© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
BETTER BUSINESS REPORTING
A practical
guide to the
business review
May 2015
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
Contents
The business review: An evolutionary step towards better business
reporting
1
Whats the new legal requirement?
2
Preparing a business review: Overall considerations
Relevance of Accounting Bulletin 5
4
AB5’s guiding principles
4
Report focus
7
Materiality
7
Context and linkage
8
Planning ahead
10
Questions to ask
10
The content elements:
Setting the scene and explaining the year under review
11
Bringing the story up to date
24
Explaining the likely future development of the business
25
Explaining the principal risks and uncertainties
27
Overall assessment of the quality of the business review:
Questions for boards to ask themselves
30
Further information
31
Appendix 1: Extracts from Appendix 16 to the Main Board Listing
Rules
32
Appendix 2: Index of KPIs illustrated in the Implementation Guidance
attached to Accounting Bulletin 5
35
Appendix 3: A summary of questions to ask
36
Appendix 4: Local award winners
39
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
The business review:
An evolutionary step towards
better business reporting
It is widely recognised that narrative reporting has an essential role to play in providing a
broader perspective on business performance alongside the financial statements. The
new requirement to present a business review and the HKICPA’s related guidance are
the latest in a series of regulatory initiatives aimed at improving the relevance of
narrative reports for shareholders and other stakeholders.
In this practical guide to the business review, our aim is to help
in your journey towards better business reporting. We
introduce the new requirements, as well as showing how a
business review can both embrace the HKICPA’s guidance and
meet the Listing Rule requirements and recommendations
relating to the management discussion and analysis (MD&A).
But before we start, it is worth remembering that the new
business review is just one of the initiatives aimed at
improving business reporting by listed companies over the
next few years. The key developments are set out in the
timeline below each of these can be seen as an evolutionary,
rather than revolutionary, step on the journey towards better
business reporting.
For example, from 2015 the business review is required to
include a description of the principal risks and uncertainties
facing the company or group. This is a step up from the
recommended disclosure item previously found in the Listing
Rules. However, going forward into 2016 we expect even
more robust reporting on this topic in the Corporate
Governance Report, as a result of amendments to the
1
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Whats the new legal
requirement?
One of the key changes introduced by the new Hong Kong Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622 or CO)
is to require all Hong Kong incorporated companies to include a “business review” in their directors’
report, unless they are specifically exempt under section 388 of the CO
1
. This requirement is stated
in section 388 of the CO, while the minimum contents for a business review are set out in Schedule
5 to the CO. The full text of Schedule 5 has been reproduced below for easy reference.
Schedule 5 disclosure requirements for the business review
Sch 5.1
A directors’ report for a financial year must contain a business review that consists of
a)
a fair review of the companys business;
b)
a description of the principal risks and uncertainties facing the company;
c)
particulars of important events affecting the company that have occurred since the end of the financial
year; and
d)
an indication of likely future development in the company’s business.
Sch 5.2
To the extent necessary for an understanding of the development, performance or position of the
company’s business, a business review must include
a) an analysis using financial key performance indicators;
b) a discussion on
i. the company’s environmental policies and performance; and
ii. the company’s compliance with the relevant laws and regulations that have a significant impact
on the company; and
c) an account of the company’s key relationships with its employees, customers and suppliers and others
that have a significant impact on the company and on which the companys success depends.
Sch 5.3
This Schedule does not require the disclosure of any information about impending developments or
matters in the course of negotiation if the disclosure would, in the directors’ opinion, be seriously
prejudicial to the company's interests.
Sch 5.4
This Schedule has effect in relation to a directors' report required to be prepared under section 388(2) [i.e. a
consolidated directors' report] as if a reference to the company were a reference to
a) the company; and
b) the subsidiary undertakings included in the annual consolidated financial statements for the financial
year.
Sch 5.5
In this Schedule key performance indicators (關鍵表現指標) means factors by reference to which the
development, performance or position of the company's business can be measured effectively.
1
Section 388(3) and (4) of the CO sets out 3 categories of companies which are exempt from preparing a business review. These are
as follows:
1) wholly owned subsidiaries of another body corporate in the financial year as defined in section 357(3);
2) companies which fall under the “reporting exemption” i.e. companies which meet one or more of the size and/or approval
requirements set out in section 359 for private companies and companies limited by guarantee; and
3) private companies whose shareholders have passed a special resolution at least 6 months before the year-end exempting the
company, in accordance with the conditions set out in section 388(3)(c) and (4).
2
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
The business review is part of the directors’
report boards and audit committees are
responsible for ensuring that the picture of the
business is one they recognize
Other than these brief requirements in Schedule 5, there
is no further indication in the CO as to the expected
contents of the business review.
As a result, the HKICPA, at the invitation of the Companies
Registry, has issued Accounting Bulletin 5 (“AB5”) to
provide further guidance on the preparation and
presentation of the business review, following the
approach taken in the UK to this topic more on this in the
next section of this guide.
Applicability of Schedule 5 to listed issuers
Paragraph 28 of Appendix 16 to the Main Board Listing
Rules (“App 16.28”), as amended in February 2015
2
,
requires all listed issuers, whether or not they are
incorporated in Hong Kong, to comply with Schedule 5,
consistent with the HKEx’s level playing field principle.
The HKEx has set an effective date of years ending 31
December 2015 for these amendments. Before that date,
compliance with Schedule 5 is optional for non Hong Kong
incorporated issuers, creating a short transitional period
when the requirements may differ depending on whether
the issuer is incorporated in Hong Kong or overseas.
In addition, listed issuers and other entities claiming
compliance with the disclosure requirements of the Listing
Rules, still need to ensure that the MD&A information
disclosed in the annual report includes commentary on
each of the matters specifically identified in App 16.32 (or
the equivalent GEM Rule). They may also choose to
comply with App 16.52 (or the equivalent GEM Rule)
which sets out recommended additional disclosure which
issuers are encouraged to disclose in their annual reports.
These specific MD&A items align well with the core
content elements and other matters required by Schedule
5 and therefore we expect that most issuers will include
them within the business review, rather than disclosing
them elsewhere in the annual report. In this guide we
highlight these required and recommended commentary
items in amongst the discussion of the content elements
as applicable. We have also included for easy reference
the full text of these paragraphs in Appendix 1 to this
guide, together with an index of where these items are
discussed in this guide.
Key areas of change that we encourage listed issuers
to focus on:
The impact of Schedule 5 on listed issuers will depend
on the extent to which the issuer went beyond the
minimum requirements in their MD&A’s in prior years.
However, we would encourage all listed issuers to
revisit the content and structure of their reporting to
ensure it continues to align with the information needs
of the shareholders. Areas to focus on would include:
More rigorous descriptions of business model and
strategy to provide shareholders with an understanding
of the processes, relationships and resources that the
business depends on and the strategy for developing
and preserving business capability over the longer
term.
Complementing as well as supplementing the
financial statements by providing additional financial
and non-financial information which may be relevant to
the shareholders’ evaluation of past results and
assessment of future prospects.
Improved selection and presentation of
performance measures which are relevant to an
understanding of business achievements, prospects
and capabilities.
Better linkage within the MD&A and between the
MD&A and other elements of the report to promote
understanding and to bring together relevant
information in a cohesive way.
But the most important thing to remember is that each
business review should be unique and authentic
shareholders will be unimpressed and skeptical at any
signs that the business review is boilerplate or
otherwise lacking in credibility.
Boards and audit committees have a particular role to
play here in ensuring that the picture of the business
presented is one that they recognize. This is
emphasized by the legal requirement that the business
review forms part of the directors’ report, whether
directly or by specific cross-reference to the MD&A
discussion within the annual report.
2
On 6 February 2015, the HKEx issued its Consultation Conclusions on the Review of Listing Rules on Disclosure of Financial Information with
reference to the New Companies Ordinance and Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards and Proposed Minor/Housekeeping Rule Amendments
to update the Listing Rules for the new Companies Ordinance disclosure requirements. Amendments to the Listing Rules were included as an
appendix to the Consultation Conclusions. These amendments are mandatory for financial years ending on or after 31 December 2015. This guide is
based on these updated Listing Rules.
3
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Preparing a business review:
Overall considerations
Given the high level nature of the requirements set out in the legislation, directors are free to decide
on a format and level of information that would make most sense in the company’s circumstances. In
this section of our guide, we consider how the guidance issued by the HKICPA, Accounting Bulletin
5, is relevant to meeting this challenge. We also consider report focus and materiality, the concept of
linkage and the importance of planning ahead, involving the right depth and breadth of experience
and asking the right questions to produce a high quality business review.
Relevance of Accounting Bulletin 5
Accounting Bulletin 5 Guidance for the Preparation and
Presentation of a Business Review under the Hong Kong
Companies Ordinance Cap. 622 (“AB5”) was developed
by the HKICPA at the invitation of the Companies
Registry and was issued in July 2014. It is intended to
assist entities in preparing and presenting a business
review that complies with the requirements of Schedule
5 and that provides useful information for members of
the company.
The guidance, which is not mandatory, was based on
guidance originally developed in the UK, given similarities
in the reporting requirements. The Hong Kong guidance
was written with the requirements of non-public
companies in mind (particularly those companies which
have not previously prepared a business review) but it
also represents minimum best practice for all companies
required to prepare a business review. This guide takes a
similar approach.
AB5 begins by recapping on the obligation under the
Companies Ordinance to prepare a business review. It
then contains the following main sections:
Guiding principles for the preparation and
presentation of a business review
Guidance on each of the four content elements
required by Schedule 5
Implementation guidance which illustrates a range of
financial and non-financial KPIs
It is important to note that the HKICPA’s guidance does not
prescribe a mandatory structure for the report. Instead, it
offers a basis for ensuring that the report provides a holistic
assessment of past performance, the current state of
the business, and its future prospects.
In this section of our guide, we introduce AB5’s
guiding principles. In later sections we look at the
areas of content required by law in the context of the
HKICPA’s guidance and the related requirements of
the Listing Rules, in particular focusing on the role of
KPIs and linkage.
AB5’s guiding principles
AB5 identifies a number of guiding principles to be
considered when preparing and presenting a business
review. These are set out in the box below.
Directors should bear these guiding principles in mind
throughout the planning and drafting of the business
review. It may also be useful to refer to them as the
benchmark for the directors assessment of adequacy
of the business review, when the board performs an
overall review prior to approval of the directors’ report.
Guiding principles for the preparation and
presentation of a business review (AB5.15)
1) The review should set out an analysis of the business
through the eyes of the board of directors
2) The scope of the review should be consistent with the
scope of the financial statements
3) The review should complement as well as
supplement the financial statements, in order
to enhance the overall corporate disclosure
4) The review should be understandable
5) The review should be balanced and neutral, dealing
even-handedly with both good and bad aspects
4
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
AB5 sets out principles and guidance
relevant for companies of any size
Principles (1) and (2) are closely related to the legal
requirements: as explained in our section on those
requirements, the business review is part of the directors’
report and therefore it needs to reflect how the directors
see the business. Also, it is a requirement of Schedule 5
that if the business review is attached to consolidated
financial statements, then it should reflect the business of
the group as a whole, i.e. it should be consistent with the
scope of the consolidated financial statements.
Principles (3), (4) and (5) deal with qualitative aspects
of the business review. We consider that these
principles are fundamental to all business reviews,
irrespective of the size of the company or group, to
ensure that the business review is a useful addition to
the annual report and presents a fair picture of the
business to the company’s shareholders and other
interested parties. Here are some of the key reasons
why we hold this view:
Complementing and supplementing
If a business review simply summarises or repeats
information which is already found in the financial
statements then it has minimal added value for the
shareholder. For a business review to be useful it
needs instead to complement and supplement the
financial statements. This is explained in AB5 as
follows:
In complementing the financial statements, the
business review provides useful financial and non-
financial information about the business and its
performance that is not reported in the financial
statements but which, in the directors' judgement,
may be relevant to the members' evaluation of past
results and assessment of future prospects.
