performed on the full CGU including 100% of the CGU's cash-generating capacity, there is a mismatch.

The impairment test compares a carrying amount that includes only 70% of economic goodwill against a recoverable amount that reflects 100% of the CGU's earning power. This can make the CGU appear more healthy than it actually is in economic terms.

IAS 36 requires a "grossing up" adjustment when the CGU contains partial goodwill. The carrying amount of the CGU is adjusted to include the hypothetical full goodwill (the 100% amount including the non-controlling interest's share), the recoverable amount is compared to this grossed-up carrying amount, any impairment loss is calculated on the full goodwill basis, and then only the acquirer's proportionate share of the goodwill impairment loss is recognised.

This adjustment is operationally demanding but prevents the partial goodwill method from producing systematically lower impairment charges than the full goodwill method.

---

Reversal of Impairment Losses: What Is and Is Not Permitted

For Goodwill

Impairment losses on goodwill are never reversed. The prohibition is absolute. Recognising a reversal would effectively be recognising internally generated goodwill, which IAS 38 prohibits. Once goodwill is impaired, that impairment is permanent.

For All Other Assets

An impairment loss can be reversed if, and only if, the circumstances that caused the impairment have changed. The increase in recoverable amount must be attributable to specific changes in the estimates used to determine the asset's recoverable amount since the last impairment loss was recognised. A general improvement in market conditions without specific linkage to the impaired asset's recoverable amount does not automatically justify reversal.

The reversal is limited: the carrying amount after reversal cannot exceed what the depreciated historical cost would have been had the original impairment never been recognised.

Worked Example: Reversal Ceiling

A machine was originally acquired for Rs. 200 crore with a 10-year useful life. At the end of Year 4, an impairment loss of Rs. 40 crore was recognised, reducing the carrying amount to Rs. 80 crore. At the end of Year 6, the circumstances have reversed.

Depreciated historical cost at end of Year 6 (had no impairment occurred):

Original cost: Rs. 200 crore.

Depreciation over 6 years (straight-line over 10 years): Rs. 200 × 6/10 = Rs. 120 crore.

Depreciated historical cost: Rs. 200 – Rs. 120 = Rs. 80 crore.

Carrying amount at end of Year 6 (with impairment):

Post-impairment carrying amount at Year 4: Rs. 80 crore.

Depreciation on Rs. 80 crore over remaining 6 years from Year 4: Rs. 80 × 2/6 = Rs. 26.67 crore (for Years 4 to 6).

Carrying amount at Year 6: Rs. 80 – Rs. 26.67 = Rs. 53.33 crore.

Reversal ceiling: Rs. 80 crore (depreciated historical cost).

Current carrying amount: Rs. 53.33 crore.

Maximum reversal: Rs. 80 – Rs. 53.33 = Rs. 26.67 crore.

If recoverable amount at Year 6 is Rs. 100 crore (exceeding the ceiling), the reversal is still capped at Rs. 26.67 crore. The asset is reinstated to Rs. 80 crore, not to Rs. 100 crore. Recoverable amount above the depreciated historical cost ceiling simply confirms that no residual impairment exists.

---

Sequence of Tests: The Correct Order Matters

When an entity has both individual CGUs and corporate assets, and some CGUs have goodwill allocated to them, the impairment tests must be performed in a specific sequence to avoid masking problems.

IAS 36's intended sequence:

Step 1: Test individual CGUs without goodwill and without unallocatable corporate assets. Identify any impairments.

Step 2: Test CGUs with goodwill allocated to them (include the goodwill in the CGU carrying amount). This is the annual mandatory test.

Step 3: Test the smallest group of CGUs to which corporate assets that cannot be allocated to individual CGUs belong.

Step 4: If the group-level test identifies impairment, allocate the impairment loss to individual CGUs within the group, and then allocate within each CGU (goodwill first, then pro rata).

---

Disclosure Requirements: What the Notes Must Say

For CGUs containing significant goodwill or indefinite-life intangibles, IAS 36 requires extensive disclosure:

A description of the key assumptions on which management has based its VIU or FVLCD calculation. The approach to determining the values assigned to each key assumption: whether based on past experience, external sources, or management estimates.

The discount rate(s) applied.

The period over which cash flows are projected and the basis for that period. If cash flows are projected beyond five years, justification is required. IAS 36 presumes that projections beyond five years carry increasing uncertainty unless the entity can demonstrate otherwise.

A sensitivity analysis: the change in the key assumption that would, in isolation, cause the CGU's carrying amount to equal its recoverable amount (the "headroom" analysis). This effectively tells readers how close the CGU is to impairment.

For an Indian IT company with significant goodwill from US acquisitions, these disclosures reveal the assumptions underlying billions of rupees of goodwill carrying values. Revenue growth rate assumptions, EBITDA margin trajectories, discount rates, and terminal growth rates are all disclosed. Analysts use these to assess whether the goodwill is defensible at carrying amount.

---

Ind AS 36 vs IAS 36: CGU and Goodwill Testing

The IASB's exposure draft on Business Combinations Disclosures, Goodwill and Impairment would, if finalised, require enhanced disclosures about whether acquisitions have delivered expected benefits and a more granular sensitivity analysis for goodwill-carrying CGUs. Indian companies with significant acquisition-derived goodwill should monitor this development.

---

What Big 4 Auditors Focus On

CGU boundary consistency year to year. Auditors test whether CGU definitions have changed from the prior year. A change in CGU boundaries can mask impairment: combining a deteriorating CGU with a healthy one moves the impairment below the surface. Any change in CGU definition requires a documented business rationale and consistent application going forward.

