The Big4 Company works with XBRL in two ways: 1. For SME they do the filing. These companies often have a package for accounting. 2. Providing assurance on XBRL documents. They filed the first XBRL report for another Big4 company ever. This was an compliance statement, there was no continuous assurance involved. Current situation for SME Client does its own accounting. The trial balance is read into the accounting software. Then mapping is done on paper. Because the definition is already in the trial balance, this process is simultaneous to assembling the XBRL document. But there is no efficiency gain for the companies with this approach. GL There are pilots with XBRL GL. The problem with GL is that it takes 3-4 times more memory and processing. Cost is not a barrier, because the added value is visible. There are benefits on transaction level; checks on control measures and more complex analysis. The situation now is that XBRL starts from the trial balance, not from transaction level. The tax services are interested in replacing their XML audit files with XBRL GL. But all this is still theory, when the technique is proven, then further expansion will go fast. There are 2 projects Deloitte succeeded, but it was not efficient. In the end an instance document was created. Internal systems at the chamber of commerce and the tax services. This is still in a test stage and there were many initiated problems, mostly with the software companies. They are trying to embed as many as possible, with less as possible manual implementation and all IT. SBR history SBR is an initiative from the government with the purpose to lessen the administrative burden. There was said that it would save 750 million euro. But the real savings are not within the companies, unless XBRL GL is implemented.
The Big4 Company works with XBRL in two ways: 1. For SME they do the filing. These companies often have a package for accounting. 2. Providing assurance on XBRL documents. They filed the first XBRL report for another Big4 company ever. This was an compliance statement, there was no continuous assurance involved. Current situation for SME Client does its own accounting. The trial balance is read into the accounting software. Then mapping is done on paper. Because the definition is already in the trial balance, this process is simultaneous to assembling the XBRL document. But there is no efficiency gain for the companies with this approach. GL There are pilots with XBRL GL. The problem with GL is that it takes 3-4 times more memory and processing. Cost is not a barrier, because the added value is visible. There are benefits on transaction level; checks on control measures and more complex analysis. The situation now is that XBRL starts from the trial balance, not from transaction level. The tax services are interested in replacing their XML audit files with XBRL GL. But all this is still theory, when the technique is proven, then further expansion will go fast. There are 2 projects Deloitte succeeded, but it was not efficient. In the end an instance document was created. Internal systems at the chamber of commerce and the tax services. This is still in a test stage and there were many initiated problems, mostly with the software companies. They are trying to embed as many as possible, with less as possible manual implementation and all IT. SBR history SBR is an initiative from the government with the purpose to lessen the administrative burden. There was said that it would save 750 million euro. But the real savings are not within the companies, unless XBRL GL is implemented.