In supplementing the financial statements, the
business review provides additional explanations of
amounts recorded in the financial statements;
and/or explains the conditions and events that
shaped the information contained in the financial
statements. (AB5.18-19)
Understandability
Clearly information cannot be useful if it is not
understandable. In fact, information may even be harmful
if it is easily misunderstood by the reader. AB5 highlights
the following key matters to pay attention to in order to
ensure that the business review is understandable:
The business review should include only relevant
information on material matters the inclusion of too
much information may obscure judgments and will
not promote understanding.
Where additional information is discussed elsewhere
in the annual report, or in other reports, cross-
referencing to those sources will assist the reader.
Readers should be able to assess the reliability of
information presented where relevant, directors
should explain the source of the information and the
degree to which it is objectively supportable.
The writing style should be clear and readily
understandable.
It should be clear to the reader how any KPIs have
been computed and the source of data used in the
calculation.
Much of this is common sense if the preparer of the
business review keeps in mind the readers’ perspective
and has a genuine wish to share information with them.
But it can nevertheless be a challenge to find the right
balance of compliance and communication when drafting
a business review to be included in a statutory annual
report. Some additional matters to think about in this
regard relating to focus, materiality and linkage are
discussed later on in this section. Also, as part of our
closer look at the content elements, we give examples of
how to present KPIs clearly and how to link information to
increase understandability.
5
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Biases must be resisted in the business
review it is part of a statutory
document to be given to shareholders
Balanced and neutral
The principle that the business review should be
“balanced and neutral, dealing even handedly with both
good and bad aspects” is often easier said than done. In
any self-assessment, there is a natural tendency to
emphasize the successes and gloss over the not-so-
flattering aspects of the period or activity under review.
This tendency can also be present in marketing
communications, intended to boost a company’s or
person’s image.
These biases must be resisted in the preparation of the
business review given that this is part of a statutory
document to be presented to shareholders. As AB5
advises, the directors should ensure that members are
not misled as a result of excessive focus on favourable
information or the omission of any significant information
on unfavourable aspects (AB5.25). This will require
companies to be transparent by discussing their
weaknesses and challenges, as well as their successes, to
a consistent level of materiality.
As AB5 points out, one way to fight the biases is to present
KPIs and other information consistently from one year to
the next this approach works well provided that relevant
and meaningful KPIs have been chosen in the first place.
This is discussed further on pages 14 to 20.
Another way that a company may present a “balanced and
neutral” view of the business is to provide a summary of
the status of key projects/initiatives during the year
compared to strategies or previously discussed plans this
is illustrated in the following example, as well as in the
examples on pages 9 and 20.
Example of assessing performance against strategy:
Business Strategy
How we did in 2015
Invest in online
growth
Invest in growth from
our online business,
through improving UK
services
Progress: We have added Same-Day, Evening, Sunday and Next-Day to Store delivery services
to UK customers to respond to customer demand for faster and more predictable deliveries. In
the UK market our average sales per active customer
1
per month increased by 10.3% in the
first 6 months after the launch, with an increase of 12.7% in the frequency of on-line ordering
by these active customers which can be linked to the improved delivery services. These
measures are approximately 10% more than we had expected for this first launch period and
customer feedback has continued to be positive.
People
Improve staff
engagement, to realise
the value to our
business of a
committed workforce
Progress: We measure staff engagement using a range of indicators including staff turnover, sick
days, customer feedback and the use of an independent survey company which benchmarks our
employees’ responses on a 6-monthly survey against a range of other comparable companies.
During 2015 improvements in these measures were noted and fell within the ranges set for this
year in line with our five-year people strategy. In particular, our key indicator of engagement,
being the annualized rate of staff turnover, improved from 18% in 2014 to 15% in 2015 for staff
that had completed at least one year with the group.
Supply chain
management
Control our logistics
from source to store,
allowing us to monitor
our inventory more
efficiently
Progress: The opening of our new European distribution centre has been delayed until Q2 2016,
6 months behind schedule. The centre is a core part of our plan to reshape our warehouse
network and should enable us to reduce overall inventory levels and wastage while maintaining
the same time-interval between order placement and shelf deployment at our stores. However,
completion of the construction has been delayed by the extreme weather conditions experienced
in the early onset of winter in 2015. We estimate that the disruptions to the construction
schedule caused by the weather have increased the overall costs of the construction by 15%. The
structure is now at an advanced stage and we anticipate completion no later than May 2016.
1
A customer is considered “active” once a 2nd order is placed online within 4 weeks of the 1st order, and is considered “inactive” if the customer has not
placed an order in the last 4 weeks.
Target achieved in 2015 On plan Target missed in 2015
6
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
The significance of information will depend to
a
large extent on how far it helps shareholders form
their own views of future business prospects
Report focus
The business review forms part of the statutory
reporting by directors to the members of the company.
The members’ needs are therefore paramount when
considering what information should be included in the
business review.
Boards may have a general picture of shareholder
priorities through their ongoing shareholder dialogue.
However, it is important that, when considering what
to include in the business review, they do not merely
respond to past levels of interest. The emphasis of the
guidance in AB5 is on the business telling its story
directors are responsible for identifying and sharing
information that they consider ought to be relevant to
shareholders’ decisions.
In applying this guidance, the directors will generally
need to consider whether the information in question is
relevant to either:
1) Shareholders’ voting decisions; or
2) Shareholders’ investment decisions (i.e. buy / sell /
hold).
It is also important to recognise that whilst many
financial reporting disclosures are necessarily focused
on historical events, shareholders will generally view
business value from the perspective of its future
earnings prospects. They will need information that can
help them assess this.
That does not mean that directors need to provide
projections. However, the usefulness of information in
the business review will depend to a large extent on
how far it helps shareholders form their own views of
future business prospects.
For example, to assess past success and the potential
earnings impact of a strategy centred on developing a
particular segment of the customer base, shareholders
would need performance information which has a
similar degree of segmentation. If the reported
performance measures are in aggregate, or segmented
in a different way, then the shareholders needs are not
being met.
Materiality
The application of materiality is particularly important in a
principles-based framework. The key is to find a balance
between providing enough information for the review to
be useful, but not overwhelming the reader with
excessive detail, which obscures the key messages.
The guidance in AB5 reminds us that when judging
whether information is material, directors should
consider both qualitative and quantitative aspects in the
particular circumstances. Factors to be taken into
account include the legality, sensitivity, normality and
potential consequences of a transaction or event and the
parties involved. For example, the monetary amount at
which an item becomes material may be significantly
lower for fines and penalties, than it would for “business
as usual” items.
In practice, directors of listed companies should be
familiar with making these judgment calls, whether in
respect of announcements of price sensitive information
or more generally in the preparation of annual reports
and other investor communications. Specifically in
respect of the business review, materiality links with the
shareholder focus: the aim is to provide shareholders
with relevant information that is useful for making
resource allocation decisions and assessing the
directors’ stewardship.
When can material information be excluded?
There is no general exemption for information which the
directors may consider to be commercially sensitive.
However, Schedule 5 allows a company not to disclose
any information about “impending developments or
matters in the course of negotiation”, if such disclosure
would, in the directors’ opinion, be “seriously prejudicial
to the company’s (or group’s) interests.
The safe harbours set out in Section 307D of the
Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571) which
permit a company to withhold disclosure of inside
information under specified circumstances, have a
similar objective. However, Section 307D sets out more
detailed requirements.
It is not yet clear how these two pieces of legislation will
work together in practice. Therefore we advise directors
to obtain legal advice in this regard.
7
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Context and linkage
In order for information to be useful it needs to have
context. Consider this simple piece of factual
information: sales grew by 20% in 2014. From this the
shareholder learns nothing they couldn’t already work
out from looking at the income statement and they are
unable to judge whether this is a good or poor
performance from this statistic alone.
The informational value of this statistic is instantly
increased if the reader is given any one or more of the
following pieces of contextual information:
How much did sales grow in each of the last few
years?
What was the goal for this year?
How well did our competitors do?
Do we expect this trend to continue next year?
Linking information is a key way to provide this context
and provide a more holistic picture, for example:
Linking information between the content elements
within the business review
Linking between the business review and other
parts of the annual report
Linking over time with information contained in
previous business reviews
Linkage between the content elements
As a reminder: Schedule 5 states that a business
review should consist of the following four broad
content elements:
1) Fair review of the business;
2) Subsequent events;
3) Likely future developments; and
4) Principal risks and uncertainties.
If issues raised in relation to one content element are
followed up in the other elements, this can provide
readers with an objective analysis of how the business
is making progress in managing each matter. This may
be particularly relevant for the discussions of risks and
future developments, for example as follows:
Example linkage of content elements:
Alpha Ltd highlights in its business model description
that 40% of its revenues are currently derived from
maintenance and support provided to its existing user
base. Alpha’s discussion of business trends identifies
that specialist support providers are increasingly
competing for this revenue stream. This discussion
links to Alpha’s strategy which explains that it has
responded by promoting whole-life service contracts.
Although this is currently a small part of overall
revenue, KPIs are provided to show the proportion of
renewals switching to this alternative structure as
useful information when assessing future prospects.
Linking information
within the business review,
within the annual report
and over time is a key
way to provide context and
a more holistic picture
8
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Linkage between the business review and other parts
of the annual report or other reports
To support an annual report that is concise, it is likely
that companies will see a greater need for linking
various reports or aspects within the annual report to
avoid unnecessary repetition.
Better linkage will also drive consistency within the
annual report. In particular, providing reconciliations or
explaining adjustments can help to demonstrate that
any adjusted information in the directors’ report serves
to complement and supplement the financial
statements, rather than being “inconsistent” with
those financial statements.
This distinction is important as the company's auditor
has a new duty under section 406(2) of the Companies
Ordinance to consider whether the information in a
directors' report for a financial year is consistent with
the financial statements for that year. If the auditor
considers that the directors’ report is not consistent,
then the auditor is required to state that opinion in the
auditor's report and may bring that opinion to the
members' attention at a general meeting.
Linkage over time
Providing comparative information is a widely accepted
practice in annual reports. However, this information is only
useful if it enables users to draw meaningful conclusions
about trends. Its ability to do this can be improved by:
Identifying meaningful data points: for long term,
steady businesses historical information covering 5 or
even 10 years at annual intervals may be useful, but for
fast changing businesses it may be more informative to
show data points every half year, or even more frequently
than that, over the most recent past.
Complementing the data by explaining the extent to
which it is in fact comparable: if circumstances have
changed over the data period, then users need additional
contextual information to minimize the risk of
misinterpreting the data. For example, it can be useful to
know whether growth in revenue is volume or price
driven, whether organic or from acquisitions, or comes
simply from changes in accounting policies. The focus
should be on providing a mixture of data and balanced and
neutral commentary, rather than simply data in isolation.
Example of a transparent way to link achievements during the year to short and longer term strategies:
What we said we would
do in 2015
What we did in 2015
What we plan to do in
2016
Plans beyond 2016
Reduce customer
churn rates by 5%
*Customer churn
rates are measured as
the percentage of
customers who do not
renew their contracts
over the total number
of customers under
that contract type
Our customer churn rates
decreased by 8% during
the year which we believe
is the result of the launch
of our new bundling
packages which provide
consumers with greater
flexibility
We plan to launch new
smart phone plans in
2016. These plans will
offer increased data
allowance and unlimited
voice and SMS across all
Asian markets and some
selected non-Asian
markets
We aim to simplify our pricing
plans, to give clear visibility to
our customers. We also plan to
invest $ 50 million in our
online platform, over the next 5
years, in order to acquire new,
and retain existing, customers
Consolidate our
network engineering
teams across borders
in order to maximise
cost efficiency
We were unable to
complete the
consolidation of our
network engineering
teams on time, as we
have been faced with
some unexpected
regulatory pressures.