Goodwill allocation completeness. Auditors verify that all goodwill from all acquisitions has been allocated to specific CGUs, that the allocation was made within a reasonable time after the acquisition (not years later), and that the allocated CGUs actually benefit from the acquisition's synergies. Allocating acquisition goodwill to unrelated CGUs to benefit from their healthier recoverable amounts is a known risk.

VIU cash flow forecast credibility. For CGUs containing significant goodwill, auditors compare forecast cash flows in the current VIU to: last year's VIU forecasts (to test whether prior-year forecasts were reliable), the entity's board-approved budget and strategic plan, and actual cash flows generated in recent years. Consistently optimistic forecasts that systematically exceed actuals undermine the VIU and create audit risk.

Pro rata allocation floor compliance. When impairment losses are allocated pro rata across CGU assets, auditors verify that no individual asset has been reduced below the highest of its individual FVLCD, VIU, and zero. Missing this floor is a common calculation error in exam settings and in practice.

Sensitivity disclosure adequacy. Auditors test whether the sensitivity disclosures quantify a meaningful and realistic change in key assumptions, and whether the "headroom" figure (how much the recoverable amount exceeds carrying amount) is calculated correctly. A sensitivity that shows the CGU would need a 50% decline in revenue to become impaired, when the business is in a cyclical sector, may not be a realistic sensitivity.

---

Dip IFRS Exam Angle

CGU impairment testing is one of the most calculation-heavy areas in Dip IFRS. Multi-part questions combining CGU carrying amount, VIU calculation, goodwill allocation, impairment loss allocation, and reversal ceiling all appear in the same question.

Most tested areas:

CGU identification: given a scenario describing how a business generates cash flows and how management monitors it, identify the appropriate CGU(s). Know that the CGU is the smallest independently cash-generating group.

Goodwill allocation and testing: given a CGU carrying amount (including goodwill), a VIU or FVLCD, and an impairment shortfall, allocate the impairment: goodwill first, then pro rata to other assets, with the individual asset floor.

Impairment loss allocation order: goodwill is always first. Then pro rata. The floor prevents any individual asset from going below its own recoverable amount or zero.

Reversal ceiling: given the original cost, the useful life, the impairment year, and the reversal year, calculate the depreciated historical cost ceiling and cap the reversal accordingly.

Common traps:

Allocating impairment pro rata without first eliminating goodwill. Goodwill goes first. This is tested directly and frequently.

Reversing goodwill impairment. It cannot be reversed under any circumstances.

Forgetting the individual asset floor when allocating pro rata. An asset cannot be written below the highest of its FVLCD, VIU, and zero.

Including financing liabilities in the CGU carrying amount. Borrowings and lease financing liabilities are excluded. Their cost is in the discount rate.

Failing to gross up partial goodwill before the impairment test. Where NCI goodwill is excluded, the grossed-up goodwill must be used for the test even though only the acquirer's share is in the carrying amount.

---

FAQ

Can a CGU be larger than a single asset but smaller than a division?

Yes. A CGU can be a single production line, a store, a geographical territory, or any other grouping of assets whose cash inflows are largely independent. It is defined by cash flow independence, not by any organisational hierarchy.

What if an entity changes its CGU boundaries?

CGU boundary changes are permitted when the entity's operations or the manner in which it conducts them changes. The change must be documented and disclosed. Prior year comparatives are not restated, but the change may create a situation where goodwill needs to be reallocated between CGUs, using a relative value approach.

Can goodwill be allocated to a CGU that was not part of the acquisition?

Yes, but only if that CGU is expected to benefit from the synergies of the combination. If a Wipro acquisition of a US analytics firm generates synergies that benefit Wipro's Indian delivery CGUs (lower staff costs, expanded client pipeline), those Indian CGUs can receive a share of the goodwill allocation.

Does the corporate assets test ever result in the entire entity being one CGU?

Effectively, yes, in some cases. Where corporate assets cannot be allocated on any reasonable basis below the entire entity level, the entity itself becomes the relevant group of CGUs for corporate assets testing. This can happen for small entities with highly integrated operations.

What is the "headroom" in IAS 36 sensitivity disclosures?

Headroom is the excess of recoverable amount over carrying amount. If recoverable amount is Rs. 1,200 crore and carrying amount is Rs. 1,000 crore, headroom is Rs. 200 crore. The sensitivity disclosure typically shows how much a key assumption (revenue growth rate, discount rate) would need to change to reduce headroom to zero (i.e., for impairment to arise).

Is impairment reversal taxable in India?

Impairment reversal, like the original impairment charge, creates temporary differences between accounting and tax carrying amounts. The reversal creates a taxable temporary difference (accounting value increases but tax base does not), requiring recognition of a deferred tax liability under Ind AS 12. The interaction between impairment, reversal, and deferred tax requires careful tracking.

---

Enroll with Global Fin X

CGU impairment testing is the most calculation-dense topic in IAS 36 and one of the most rewarding in terms of marks if approached systematically. The allocation sequence, the reversal ceiling, and the partial goodwill grossing-up are all mechanically testable. Our programme covers IAS 36 across two posts with detailed lectures, worked examples including multi-asset CGU allocation, exam-style MCQs, and a dedicated LMS for working professionals.

Enroll Now: Dip IFRS Programme

Faculty profile: www.globalfinx.in/manikanta

---

This is Post 40 of the Global Fin X IFRS Series. Previous: IAS 36: Indicators, Recoverable Amount and VIU vs FVLCD. Next: Post 41: IAS 36: What Big 4 Auditors Flag in Impairment Reviews.