We plan to complete the
consolidation of our
network engineering
teams by the 2
nd
quarter
of 2016
Compared to our cost base
in 2015, we aim to reduce
our operating costs by 20%
by 2020 as a result of the
consolidation of our
networking engineering
team, by unifying our IT
management and
simplifying our business
model across markets
9
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Planning ahead
The traditional approach to annual report preparation
has entailed allocating responsibility for each element
of the report to separate parts of the organisation. It
may be time to rethink this approach. Presenting a
consistent business-wide story will require a more
joined-up approach and advance planning. Approaches
could include one or more of the following actions:
1) Establish a cross-functional team to develop the
report on an integrated basis. Ensure that this team
is chaired by someone who is sufficiently senior to
cut across any existing reporting silos.
2) Develop the “front-end” of the report from the
business model by focusing on a ground-up
assessment of the features that are most
significant to understanding current performance
and assessing future prospects. Ensure that the
reporting team has the right operational and
business strategy representation to do this
effectively.
3) Regularly adapt the content and structure of the
report to reflect evolving business circumstances
and strategies. As well as reporting to
shareholders on how issues identified previously
have developed in the year, continually re-assess
the content to ensure that sufficient prominence is
given to the most important current and emerging
issues.
4) Recognize that it may take time to develop
meaningful shareholder-focused performance
measures. If data for a meaningful measure isn’t
available, put a plan in place to address this for
future periods. For example, this may include
working with industry survey organizations to
obtain benchmarking information, tracking social
media over an extended period to pick up on
trends, or arranging for employee or customer
satisfaction surveys to be conducted at regular
intervals.
All of the above will contribute to a better quality
business review and annual report. But also, perhaps
more significantly, if done well these activities may
also contribute to better quality information and focus
within the organization on setting strategy and
measuring progress against clearly defined goals and
objectives. If the above are not already well
established practices in your organization, now may be
a good time to change.
Questions to ask
As we stressed earlier, each business review should be
unique and authentic shareholders will be unimpressed
and skeptical at any signs that the business review is
boilerplate or otherwise lacking in credibility.
In order to achieve this quality outcome, those involved
in pulling together the business review need to
challenge themselves continually:
at the outset, think about what you are aiming to
achieve and plan how you are going to get there;
during the drafting stage, focus on fact-finding
across the full scope of the topics to be covered
and make sure there is clear understanding of the
matters that need to be discussed; and
at the final review stage, reflect on how well the
review paints a picture of the business that the
board recognizes, that is useful to shareholders
and fully satisfies the requirements.
To help with meeting these challenges, we have
included throughout the remainder of this guide some
suggested questions to ask these have been collected
together in Appendix 3 for easy reference. These
questions may be particularly useful to think about
during the drafting and final review stages. To kick off,
here are some questions for the planning stage:
Key questions to ask when planning ahead:
Have we put together a team with enough insight into
top management’s strategy to ensure the review is
useful and authentic?
Has the annual report compared well in the past with
information being communicated through other
channels (such as investor presentations) or could it
be improved this year to reduce gaps?
How well does last year’s MD&A stand up against
AB5’s guiding principles? For example:
How well did it complement and supplement the
financial statements?
How far did management go to provide balanced
and neutral information?
How easy was it to understand?
Could more be done this year on any of these aspects
to improve the usefulness for shareholders?
What are the new topics that need to be discussed in
this year’s review, compared to last year’s MD&A?
Where is the information for these topics and will we
be able to find comparative information as well?
10
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
The content elements
1. Setting the scene and
explaining the year under review
The requirement to give “a fair review of the business” deals with companies’ (or
groups’) assessments of how they have performed during the year and their financial
position at the end of it. The review should be in the context of the business
objectives, strategies and business model and provide relevant information necessary
for an understanding of the development, performance or position of the business.
In practice we expect this first content element to form
the majority of the business review. AB5.31 identifies
the following 4 topics to be covered in this “fair review
of the business”:
1) A description of the business and the external
environment in which it operates
2) An analysis of the performance of the reporting
entity for the year under review and the financial
position of the reporting entity as at the end of that
period using financial KPIs which complement or
supplement the financial statements
3) A discussion on the reporting entity's
environmental policies and performance and the
reporting entity's compliance with the relevant
laws and regulations that have a significant impact
on the entity
4) An account of the reporting entity's key
relationships with its employees, customers and
suppliers and others that have a significant impact
on the entity and on which the entity's success
depends
The first of these topics sets the scene for the rest of
the business review. Topics 2, 3 and 4 then fill out the
“fair review” of the business with information that
demonstrates compliance with Schedule 5.2’s
requirement to give this information “to the extent
necessary for an understanding of the development,
performance or position of the company’s [or group’s]
business”.
Taken together, these topics overlap with the general
requirement in App 16.32 to include a discussion and
analysis of the group’s performance during the financial
year and the material factors underlying its results and
financial position. There are also specific disclosure items
required or recommended under Appendix 16 which we
would expect to see included in this part of the business
review. These are highlighted in the following discussion
using the abbreviation “App 16”.
The remainder of this section of our guide looks at each of
these 4 topics in turn:
1) Description of the business and the external
environment in which it operates
The business review should provide a description of the
business and the external environment in which the
reporting entity operates, as context for the directors’
discussion and analysis” (AB5.31(a))
A clear description of the objectives, strategy and
business model can help the review as a whole to stay
focused on the most significant drivers of business value.
It can also provide quantitative and qualitative context to
help shareholders assess the impact of matters on the
business as they arise.
A well written business model description should also give
shareholders greater confidence that the rest of the
review addresses all material aspects of the business.
11
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Good business model and strategy
descriptions provide the foundation
for a good business review
Basic information: factual description of the business
and its environment
This description provides a foundation for the rest of
the review, so it is important that the picture painted
is one that is recognised by the board, and consistent
with the operational realities of the business.
In a well written business review such a description
would provide an understanding of:
the industry or industries in which the company or
group operates;
its main products/services;
its main categories of customers;
its main business processes;
its main distribution methods; and
the structure of the business and its economic
model, including an overview of the main
operating facilities and their location. (AB5.32).
It would also include a description of the resources
that are significant to the entity’s operations,
consistent with the recommended disclosure
requirement in App 16.52(iii) to disclose the principal
drivers of performance.
Examples of key resources used in the business
could include:
corporate reputation and brand strength,
natural resources,
assembled workforce,
distribution or supply chain networks,
research and development projects,
intellectual capital, licenses, patents, copyrights and
trademarks. (AB5.33).
A transparent business review would also go further and
discuss features of the external environment which are
significant to the business’s success. These could
include the entity’s major markets and competitive
position within those markets, and the significant
features of the legal, regulatory, macro-economic and
social environment that influence the business.
For example, a reporting entity may disclose the fact that
it has significant operations in a certain country currently
experiencing difficult economic or political environment,
or conversely a country experiencing high growth, either
of which circumstances could have a significant impact
on the future development and performance of the
business.
The discussion of the external environment could extend
to the recommended disclosure item set out in App
16.52(iv) relating to trends in the issuer’s industry and
business.
It can be difficult to focus this description at the right level
of detail. Getting the right people involved in the drafting
process can help here. In particular, the involvement of
segment management can help keep the description
grounded in the operational realities of the business.
12
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Setting out clearly the objectives and strategies of the
business, measuring performance against them and giving
some indication about future plans provides transparency
which investors and analysts would appreciate
Additional information: objectives, strategies and
competitive advantages
In a well written business review, the description of
the business helps shareholders to focus on those
aspects of the company’s (or group’s) business model
that differentiate it from others in the sector.
The difficulty is: where to draw the line between (a)
helping shareholders understand the business and (b)
revealing too much sensitive information which could
erode the entity’s competitive advantage? This is an
important matter for directors to consider and decide
for themselves. Reluctance to reveal too much is
understandable. However, setting out clearly the
objectives and strategies of the business, measuring
performance against them and giving some indication
about future plans may provide transparency which
investors and analysts would appreciate.
In this regard, AB5.34 states that the description of
the business “may” refer to the objectives of the
business to generate or preserve value over the
longer term. These objectives may be defined in
terms of financial or non-financial performance
measures. This guidance is consistent with the
recommended disclosure requirement in App
16.52(iii) to disclose a discussion of the issuer’s
purpose and corporate strategy.
We sometimes see business objectives described in
generic terms for example ‘to generate shareholder
returns’, or ‘to increase customer satisfaction’.
Descriptions of this nature convey limited information
to shareholders few businesses would disagree
with these.
A more helpful approach is to describe the board’s
objectives for the business itself for example, it may
be to become the market leader in a specific
segment, or to establish technological leadership in a
particular sector. Such specific identification of the
board’s objectives can be key to producing a
consistent and focused business review.
Key questions to ask about …
Factual information about the business:
Does the description of the business align with the
board’s view of the significant business value
drivers?
Where different segments of the business have
different operating characteristics or performance
drivers, is this clear enough?
Has sufficient detail been provided about the
business so that shareholders can assess the
potential impact of matters raised elsewhere in the
report?
Any discussion about objectives and strategy:
Are the stated objectives business-specific? For
example, becoming the market leader in a specific
segment, rather than generic aims such as
maximising shareholder return
Does the description of the strategy address the
short, medium, and longer term priorities for the
business?
Is there enough linkage of stated objectives and
strategies to the analysis of performance and other
content elements?
13
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
We would expect this section of the business
review to be a combination of narrative
explanation and a range of well chosen KPIs
2) Analysis of the performance for the year and the
financial position at the end of it using KPIs
The business review should provide an analysis of the
performance of the reporting entity for the year under
review and the financial position of the reporting entity
as at the end of that period using financial KPIs which
complement or supplement the financial statements”
(AB5.31(b))
The requirement to provide an analysis of how the
business has performed during the year and its
financial position at the end of the year is consistent
with the general requirement in App 16.32 to include a
discussion and analysis of the group’s performance
during the financial year and the material factors
underlying its results and financial position.
In this regard, minimum required disclosure items
under App 16.32 include commentary on the following:
The capital structure of the group in terms of the
maturity profile of debt and obligation, type of
capital instruments used, currency and interest rate
structure (App 16.32(2))
Significant investments held and their performance
during the year (App 16.32(4))
Details of material acquisitions and disposals of
subsidiaries, associates and joint ventures in the
course of the year (App 16.32(5))
Segment information this may cover changes in
the industry segment, developments within the
segment and their effect on the results of that
segment. It may also include changes in the market
conditions, new products and services introduced
or announced and their impact on the group’s
performance and changes in revenue and margins
(App 16.32(6)).
In addition, App 16.52 recommends disclosure of the
following items:
An overview of trends in the listed issuer’s industry
and business (App 16.52(iv))
Receipts from and returns to shareholders (App
16.52(vi)).
These requirements are consistent with AB5 which
also adds that when discussing how the business has
performed during the year, the focus should be on
those business segments that are relevant to an
understanding of the development and performance of
the reporting entity as a whole and the ability of the
reporting entity to generate cash to meet known or
probable cash requirements and to fund growth
(AB5.37).
Consistent with the complementing and
supplementing guiding principle, the analysis in the
business review should avoid simply repeating or
summarizing information which can be found in the
financial statements.
Instead, we would expect this section of the business
review to be a combination of narrative explanation of
key features of the performance, financial position and
cash flows in the financial year, together with a range
of well chosen financial and non-financial KPIs which
demonstrate the trends in the performance and key
ratios over a period of time.
For example, this discussion would refer to changes in
market conditions which have had a significant impact
on the development and performance of the reporting
entity during the period, or the introduction of new
products and services which are significant to the
future prospects of the business. In addition, the
business review should draw attention to material
changes in accounting policies which have resulted in
significant changes in the measurement of KPIs during
the financial year under review due to changes in input
data.
When drafting this part of the business review, bear in
mind the overall considerations discussed on pages 4
to 10 of this guide relating to the guiding principles in
AB5, focus, materiality, context and linkage.
These points apply not only to the narrative discussion
in the fair review content element. They also apply
specifically to the KPIs selected and presented as part
of that review as explained and illustrated in the
following discussion:
14
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
The KPIs disclosed should be those that
are effective in measuring delivery of
strategies and managing the business
Using KPIs to explain performance
Even if this had not been an explicit requirement of
Schedule 5, we would normally expect a company to
include financial, and where appropriate, non-financial
KPIs in its business review in order to provide clear and
useful information to the user. Looking at the drivers of
performance identified in the business model
description that are critical to the future operation of
the business may help to focus the performance
measures on the most relevant matters. Some areas
where KPIs may have a role to play include:
Assessing progress against the business’s strategy
and objectives
Measuring the financial performance and position of
the business during the year under review
Providing objective measures for the discussion on
compliance with environmental policies, laws or
regulations, or relationships with customers,
suppliers, employees or significant others
Monitoring principal risks and uncertainties and
progress made in managing those risks
Quantifying trends or factors affecting the future of
the business where practicable.
Specifically, App 16.32(10) requires a listed issuer to
disclose its gearing ratio and App 16.52(i) and (ii)
recommend disclosure of efficiency indicators (e.g.
return on equity, working capital ratios) and industry
specific ratios, if any, for the last five financial years.
In addition to compliance, KPIs can be used to
demonstrate how management is working to develop
and protect shareholder value over an extended period.
Well chosen KPIs may therefore be able to help reduce
the risk of excessive focus by investors and analysts on
short-term earnings measures by giving them more
meaningful measures to think about.
Despite this potential reward, a recent KPMG International
survey highlighted the gap between the key drivers of
business value, and the performance measures being
reported (see table below). The survey also highlighted that
many of the non-financial measures being provided were
derived from existing statutory or other disclosure
requirements instead of being selected for their relevance
to investors.
Companies reporting on key business value drivers
identified as a top
three value
driver
(1)
companies
providing a
related KPI
Operational
66%
21%
Customer
focus
56%
7%
Supply chain
42%
8%
Brand &
reputation
42%
2%
Note: (1) Audit committee members identifying the area as one
of their top three drivers of business value.
Source: The KPMG survey of business reporting: KPMG
International, 2014.
These results indicate that for many companies there is
considerable room for improvement. Now may be a good
time for directors to take a fresh look at the performance
measures currently being reported and to re-evaluate
whether they continue to provide relevant information to
shareholders.
15
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
KPIs selected should be relevant, rather
than focusing only on those that show
the business in a favourable light
Financial vs non-financial KPIs
Schedule 5 specifically refers to an analysis using
“financial” KPIs. These typically use data which can be
found in the financial statements, or can be reconciled
to the financial statements. For example, the gearing
ratio required by App 16.32(10) would generally be
calculated using information from the statement of
financial position.
Financial KPIs can also be derived from a mixture of
both financial and non-financial data one obvious
example being sales or rental income per square foot.
Other KPIs could be entirely non-financial, such as
carbon dioxide emissions or measures of customer or
employee satisfaction.
Such mixed or non-financial measures complement the
financial statements and, if chosen well, are useful in
communicating information about the performance and
future prospects of the business. For example,
employee turnover, % of qualified staff or spend per
employee on training could be useful measures for
businesses highly dependent on a trained workforce,
and might usefully be disclosed as part of the account
of the group’s key relationships with its employees.
More examples can be found in the implementation
guidance attached to AB5 for easy reference an index
of these examples is included as Appendix 2 to this
guide.
Selecting balanced and neutral KPIs
Care should be taken to select KPIs which are relevant to
the development, performance or position of the reporting
entity’s business, rather than focusing only on those that
show the business in a favourable light.
As discussed earlier, one way to fight the biases is to
present KPIs and other information consistently from one
year to the next this approach works well provided that
relevant and meaningful KPIs have been chosen in the
first place.
Another way is to compare KPIs to forward-looking
targets which had been set in previous periods. This
provides useful information provided that appropriate
targets were chosen previously.
Well chosen targets will be those that will be a good
indicator of the success of management’s efforts in
directing the business if met. For example, in a highly
competitive environment where the group is more of a
price-taker, rather than a price-maker, meaningful forward-
looking targets might focus on volume measures (such as
occupancy rates or cubic metres shipped) rather than on
monetary targets, or focus on net margins rather than
gross revenues.
Meaningful targets might also be relative, rather than
absolute, such as maintaining market share or above
average returns compared to industry peers.
In other words, for a target to be meaningful, meeting or
getting close to achieving the target needs to be
something within management’s influence and intention,
at least at the time that the target was set. This helps
shareholders see the business through the eyes of the
directors and provides a strong basis for an assessment of
subsequent performance.
Presenting KPIs in a meaningful way
To maximize the usefulness of KPIs, it is important that
they are presented in a way that is consistent with the
“understandability” and “balanced and neutral” guiding
principles.
These principles are inter-linked: in a well written
business review, KPIs are presented in a way that
enhances their informational value and conveys the key
messages efficiently. Key matters to consider when
judging the quality of the presentation are as follows:
Will the reader correctly understand how the KPI has
been computed?
Will the reader correctly understand the relevance of
the KPI to the topic under discussion?
Is there sufficient contextual information to enable
the reader to interpret the KPI and draw conclusions
from it?
How straightforward will it be for the reader to reach
these understandings? Could a less diligent reader be
misled by the presentation?
19
16
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
In a well written business review, KPIs
are presented in a way that enhances
their informational value and conveys
the key messages efficiently
For example, understandability is increased when the
basis of computation and, if relevant, the source of data is
explained or reconciled to the financial statements for
example, the basis on which the gearing ratio is computed
is a required disclosure under App 16.32(10) and the basis
of computation of efficiency indicators and industry
specific ratios is a recommended item under App 16.52(i)
and (ii).
The informational value is also improved if KPIs are
presented over an extended period of time, particularly if
meaningful data points are chosen and the information is
complemented by narrative explanation. If the method of
calculation has been changed compared to previous
years, this should also be highlighted.
How the KPIs are presented visually is also important.
They can, of course, be presented in a simple narrative
format. However, they can be made far more impactful
using other formats, so long as that format conveys the
information in an unbiased way.
For example, one way to present KPIs may be in a tabular
format. Tabular presentations of performance data can
reduce the risk that key data is ‘lost’ in the narrative
discussion and can include information which explains
why the business is using a particular indicator. This is
shown in the following example of typical revenue KPIs
used in the hotel industry:
Example of KPIs presented in a tabular format:
Occupancy Rates
Average daily rate (ADR)
Revenue per available room
(RevPAR)
Measurement
Total number of rooms sold
divided by Total number of
rooms available
Total room revenue divided by
Total number of rooms sold
Total room revenue divided by
Total number of available rooms
Significance
Occupancy measures the
utilization of our hotels’
capacity. It reflects both supply
and demand and therefore it is
important for us to monitor our
occupancy in order to gain a
sustainable competitive
advantage. Occupancy levels
also help us determine
achievable ADR levels as
demand for hotel rooms
increases or decreases.
ADR measures average room
price attained by a hotel and ADR
trends provide useful information
concerning the pricing
environment and the nature of
the customer base of a hotel or
group of hotels. ADR is a
commonly used performance
measure in the industry, and we
use ADR to assess pricing levels
that we are able to generate by
type of customer, as changes in
rates have a different effect on
overall revenues and incremental
profitability than changes in
occupancy.
This KPI is one of the most
important of all ratios because the
measure incorporates both room
rates and occupancy. It provides a
convenient snapshot of how well
our group is filling its rooms, as
well as how much it is able to
charge.
Occupancy rates (%)
+ 4.78%
2015 : 70.2%
(2014: 67%)
ADR (HK$)
- 10.77%
2015 : 2,501
(2014: 2,803)
RevPAR (HK$)
- 6.50%
2015 : 1,756
(2014: 1,878)
17
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Another way to present this information may be through
the use of graphs, charts and other data graphics, as
illustrated in the examples below. This approach can be
useful for any measures where the trend in the measure
or the relative position as a proportion of the business or
compared to benchmarks is particularly meaningful and it
can be used instead of, or in addition to, traditional
numerical tables of absolute values.
In each of the examples illustrated below we would
expect the graph or chart to be accompanied by narrative
discussion highlighting the key points shown in the data
and giving additional contextual information which
explains the performance or position shown.
Examples of KPIs presented graphically:
(1) Example of clustered bar chart showing absolute monetary amounts per product category over time, together with
an indication of the trend in the total amount of sales over that period
(2) Example of analyses of employee data as a proportion of total workforce with comparatives and footnote
explaining change in basis of calculation
18
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
(3) Example of line chart using external data and annotated for key events
(4) Examples of bar charts using dual vertical axes to compare and contrast two data sets
(a) Net income and return on equity
(b) Volume sales and market share
(5) Example of graphical reconciliation from prior year operating income to current year absolute amounts
19
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Linking KPIs with strategies and future targets
Companies may also consider making their
business objectives and strategies measurable by
linking them to relevant KPIs. This can be achieved
either by cross-referencing to another section in the
report where a more detailed analysis of the KPIs
can be found, or by describing the KPIs and how
they help measure progress against a specific
strategic objective in the discussion of the
business objectives itself.
To elaborate on this, a company may also refer to
ongoing targets for each KPI in order to
demonstrate how future success will be measured
relative to its current performance. The assessment
of likely future developments is discussed in more
detail in Section 3 of this guide.
An example of how KPIs could be discussed in the
context of strategies and targets is provided below:
Key questions to ask about KPIs:
Are the KPIs selected for disclosure consistent with
those used by the board to assess the business? For
example, do the measures address progress in
managing the critical resources on which the business
depends?
Do the measures address the specific part of the
business affected by the issue, rather than being
provided on an aggregate basis for the business as a
whole?
Are the measures selected and presented in accordance
with the “balanced and neutral” guiding principle? For
example, are they presented consistently over time to
show key trends?
Are the measures presented in a way which is
understandable? For example, is the basis of
computation and the source of data clear and have they
been given enough context by being linked to other
information, such as strategy and future plans?
Example of how to link KPIs to future priorities of the business:
Strategic
priority
Key performance
indicator
Target
for 2015
Actual performance
Performance for 2015
Target
for
2016
2015
2014
2013
Loyal and
satisfied
customers
To increase
customer
satisfaction and
build long-
lasting
relationships.
Customer satisfaction
survey
“Overall satisfaction” score
(being the proportion of
extremely satisfied
customers across current
account and savings) from
an annual independent
survey of approximately
5,000 customers.
58%
Target
exceeded
60%
55%
48%
Since the roll out of a new
customer-service based
training programme in 2013
we have seen a significant
improvement in our
customer satisfaction score,
reducing the gap between us
and the top 3 peers.
To be
one of
the top
3 in
peer
group
(Average of top 3
peers)
(62%)
(62%)
(60%)
Consistent
profitability
and a strong
balance sheet
To focus on cost
discipline and
achieve
operating
efficiencies in
order to
maintain the
capacity to
invest in the
future.
Loan loss rate
Defined as total annualized
loan impairment divided by
gross loans and advances to
customers and banks held at
amortised cost at the
balance sheet date
65 bps
Target
missed
72
bps
70
bps
77
bps
We saw higher levels of
write-offs in the home loans
recovery book and the
impact of one large name in
the commercial property
portfolio. Further discussion
of the performance of our
loan portfolio can be found
on pages [] to [].
68 bps
Cost-to-income ratio
Defined as total operating
expenses, excluding
provisions and charges,
divided by total operating
income.
50%
Target
met
50%
51%
54%
We remained focused on cost
discipline as we managed
higher operational and
regulatory costs while
continuing to invest
significantly in the business.
Cost increases were offset by
a continued improvement in
net interest income.
48%
20
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Take care to focus on these matters in
the business review only to the extent
that is relevant and material to the
shareholders’ assessment of the business
3
The Environmental, Social and Governance Reporting Guide was issued by the HKEx as an Appendix to the Main Board Listing Rules
(Appendix 27). According to App 16.53, issuers are encouraged to include the information set out in Appendix 27 in the annual report
regarding the same period covered in the annual report or as a separate report. The Note to this paragraph states that where the
information is included in a separate report, an issuer is free to report on any period but should consistently report on the same period
so that the information can be comparable. However, the Exchange encourages an issuer to report regarding the same period as in the
annual report.
4
These recommended specific items were deleted from App 16.52 in the February 2015 amendments to the Listing Rules to avoid
duplication with the requirements of Schedule 5.
3) Discussion on environmental policies, compliance
with laws and regulations and 4) An account of key
relationships
To the extent necessary for an understanding of the
development, performance or position of the reporting
entity's business, the business review should include:
a discussion on the company’s (or group’s)
environmental policies and performance and
compliance with the relevant laws and regulations
that have a significant impact on the company (or
group) (Sch 5.2(b)); and
an account of key relationships with employees,
customers and suppliers and others that have a
significant impact on the company (or group) and on
which its success depends (Sch 5.2(c)).
which the company’s [or group’s] success depends”.
Care should therefore be taken to focus on these matters
in the business review only to the extent that is relevant
and material to the shareholdersassessment of the
business’s performance and future prospects. If the
directors wish to include more detail on these matters,
e.g. in accordance with The Environmental, Social and
Governance Reporting Guide (Appendix 27 to the
MBLR)
3
, then it is advisable to consider developing
separate reports to which the business review can cross-
refer.
Set out below are some examples of topics that may be
covered in the business review to satisfy Schedule 5’s
requirements. To ensure that the business review
remains concise, this analysis can be enhanced by the
inclusion of some relevant KPIs as illustrated on the
previous pages of this guide and in the discussion below.
Discussion on environmental policies and compliance
with relevant laws and regulations
It is important to note that the scope of this disclosure
requirement is not just limited to typical “green” issues.
In addition to a discussion on policies and performance
on environmental issues, Schedule 5 requires that
directors identify those laws and regulations that have a
significant impact on the company (or group). Examples
of topics to be covered in this discussion could include:
environmental issues such as greenhouse gas
emissions, management of hazardous wastes and
efficient use of scarce resources;
relevant laws and regulations on providing a safe
working environment;
relevant standards, laws and regulations on health
and safety of products and services provided to
customers, compensation for defective
products/services and/or data privacy; and
Previously
4
App 16.52 included the following
recommended commentary items:
“a discussion on the listed issuer’s environmental
policies and performance, including compliance with
relevant laws and regulations”; and
“an account of the listed issuer’s key relationships
with employees, customers, suppliers and others,
on which its success depends”.
Therefore, for some listed issuers, these requirements in
Schedule 5 will not be new. However, we would
encourage all listed issuers to revisit the content and
structure of their reporting to ensure it is sufficient for
the purposes of Schedule 5.
Schedule 5 requires a discussion of these matters “to
the extent necessary for an understanding of the
development, performance or position of the company’s
[or group’s] business. It also specifically requires that
directors identify those laws and regulations and key
relationships that “have a significant impact on the
company” (or group) and, in the case of relationships, on
21
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
other legislation, such as the US’s Foreign Account
Tax Compliance Act, anti-money laundering legislation
or sanctions against certain regimes, all of which
impose obligations on the company to ensure that it
(or its group) refrains from acting in a manner contrary
to public policy.
For example, one company said the following in their
annual report about the passenger rights legislation
facing the airline industry:
“… European airlines, including our own, have also
become subject to air passenger rights legislation
whereby airlines may be required to pay compensation
to passengers whose flights are delayed more than
three hours. Since its introduction, this legislation has
cost the Group £19 million in compensation payments.
We are actively engaged in lobbying governments in the
interests both of our industry and our customers, and
reminding them of the importance of travel and tourism
as a source of employment and driver of growth.”
In order to comply with the specific disclosure requirement
in Schedule 5, it is not enough simply to state that the
group is subject to these laws and regulations the review
needs to go further by discussing the group’s compliance
with those laws and regulations to the extent necessary for
an understanding of the development, performance or
position of the business. For example, this might involve:
discussing the measures and controls put in place to
ensure compliance with the relevant laws and
regulations;
discussing the extent to which complying with the
relevant laws/regulations has had financial or other
consequences for the business (such as increased
operating costs from carrying out know your
customer” anti-money laundering checks, or reduced
passenger demand, when passengers are subject to
additional levies on airline tickets); and
disclosing if the business has been subject to any
significant regulatory action such as fines or other
penalties imposed for non-compliance, suspension or
closure of any activities or refusal of permission.
Key Relationships
Schedule 5 requires companies to give an account of key
relationships with their employees, customers, suppliers
and others that have a significant impact on the
company/group and on which the company’s/group’s
success depends. To comply with this requirement it is
necessary to take a broad view in considering the extent
to which the actions of stakeholders other than
shareholders can affect the company's or group’s
performance and thus its value.
For example, relationships with customers, suppliers,
distributors, employees, contractors, lenders, creditors
and/or regulators could be important to the business’s
success, as could the company's/group’s broader impact
on society and the communities affected by its activities.
Strategic alliances with other companies can also affect
the performance of the company and its value.
AB5.48 gives the following examples of matters that may
be included in the business review in this regard:
policies on employees’ compensation, recruitment,
training and development;
policies on managing environmental and social risks
of distribution and supply chain networks; and
community involvement and contribution in relation to
education, environmental concerns, culture, sport and
social responsibilities.
KPIs and other data can be used effectively to anchor an
account of a relationship objectively. For example, a
retailer disclosed the following as one of its 5 customer-
focused strategic KPIs in a recent annual report:
2. New customers choose us
29.1% of new loyal customers
Definition: New loyal customers
*
as a percentage of last year’s loyal
customer base
Commentary: We want to build our loyal customer base so in addition to
retaining our existing loyal customers, we want to attract new ones. Our
investments in the customer offer are designed to create long-term value
for new customers too.
*
Loyal customers are defined based on their frequency of spend and average
weekly spend.
The relevant KPIs will vary depending on the nature of
the relationship. For example, if giving an account of the
relationship with employees, relevant KPIs could include
staff turnover, % of staff with more than 5 years’
service, lost work day frequency rate etc.
22
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
KPIs can be used effectively to anchor an
account of a relationship in facts and
provide at-a-glance information
KPIs can also be combined with other measures to
provide at-a-glance information which gives insight into
the state of a relationship. Examples of charts and graphs
with multiple data sets were given earlier in this section
and can be used for this purpose. Set out below is a
further example from the British Broadcasting
Corporation’s (BBC’s) annual report, which demonstrates
how a KPI (in their case the answer to the survey
question
on whether the BBC had lots of fresh and new ideas)
can be compared to information on how important this
issue is to their customers in order to assess their own
performance. Similar approaches could be used for many
other data pairings to complement any narrative account
of the state of a relationship. Care, however, needs to be
taken to ensure that the pairing is meaningful and that
appropriate conclusions are drawn from the data shown,
to minimise the risk that the reader is misled.
Extract from the “Understanding audiences” section of the BBCs 2013/14 annual report:
In addition:
App 16.32(7) requires details of the number and
remuneration of employees, remuneration policies,
bonus and share option schemes and training schemes
to be disclosed and commented on; and
App 16.52(v) recommends disclosure of a discussion
on the listed issuer’s policies and performance on
community, social, ethical and reputational issues.
This information could be given in this discussion or more
generally in the description of the business.
Key questions to ask about the discussion on
environmental policies, laws and regulations and
key relationships:
Does the discussion identify those environmental
policies, laws and regulations which have a
significant impact on the business and does it
include a discussion of the extent of compliance?
Does the discussion identify and give an account of
those relationships on which the
company’s/group’s success depends?
If KPIs have been included in the discussion, are
they balanced and neutral and presented in an
understandable way?
Have cross references been included to where
further information can be found, where relevant?
23
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
The content elements
2. Bringing the story up to date
Schedule 5 requires the business review to provide “particulars of important events that have
occurred since the end of the financial year. This will bring the story up to date and can provide a
bridge between the discussion of the year’s performance and position and where the business is
heading.
Schedule 5 requires companies to disclose the
particulars of important events affecting the reporting
entity that occurred after the financial year end and up
to the date of the report.
The law is not definitive on how the review should be
structured, but in our view it would be logical for this
discussion to follow the review of the financial year, as
this discussion will update the story of the business to
the date of approval of the report.
The review’s discussion should not be limited to
financial events some discussion may be needed on
non-financial events if the company considers them to
be important to the business.
However, as discussed on page 7 of this guide,
Schedule 5 allows a company not to disclose any
information about “impending developments or
matters in the course of negotiation”, if such
disclosure would, in the directors’ opinion, be
“seriously prejudicial” to the company’s (or group’s)
interests.
The safe harbours set out in Section 307D of the
Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571) which
permit a company to withhold disclosure of inside
information under specified circumstances, have a
similar objective. However, Section 307D sets out
more detailed requirements.
It is not yet clear how these two pieces of legislation
will work together in practice. Therefore we advise
directors to obtain legal advice in this regard.
Complementing and supplementing the financial
statements
Although the business review may make reference to
where information on post year-end events may be
found elsewhere in the annual report, companies
should generally be looking to go beyond the
disclosures made in their financial statements.
For example, the business review could discuss how
the events impact on the performance measures
disclosed in respect of the year under review and
companies could quantify this impact by updating the
affected KPIs. The review may also discuss:
the likely impact of these important events on the
future plans of the business; and
whether these events have caused management
to re-assess the principal risks and uncertainties
facing the business going forward.
In addition to this discussion of specific important
events, directors may also consider whether it would be
useful to provide more general commentary on the
direction of the business since year end. This can bridge
the gap between the discussion of what happened
during the financial year under review and the discussion
of the likely future developments of the business.
Key questions to ask when bringing the story
up to date:
Has the company disclosed both financial and non-
financial events that are important to the business?
If not, has legal advice been obtained on whether it
is acceptable to withhold this information from the
public?
Has sufficient information about the event been
given in the business review, including updating the
KPIs where applicable and discussing the impact of
the event on the future business?
Would it be useful to provide more general
commentary on the direction of the business since
year end and where it is heading?
24
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
The content elements
3. Explaining the likely future
development of the business
Schedule 5 requires the business review to contain an indication of the likely future development in the
company’s (group’s) business. In a well written business review, this discussion would address the
main trends and factors likely to affect the future development, performance, or position of the
business.
Companies may already be discussing the main business
trends in their annual reports as this is a recommended
disclosure item under App 16.52(iv). However, even those
companies complying with this recommended practice
item may not be providing sufficient explanations to help
readers assess the potential impact of these trends on the
business.
Trends and likely future developments can arise from both
internal factors (such as the development of new product
segments) and external factors (such as changing
customer needs and preferences, and emerging threats
and opportunities).
In a well written business review, the discussion should
go beyond providing high level assessments that might
apply to any business in the sector. Instead, companies
may consider discussing:
the likely impact of each trend or factor on their
future business and to what extent this depends on
factors within or outside their control or influence;
whether they feel that the identified trend or factor
presents new opportunities or threats to the
business; and
how the company is managing any risk exposure
relating to each trend or factor identified.
In this regard, App 16.32 requires the following to be
disclosed:
the state of the group’s order book (where applicable)
and prospects for new business including new
products and services introduced or announced (App
16.32(3));
future prospects of significant investments held (App
16.32(4)); and
details of future plans for material investments or
capital assets (App 16.32(9)).
In addition, AB5.56 states that the discussion should
include comments on short and longer-term funding plans
to support the directors' strategies to achieve the
reporting entity’s objectives. The discussion should
supplement the information provided in the financial
statements by, for example, commenting on any special
factors that may have a significant effect on future cash
flows.
This could include, for example, the existence and timing
of commitments for capital expenditures and other known
or probable cash requirements. The discussion on funding
should also include details of expected sources of funding
in the coming year for the planned material investments or
capital assets as required by App 16.32(9). Conversely,
where the reporting entity has cash that is surplus to
future operating requirements and current levels of
distribution, the discussion should include future plans for
making use of the excess.
25
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Holding back “seriously prejudicial information
As discussed in the previous section of this guide,
Schedule 5 allows the directors not to disclose any
information about “impending developments or matters in
the course of negotiation”, if such disclosure would, in the
directors’ opinion, be “seriously prejudicial” to the
company’s (or group’s) interests.
This exemption may also be relevant in some specific
situations to the discussion of the likely future
development of the business. However, care should be
taken not to misuse this exemption, by taking it too
broadly. For example, even where there is a business
acquisition in the course of negotiation, shareholder needs
may be able to be met by disclosing information about the
group’s plans for future expansion or diversification of
which this acquisition is a part, without disclosing
information which is “seriously prejudicial” to the
negotiations.
If the board is considering making use of this exemption,
we recommend that you obtain legal advice in this regard.
Linkage
As discussed earlier, companies should also think about
linking their future development discussions to their
strategies and performance measures where appropriate.
There is no prescribed structure for doing this, so
companies will need to consider how best to tell the story
of how business value is expected to be generated and
preserved. Tables, such as those illustrated on pages 9 and
20, might be a useful presentation technique to assist with
this.
Companies can also help shareholders assess the impact of
the trends and factors identified by providing contextual
information. For example, if a trend has been identified
affecting a specific customer segment, shareholders will
need to understand the size of that segment if they are to
model its impact. Ideally this information should already be
available from the description of the business model.
There is also a clear commonality between the discussion
of further prospects and the principal risks and
uncertainties facing the business. Care should be taken to
ensure that the discussion of future prospects takes those
identified principal risks and uncertainties into account, to
present a balanced and neutral discussion of how the
directors view the future. This could include their plans to
mitigate any negative impacts or take advantage of any
opportunities that may arise as the future unfolds. What-if
analyses which flex KPIs for a range of possible future
outcomes can also provide useful information in this
regard.
Including a health warning
AB5.57 advises that given the nature of some forward-
looking information, in particular statements that cannot
be objectively verified but have been made in good faith,
directors may want to include a warning in the review to
treat such statements with caution, explaining the
uncertainties underpinning such information.
Typically such warnings will be drafted with the assistance
of the company’s legal advisers and vary from a
boilerplate style of general health warning, to more
specific wording which draws attention to the specific
risks and uncertainties facing the group. However, these
statements all share the same basic intent of conveying
the following 3 key messages:
the discussion and analysis includes forward-looking
statements;
these forward-looking statements reflect current
assumptions about future developments based on the
directors’ current views; however
actual outcomes and developments may be different
due to risks and uncertainties outside of the directors’
control.
Some companies include a comprehensive health warning
statement in a prominent position at the start of their
annual report. In such cases it may still be advisable to
integrate the above key messages into the discussions of
future prospects in the business review, and/or to take
particular care to ensure the discussion is understandable
in its own right. This is in order to minimise the risk that
the reader misinterprets the discussions as reflecting
greater confidence in the directors’ ability to predict or
control the future than the directors feel themselves.
Key questions to ask about the indication of
the likely future developments:
Does the discussion address the material
anticipated changes across the business model,
covering changes arising from both management
initiatives, and external factors?
Do identified trends look beyond those already
apparent in the financial statements?
Is sufficient detail provided for shareholders to form
their own views on the implications of each trend or
factor?
Does the review contain sufficient warning about
the uncertainty of any forward-looking information?
26
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
The content elements
4. Explaining the principal risks
and uncertainties
Schedule 5 requires the business review to include a description of the principal risks and
uncertainties facing the company (or group). In a well written business review the description of the
principal risks and uncertainties should cover the exposure to negative consequences, as well the
directors’ policy for managing principal risks and potential opportunities.
Previously App 16.52(v) included the following
recommended commentary item: “a discussion on
business risks (including known events, uncertainties and
other factors which may substantially affect future
performance) and risks management policy”
5
. In addition,
App 16.32 continues to require commentary on the
following matters that are relevant to the discussion of risk
and uncertainties:
the group’s liquidity and financial resources. This may
include comments on the level of borrowings at the
end of the period under review, the seasonality of
borrowing requirements, and the maturity profile of
borrowings and committed borrowing facilities.
Reference may also be made to the funding
requirements for capital expenditure commitments and
authorisations (App 16.32(1));
details of charges on group assets (App 16.32(8));
exposure to fluctuations in exchange rates and any
related hedges (App 16.32(11)); and
details of contingent liabilities, if any (App 16.32(12)).
Some form of risk discussions, especially relating to
liquidity risk, may therefore already be an established part
of many listed companies’ annual reports. But these
discussions may well not go far enough, or have the right
balance, compared to the new requirement in Schedule 5
to discuss the principal risks and uncertainties facing the
business. A closer look at the guidance in AB5 may drive
further improvement in disclosures in this area:
Guidance in AB5 on identifying risks to disclose
There is an emphasis in AB5 on addressing the full range
of business risks irrespective of whether they are financial
or non-financial in nature specifically, AB5.50 mentions
reputational, strategic, commercial, operational and
financial risks as the types of risk that the business may
face.
AB5.50 also lists the following common examples of risks:
(a) risk of loss of income, for example arising from
increased competition affecting market share and/or
pricing of products and services, or changes in the
market itself;
(b) risk of increased costs, for example arising from
impact of inflation or scarce supply on costs of key
resources such as premises, skilled workforce, raw
materials;
(c) risk of loss of asset value, for example arising from the
reporting entity's exposure to price changes in the
value of property or commodities held, or exposure to
customers' credit risk or exposure to the risk that
inventories may become obsolete due to changes in
technology or fashion;
(d) liquidity risk, for example slowing down in the timing
of cash receipts may put pressure on the reporting
entity's ability to meet loan repayment schedules or
otherwise increase borrowing costs; and
(e) risks arising from the reporting entity's reliance on
availability of skilled workforce, key suppliers or
providers of finance (such as continuing banking
facilities).
5
This recommended specific item was deleted from App 16.52 in the February 2015 amendments to the Listing Rules to avoid duplication
with the requirements of Schedule 5.
27
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Consistent with App 16.32(1), AB5 also specifically
highlights the ability of the reporting entity to fund its
current and future operations and stated strategies as an
area for discussion of risk. The guidance is consistent with
the items listed in App 16.32(1) in this regard, but goes
further by flagging covenants with lenders as an extra area
where principal risks could lie (AB5.51-52).
This guidance in AB5 is aimed at those companies
preparing business reviews for the first time. Listed issuers
would be well advised to consider whether their current
risk disclosures match up to this guidance, as well as
considering whether the guidance goes far enough given
the facts and circumstances of the issuer’s business and
its environment.
Reviewing the information planned to be disclosed in
respect of the fair review of the business (i.e. the first
content element discussed earlier on in this guide),
including the discussions of compliance with laws and
regulations and key relationships, may identify further
matters which are a source of risk for the issuer. Some
risks may also link to governance disclosures to explain
how the board is monitoring and setting risk appetite and
policy.
On the other hand, it is important to ensure that the
discussion in the business review is limited to the
“principal” risks and uncertainties facing the company or
group. Consistent with the principle of materiality, this
discussion should focus on those risks which are most
relevant to the shareholders’ decisions, and these risks
should not be obscured by excessive discussion of other
risks that are unlikely to crystallize or, if they did
crystallize, would not have a material impact.
One way of demonstrating that you have identified the
principal risks facing the group is to use a “heat map”. For
example, a South African based gold mining company
included the heat map reproduced below in a recent annual
report to present its top 10 risks in terms of the likelihood
of occurrence and the severity of impact. Although all of
these risks appear in the top right hand quadrant of
greatest heat, the relative positioning of these 10 risks each
to the other on the two axes of probability and severity
helps the shareholder distinguish between them. The heat
map also helps the shareholder understand that there may
be other risks with potential high impact which the
company has not disclosed as the directors consider them
less likely this could help the shareholders ask for further
information about any potential worst case scenarios if they
consider it useful to know.
Example of a heat map which plots risks against severity and probability axes:
28
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Company-specific descriptions, supported by
quantitative disclosures, can help shareholders
form a view of the potential earnings implications
Presenting risk information in the business review
AB5.49 states that the description of the principal risks and
uncertainties should cover the exposure to negative
consequences, as well the directors' policy for managing
principal risks and any potential opportunities.
Broad descriptions of generic or industry level risks and
mitigating actions are unlikely to provide this. Instead,
company-specific descriptions, supported by quantitative
disclosures can help shareholders form a view of the
potential earnings implications. For example, one company
said the following in a recent discussion on risk factors:
“We review the oil and gas price assumptions we use to
evaluate project decisions and commercial opportunities on a
periodic basis. We generally test projects and other
opportunities against a long-term price range of $70-110 per
barrel for Brent crude oil … While we believe our current long-
term price assumptions are prudent, if such assumptions
proved to be incorrect it could have a material adverse effect
on us. For near-term planning purposes, we stress test the
financial framework against a wider range of prices.”
One way to disclose the principal risks concisely may be to
present the information in a table, describing the risks
themselves and how they are being managed. It may also
be useful to link risk descriptions to other parts of the report
which set out the strategy and/or provide indicators of
progress in managing the risk. This is illustrated in the
example below, which describes a principal risk that might
be identified by a mining company, and how it links to other
components of that company’s business review:
Example of how to link the principal risks of the business to other components of the business review:
Risk
Description
Link to Strategy
Risk Mitigation
Risk indicators
monitored
Impact on future business if
mitigation is unsuccessful
Failure to
obtain access
to a sufficient
number of new
sites for
exploration
and
commercially
viable
extraction
purposes
Obtaining access to
new sites for
exploration purposes
and identifying new
opportunities for
commercially viable
extraction are key to
our strategy to
maintain sustainable
earnings over the
long term.
In each of our major
locations we have put in
place a team of experienced
negotiators to maximize our
chances of obtaining access
to land on commercially
viable terms. These
negotiators seek sustained
cooperation with local
governments and the wider
community in order to
reduce risks of refusal or
protracted legal disputes.
We receive monthly
progress reports on
status of new
opportunities for
extraction. We also
monitor a range of
quantitative measures
which indicate significant
delays or failure to
access land for
exploration projects, in
order that appropriate
action can be authorised.
Failure to obtain access to land
for exploration purposes and/or
failure to identify new
commercially viable extraction
opportunities will prevent us
from maintaining earnings as our
existing projects approach the
end of their productive lives.
Further details of the proved and
undeveloped reserves of our
existing projects can be found in
our discussion of our business
and its future.
As mentioned at the start of this guide, the business review
is just the beginning of a series of regulatory initiatives
aimed at improving the relevance of narrative reports for
shareholders.
One of these initiatives
6
aims to improve transparency of
companies’ risk management and internal controls, including
an annual review of effectiveness. Given the progressive
nature of disclosures around risks, we suggest that
companies take this opportunity to revisit their risk
management disclosures to ensure cohesive descriptions in
the business review and corporate governance reports.
Key questions to ask about the discussion of
principal risks and uncertainties:
Are the risks highlighted the most relevant to an
understanding of business prospects including
those relating to success in implementing
business strategies?
Does the report address significant risks arising
from both the internal and external environment?
Do the disclosures link to KPIs and governance
explanations that address progress in managing
the risk?
6
On 19 December 2014, the HKEx issued its new requirements in the Consultation Conclusions on Risk Management and Internal Control: Review of the
Corporate Governance Code and Corporate Governance Report. The new requirements will apply to accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2016 (as
illustrated in the timeline on page 1 of this guide).
29
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Overall assessment of the quality
of the business review:
Questions for boards to ask
themselves
As part of the board’s overall assessment before approval, we expect that the directors will be
familiar with the proposed contents of the business review and will have raised concerns if anything
appeared untoward.
However, as the board is ultimately responsible for the contents of the annual report, we would
recommend that the directors also ask themselves the following questions:
Are we confident that the process for drafting the review was robust
enough to ensure that the review is factually accurate?
Are we satisfied that the content of the review is comprehensive
enough to meet the statutory requirements and, where applicable, the
requirements of the Listing Rules?
Do we consider that the review stands up well against the guiding
principles set out in AB5 and in particular is it a fair and balanced
discussion of our business and its future prospects?
Do we believe that the review will make a positive contribution to
shareholders’ overall understanding of who we are, what we do and
why we are worth investing in?
These questions address fundamental assertions which should underpin the approval of any
directors’ report which contains a business review. So if the board cannot answer “yes” to each of
these questions, then clearly there is work still to be done for this year’s report!
But even if confident enough to approve this year’s report, we would encourage all companies, even
the best, to challenge themselves continuously to find new and improved ways to communicate key
messages effectively and efficiently to those who need to know. With the benefit of hindsight and
feedback, we therefore recommend that each year you ask yourselves one more question:
What can we do better next time?
30
‘‘
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
A practical guide to the business review
Further information
For easy reference, this guide includes the following appendices which may assist in drafting or improving a
business review:
Appendix 1: Extracts from Appendix 16 to the Main Board Listing Rules (with equivalent paragraph
references to the GEM Listing Rules) with an index of where these requirements are discussed in this guide
Appendix 2: Index of KPIs illustrated in the Implementation Guidance attached to Accounting Bulletin 5
Appendix 3: A summary of all the questions mentioned in this guide that you may find useful to ask
Appendix 4: Names and website addresses of the distinguished companies who have received recognition in
the recent HKICPA and Hong Kong Management Association report competitions.
In addition, your usual KPMG contact can provide you with copies of the following KPMG publications:
HK Companies Ordinance Checklist on the Business Review for Listed Companies to help
companies ensure that the minimum requirements of Schedule 5 and the Listing Rules are met, and to
help when assessing the extent to which the business review has taken the guidance in AB5 into
account
HK Companies Ordinance Checklist on the Business Review for Non-listed Companies to help
companies ensure that the minimum requirements of Schedule 5 are met, and to help when assessing
the extent to which the business review has taken the guidance in AB5 into account
The KPMG survey of business reporting to provide an overview of current reporting practice
globally and highlight areas where this could be developed to provide shareholders with a better
understanding of business performance. This publication is also available from our external website
at: www.kpmg.com/betterbusinessreporting
KPMG’s Briefing Note 2 “What’s new for directors’ reports?” to highlight the areas of change and
key requirements relating to the directors’ report under the new HK Companies Ordinance. This
Briefing Note, along with other Briefing Notes in the series, is also available from our external website
at: www.kpmg.com/cn/hk-companies-ordinance
The HKICPA’s Accounting Bulletin 5 Guidance for the Preparation and Presentation of a Business
Review under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance Cap.622 (“AB5”) can be found on the Institute’s
website at http://www.hkicpa.org.hk/en/standards-and-regulations/standards/financial-reporting/circular/.
The above is just a selection of the sources of information available. Please contact your usual KPMG contact
if you feel we can help in any way with improving your business reporting.
31
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
Appendix 1:
Extracts from Appendix 16 to the Main
Board Listing Rules
7
Paragraph 28 (equivalent to Rule 18.07A of the GEM Listing Rules) [emphasis added]:
Discussed
in this
guide on
page …
A listed issuer (whether or not it is incorporated in Hong Kong) shall include
disclosures required under the following provisions of the Companies Ordinance and
subsidiary legislation:
3
App 16.28 (1)
in financial statements
a) Section 383 Notes to financial statements to contain information on directors
emoluments etc.;
b) Schedule 4 Accounting Disclosures relating to:
(i) Part 1(1) Aggregate amount of authorized loans;
(ii) Part 1(2) Statement of financial position to be contained in notes to annual
consolidated financial statements;
(iii) Part 1(3) Subsidiarys financial statements must contain particulars of
ultimate parent undertaking;
(iv) Part 2(1) Remuneration of auditor; and
c) Companies (Disclosure of Information about Benefits of Directors) Regulation; and
App 16.28 (2)
in directors’ report
a) Section 390 Contents of directors report: general;
b) Section 470 Permitted indemnity provision to be disclosed in directors’ report;
c) Section 543 Disclosure of management contract;
d) Schedule 5 Content of Directors’ Report: Business Review; and
e) Companies (Directors’ Report) Regulation.
28.1 Directors must prepare the directors’ report which complies with section 388 of the
Companies Ordinance and the directors’ report must be approved and signed,
which complies with section 391 of the Companies Ordinance.
28.2 Section 390(3)(b) of the Companies Ordinance requires a company to disclose the
name(s) of the director(s) of its subsidiaries. Notwithstanding the disclosure
provisions in the sub-paragraph 2(a) above, a listed issuer not incorporated in Hong
Kong is not required to disclose the name(s) of its subsidiaries’ director(s).
3
7
On 6 February 2015, the HKEx issued its Consultation Conclusions on the Review of Listing Rules on Disclosure of Financial Information with
reference to the New Companies Ordinance and Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards and Proposed Minor/Housekeeping Rule
Amendments to update the Listing Rules for the new Companies Ordinance disclosure requirements. Amendments to the Listing Rules were
included as an appendix to the Consultation Conclusions. These amendments are mandatory for financial years ending on or after 31 December
2015. This guide is based on these updated Listing Rules.
32
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
Paragraph 32 (equivalent to Rule 18.41 of the GEM Listing Rules):
A listed issuer shall include in its annual report a discussion and analysis of the groups
performance during the financial year and the material factors underlying its results and
financial position. It should emphasize trends and identify significant events or transactions
during the financial year under review. As a minimum the directors of the listed issuer should
comment on the following:
3, 11, 14
App 16.32 (1)
the group’s liquidity and financial resources. This may include comments on the level of
borrowings at the end of the period under review, the seasonality of borrowing requirements,
and the maturity profile of borrowings and committed borrowing facilities. Reference may also
be made to the funding requirements for capital expenditure commitments and
authorisations;
27, 28
App 16.32 (2)
the capital structure of the group in terms of maturity profile of debt and obligation, type of
capital instruments used, currency and interest rate structure. The discussion may cover:
a) funding and treasury policies and objectives in terms of the manner in which treasury
activities are controlled;
b) the currencies in which borrowings are made and in which cash and cash equivalents
are held;
c) the extent to which borrowings are at fixed interest rates;
d) the use of financial instruments for hedging purposes; and
e) the extent to which foreign currency net investments are hedged by currency
borrowings and other hedging instruments;
14
App 16.32 (3)
the state of the group’s order book (where applicable) and prospects for new business
including new products and services introduced or announced;
25
App 16.32 (4)
significant investments held, their performance during the financial year and their future
prospects;
14, 25
App 16.32 (5)
details of material acquisitions and disposals of subsidiaries, associates and joint ventures in
the course of the financial year;
14
App 16.32 (6)
comments on segmental information. This may cover changes in the industry segment,
developments within the segment and their effect on the results of that segment. It may also
include changes in the market conditions, new products and services introduced or
announced and their impact on the group’s performance and changes in revenue and margins;
14
App 16.32 (7)
where applicable, details of the number and remuneration of employees, remuneration
policies, bonus and share option schemes and training schemes;
23
App 16.32 (8)
details of charges on group assets;
27
App 16.32 (9)
details of future plans for material investments or capital assets and their expected sources of
funding in the coming year;
32.1 It is the responsibility of the directors of the listed issuer to determine what
investment or capital asset is material in the context of the listed issuer’s business,
operations and financial performance. The materiality of investment or capital asset
varies from one listed issuer to another according to its financial performance, assets
and capitalisation, the nature of its operations and other factors. An event that is
“material in the context of a smaller listed issuer’s business and affairs is often not
material to a large listed issuer. The directors of the listed issuer are in the best
position to determine materiality. The Exchange recognises that decisions on
disclosure require careful subjective judgements, and encourages listed issuers to
consult the Exchange when in doubt as to whether disclosure should be made.
25
33
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
App 16.32 (10)
gearing ratio;
32.2 The basis on which the gearing ratio is computed should be disclosed.
15, 16
17
App 16.32 (11)
exposure to fluctuations in exchange rates and any related hedges; and
27
App 16.32 (12)
details of contingent liabilities, if any.
32.3 If the above information required in this paragraph has been disclosed in a
business review in the directors’ report as set out in paragraph 28, no additional
disclosure is required.
27
3
Paragraph 52 (equivalent to Rule 18.83 of the GEM Listing Rules):
App 16.52
Issuers are encouraged to disclose the following additional commentary on discussion and
analysis in their interim and annual reports:
(i) efficiency indicators (e.g. return on equity, working capital ratios) for the last five
financial years indicating the bases of computation;
(ii) industry specific ratios, if any, for the last five financial years indicating the bases
of computation;
(iii) a discussion of the listed issuer’s purpose, corporate strategy and principal
drivers of performance;
(iv) an overview of trends in the listed issuer’s industry and business;
(v) a discussion on the listed issuer’s policies and performance on community,
social, ethical and reputational issues; and
(vi) receipts from, and returns to, shareholders.
52.1 Issuers should also note the recommended disclosures set out in paragraphs Q to T
of Appendix 14
8
.
3
15, 17
15
12, 13
12, 14, 25
23, 27
14
Paragraph 53 (equivalent to Rule 18.84 of the GEM Listing Rules):
App 16.53
Issuers are encouraged to include information set out in Appendix 27
9
in the annual report
regarding the same period covered in the annual report, or as a separate report.
53.1 Where the information is included in a separate report, an issuer is free to report on
any period but should consistently report on the same period so that the information
can be comparable. However, the Exchange encourages an issuer to report regarding
the same period as in the annual report.
21
8
Paragraphs Q to T of Appendix 14 of the Main Board Listing Rules set out a number of recommended disclosures on corporate
governance matters. The areas covered by these paragraphs are:
Share interests of senior management;
Investor relations, including details of shareholders and the last shareholders’ meeting;
Internal controls; and
Management functions, including the division of responsibility between the board and management.
9
Appendix 27 contains the “Environmental, Social and Governance Reporting Guide”.
34
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
Appendix 2:
Index of KPIs illustrated in the
Implementation Guidance attached to
Accounting Bulletin 5
Financial KPIs
IG Example 1: Return on capital employed (ROCE)
IG Example 2: Market share
IG Example 3: Average revenue per user (customer)
IG Example 4: Sales per square foot
IG Example 5: Percentage of revenue from new products
IG Example 6: Cost per unit sold
IG Example 7: Economic capital
IG Example 8: Cash conversion rate
Non-financial KPIs
Measures relating to the reporting entity's environmental policies and performance and
compliance with laws and regulations (paragraphs 44-45):
IG Example 9: Environmental spillage
IG Example 10: CO2 emissions
IG Example 11: Waste
IG Example 12: Employee health and safety
Measures relating to the reporting entity's key relationships (paragraphs 46-48):
IG Example 13: Number of subscribers
IG Example 14: Number of products sold per customer
IG Example 15: Customer churn
IG Example 16: Employee morale
Other measures that may reflect on the current or future development in the business or
the principal risks and uncertainties facing the reporting entity:
IG Example 17: Products in the development pipeline
IG Example 18: Reserves
IG Example 19: Market risk
IG Example 20: Monitoring of social risks in the supply chain
IG Example 21: Business continuity management
35
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
Appendix 3:
A summary of questions to ask
The following brings together all the questions we suggest in this guide that you
may find useful to ask. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list of things to think
about, but may provide some useful prompts either at the planning stage or when
reviewing the draft
Discussed
in this
guide on
page …
Overall
considerations
Key questions to ask when planning ahead:
Have we put together a team with enough insight into top management’s
strategy to ensure the review is useful and authentic?
Has the annual report compared well in the past with information being
communicated through other channels (such as investor presentations) or
could it be improved this year to reduce gaps?
How well does last year’s MD&A stand up against AB5’s guiding principles?
For example:
How well did it complement and supplement the financial statements?
How far did management go to provide balanced and neutral information?
How easy was it to understand?
Could more be done this year on any of these aspects to improve the
usefulness for shareholders?
What are the new topics that need to be discussed in this year’s review,
compared to last year’s MD&A? Where is the information for these topics and
will we be able to find comparative information as well?
10
Setting the
scene
Key questions to ask about …
Factual information about the business:
Does the description of the business align with the board’s view of the
significant business value drivers?
Where different segments of the business have different operating
characteristics or performance drivers, is this clear enough?
Has sufficient detail been provided about the business so that shareholders
can assess the potential impact of matters raised elsewhere in the report?
Any discussion about objectives and strategy:
Are the stated objectives business-specific? For example, becoming the
market leader in a specific segment, rather than generic aims such as
maximising shareholder return
Does the description of the strategy address the short, medium, and longer
term priorities for the business?
Is there enough linkage of stated objectives and strategies to the analysis of
performance and other content elements?
13
36
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
Explaining
the year
under review
Key questions to ask about KPIs:
Are the KPIs selected for disclosure consistent with those used by the board
to assess the business? For example, do the measures address progress in
managing the critical resources on which the business depends?
Do the measures address the specific part of the business affected by the
issue, rather than being provided on an aggregate basis for the business as a
whole?
Are the measures selected and presented in accordance with the “balanced
and neutral” guiding principle? For example, are they presented consistently
over time to show key trends?
Are the measures presented in a way which is understandable? For example,
is the basis of computation and the source of data clear and have they been
given enough context by being linked to other information, such as strategy
and future plans?
20
Explaining
the year
under review
Key questions to ask about the discussion on environmental policies,
laws and regulations and key relationships:
Does the discussion identify those environmental policies, laws and
regulations which have a significant impact on the business and does it
include a discussion of the extent of compliance?
Does the discussion identify and give an account of those relationships on
which the company’s/group’s success depends?
If KPIs have been included in the discussion, are they balanced and neutral
and presented in an understandable way?
Have cross references been included to where further information can be
found, where relevant?
23
Bringing the
story up to
date
Key questions to ask when bringing the story up to date:
Has the company disclosed both financial and non-financial events that are
important to the business?
If not, has legal advice been obtained on whether it is acceptable to withhold
this information from the public?
Has sufficient information about the event been given in the business review,
including updating the KPIs where applicable and discussing the impact of the
event on the future business?
Would it be useful to provide more general commentary on the direction of
the business since year end and where it is heading?
24
37
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
Explaining
the likely
future
development
of the
business
Key questions to ask about the indication of the likely future
developments:
Does the discussion address the material anticipated changes across the
business model, covering changes arising from both management initiatives,
and external factors?
Do identified trends look beyond those already apparent in the financial
statements?
Is sufficient detail provided for shareholders to form their own views on the
implications of each trend or factor?
Does the review contain sufficient warning about the uncertainty of any
forward-looking information?
26
Explaining
the principal
risks and
uncertainties
Key questions to ask about the discussion of principal risks and
uncertainties:
Are the risks highlighted the most relevant to an understanding of business
prospects including those relating to success in implementing business
strategies?
Does the report address significant risks arising from both the internal and
external environment?
Do the disclosures link to KPIs and governance explanations that address
progress in managing the risk?
29
Overall
assessment
of the quality
of the
business
review
Questions for boards to ask themselves
30
Are we confident that the process for drafting the review was robust enough to
ensure that the review is factually accurate?
Are we satisfied that the content of the review is comprehensive enough to
meet the statutory requirements and, where applicable, the requirements of the
Listing Rules?
Do we consider that the review stands up well against the guiding principles set
out in AB5 and in particular is it a fair and balanced discussion of our business and
its future prospects?
Do we believe that the review will make a positive contribution to shareholders
overall understanding of who we are, what we do and why we are worth
investing in?
What can we do better next time?
38
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
Appendix 4: Local award winners
Each year, the following annual report competitions take place in Hong Kong:
The HKICPA’s Best Corporate Governance Disclosure Awards, which acknowledges listed companies and public
sector/not-for-profit organisations that exemplify the best corporate governance standards in Hong Kong, as reflected
in their annual reports; and
The Hong Kong Management Association’s (HKMA) Best Annual Reports Awards, which recognises companies
for their exemplary achievement in producing timely, accurate, informative and well-presented annual reports.
For your reference, we have provided a list of those companies along with a link to their websites who were commended by
the HKICPA and/or the HKMA in their 2014 awards for their well presented corporate governance disclosures and annual
reports. Searching out high quality annual reports of companies in comparable businesses or environments, whether listed in
Hong Kong or in overseas markets with similar reporting regimes, can be a good source of inspiration for ways to improve your
own business reporting.
The full judges reports can be found on the HKICPA’s and HKMA’s websites at: http://www.hkicpa.org.hk/en/about-us/best-
corporate-governance-disclosure-awards/ and http://www.hkma.org.hk/bara-award/introduction.html respectively.
The HKICPA’s Best Corporate Governance
Disclosure Awards Award winners
The HKMA Best Annual Reports Awards Award winners
Airport Authority Hong Kong
www.hongkongairport.com
China Merchants Bank Co., Ltd
www.cmbchina.com
China Minsheng Banking Corp., Ltd
www.cmbc.com.cn
China Shenhua Energy Company Limited
www.csec.com
CLP Holdings Limited www.clpgroup.com
COSCO International Holdings Limited
www.coscointl.com
COSCO Pacific Limited www.coscopac.com.hk
Hang Seng Bank Limited www.hangseng.com
Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited
www.hkex.com.hk
Hong Kong Productivity Council www.hkpc.org
HSBC Holdings plc www.hsbc.com
Hysan Development Company Limited
www.hysan.com.hk
Lenovo Group Limited www.lenovo.com
Prudential plc www.prudential.co.uk
Securities and Futures Commission www.sfc.hk
SOCAM Development Limited www.socam.com
The Hongkong and Shanghai Hotels, Limited
www.hshgroup.com
The Link Real Estate Investment Trust
www.thelinkreit.com
Transport International Holdings Limited
www.tih.hk
VTech Holdings Limited www.vtech.com
Airport Authority Hong Kong www.hongkongairport.com
ANTA Sports Products Limited www.anta.com.hk
CITIC Limited www.citic.com
CLP Holdings Limited www.clpgroup.com
Guodian Technology & Environment Group Corporation Limited
www.khjt.com.cn
Hang Seng Bank Limited www.hangseng.com
Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited www.hkex.com.hk
Hong Kong Housing Society www.hkhs.com
Hong Kong Monetary Authority www.hkma.gov.hk
Hong Kong Productivity Council www.hkpc.org
HSBC Holdings plc www.hsbc.com
Hysan Development Company Limited www.hysan.com.hk
Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited www.icbc-
ltd.com
Jiangsu Expressway Company Limited www.jsexpressway.com
Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority
www.mpfa.org.hk
MTR Corporation Limited www.mtr.com.hk
New World Department Store China Limited www.nwds.com.hk
Next Media Limited www.nextmedia.com/investor
Sa Sa International Holdings Limited corp.sasa.com
Securities and Futures Commission www.sfc.hk
Swire Pacific Limited www.swirepacific.com
The Hongkong and Shanghai Hotels, Limited
www.hshgroup.com
The Hong Kong Jockey Club www.hkjc.com
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University www.polyu.edu.hk
The Land Registry www.landreg.gov.hk
The Link Real Estate Investment Trust www.thelinkreit.com
Transport International Holdings Limited www.tih.hk
Tung Wah Group of Hospitals www.tungwah.org.hk
Urban Renewal Authority www.ura.org.hk
39
This publication was produced by KPMG China’s Department of Professional Practice. The information contained herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address
the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information
is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice
after a thorough examination of the particular situation.
© 2015 KPMG, a Hong Kong partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG I nternational Cooperative (“KPMG
International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. Printed in Hong Kong. The KPMG name, logo and “cutting through complexity” are registered trademarks or trademarks of
KPMG International.
kpmg.com/cn
Mainland China
Hong Kong SAR and Macau SAR
Macau
24th Floor, B&C, Bank of China Building
Avenida Doutor Mario Soares
Macau
Tel : +853 2878 1092
Fax : +853 2878 1096
Hong Kong
8th Floor, Prince's Building
10 Chater Road
Central, Hong Kong
23rd Floor, Hysan Place
500 Hennessy Road
Causeway Bay, Hong Kong
Tel : +852 2522 6022
Fax : +852 2845 2588
Chengdu
17th Floor, Office Tower 1, IFS
No. 1, Section 3 Hongxing Road
Chengdu, 610021, China
Tel : +86 (28) 8673 3888
Fax : +86 (28) 8673 3838
Beijing
8th Floor, Tower E2, Oriental Plaza
1 East Chang An Avenue
Beijing 100738, China
Tel : +86 (10) 8508 5000
Fax : +86 (10) 8518 5111
Chongqing
Unit 1507, 15th Floor Metropolitan Tower
68 Zourong Road,
Chongqing 400010, China
Tel : +86 (23) 6383 6318
Fax : +86 (23) 6383 6313
Foshan
8th Floor, One AIA Financial Center
1 East Denghu Road
Foshan 528200, China
Tel : +86 (757) 8163 0163
Fax : +86 (757) 8163 0168
Fuzhou
25th Floor, Fujian BOC Building
136 Wu Si Road
Fuzhou 350003, China
Tel : +86 (591) 8833 1000
Fax : +86 (591) 8833 1188
Guangzhou
38th Floor, Teem Tower
208 Tianhe Road
Guangzhou 510620, China
Tel : +86 (20) 3813 8000
Fax : +86 (20) 3813 7000
Shenyang
27th Floor, Tower E, Fortune Plaza
59 Beizhan Road
Shenyang 110013, China
Tel : +86 (24) 3128 3888
Fax : +86 (24) 3128 3899
Shanghai
50th Floor, Plaza 66
1266 Nanjing West Road
Shanghai 200040, China
Tel : +86 (21) 2212 2888
Fax : +86 (21) 6288 1889
Shenzhen
9th Floor, China Resources Building
5001 Shennan East Road
Shenzhen 518001, China
Tel : +86 (755) 2547 1000
Fax : +86 (755) 8266 8930
Hangzhou
8th Floor, West Tower, Julong Building
9 Hangda Road
Hangzhou 310007, China
Tel : +86 (571) 2803 8000
Fax : +86 (571) 2803 8111
Nanjing
46th Floor, Zhujiang No. 1 Plaza
1 Zhujiang Road
Nanjing 210008, China
Tel : +86 (25) 8691 2888
Fax : +86 (25) 8691 2828
Qingdao
4th Floor, Inter Royal Building
15 Donghai West Road
Qingdao 266071, China
Tel : +86 (532) 8907 1688
Fax : +86 (532) 8907 1689
Xiamen
12th Floor, International Plaza
8 Lujiang Road
Xiamen 361001, China
Tel : +86 (592) 2150 888
Fax : +86 (592) 2150 999
Tianjin
Unit 15, 47th Floor, Office Tower
Tianjin World Financial Center
2 Dagu North Road
Tianjin 300020, China
Tel : +86 (22) 2329 6238
Fax : +86 (22) 2329 6233