How can an IFRS decision tree be built to classify a stablecoin?
On 30 November, the controller of a French-Ivorian group receives 750,000 units of a US dollar-referenced stablecoin. Five hundred thousand units reach a wallet controlled by the group; 250,000 remain with an intermediary that alone can request redemption from the issuer. The token symbol is identical, but the file cannot begin with one accounting entry. It must first identify what each entity holds and which right it can exercise.
The controller builds a tree in which every branch points to evidence in the file. The contract and legal analysis remain the starting points; the tree records established facts and suspends the conclusion whenever a condition has not been demonstrated.
Define the unit of analysis before selecting a Standard
The first box describes the lot under review: holder, quantity, wallet or intermediary, applicable terms, holding purpose and reporting date. Two balances bearing the same symbol need separate branches when their rights or restrictions differ.
In the case, the 500,000-unit lot is reconciled to the distributed ledger and access controls. The 250,000-unit lot requires the intermediary’s customer agreement, a balance confirmation, return rules and the redemption process. A screenshot may support a quantity; it does not identify the counterparty to a right.
The first deliverable is therefore an identity sheet for each lot. This prevents the issuer’s reputation, reported reserve composition or observed price from replacing analysis of the right held by the reporting entity.
Branch 1: is there a contractual right to receive cash?
IAS 32 includes within the definition of a financial asset a contractual right to receive cash or another financial asset from another entity. The test concerns the contract and the counterparty required to perform. An ability to sell the token on a secondary market is not, by itself, a contractual right against the future buyer.
The tree asks for four items of evidence: who the counterparty is, which amount or asset it must deliver, when the holder can require performance, and whether the reporting entity owns the right or only an intermediary does. If the right is established, the analysis proceeds to IFRS 9 for recognition and measurement. Contractual terms, the business model and the Standard’s other requirements then need separate work. A label such as “redeemable at one dollar” does not pass every test.
For the 250,000 units, the customer agreement may show that the intermediary, rather than the group, has the direct right against the issuer. The group’s right against the intermediary must then be analysed. Copying the conclusion reached for the self-custodied lot would use the wrong unit of analysis.
Branch 2: does the lot match the narrow fact pattern in the 2019 IFRIC decision?
The June 2019 agenda decision on holdings of cryptocurrencies addressed a defined subset: a digital asset recorded on a distributed ledger, not issued by a jurisdictional authority or another party, and not giving rise to a contract between the holder and another party. For that subset, the Committee concluded that IAS 2 applies when the asset is held for sale in the ordinary course of business; otherwise IAS 38 applies.
A stablecoin carrying rights against an issuer or intermediary may fall outside that fact pattern. The tree must not turn the agenda decision into an automatic rule for every cryptoasset. It therefore asks expressly whether all three characteristics are present. A negative answer sends the preparer back to other potentially applicable Standards instead of forcing an IAS 38 outcome.
That boundary matters in the case. The group obtains the issuer’s and intermediary’s terms before concluding. Missing evidence is not coded as “no contract”; it is recorded as an open item.
Branch 3: IAS 2 or IAS 38 within the residual population
When the lot does fall within the contract-free fact pattern considered in 2019, its use in the business drives the next branch. IAS 2 covers assets held for sale in the ordinary course of business. A trader therefore documents its operating model, expected turnover and source of margin. A one-off intention to sell does not convert every corporate treasury holding into inventory.
If IAS 2 does not apply, the decision points to IAS 38. That Standard describes an identifiable intangible asset as a non-monetary asset without physical substance that is separable or arises from contractual or legal rights. The file must then address initial recognition, the permitted measurement model and disclosures. It cannot import IFRS 9 mechanics by analogy without a basis in the Standards.
The IAS 38 review project remains active. The IASB’s work-plan page, updated after its October 2026 meeting, states that the Board explored options and made no decisions at that meeting. The decision tree therefore uses the Standards currently in force. Project research is tracked as a possible future development, not applied as a present requirement.
Keep classification separate from cash presentation
Classification comes before deciding whether an amount belongs within cash or cash equivalents. IAS 7 describes cash equivalents by their purpose of meeting short-term cash commitments, high liquidity and insignificant risk of changes in value. A reference to an official currency does not, by itself, establish those conditions or make a token cash.
The tree adds a distinct control after classification: does the entity propose cash or cash-equivalent presentation, and which evidence supports that proposal? That step considers convertibility, restrictions and actual use. It does not rewrite the earlier IAS 32, IAS 2 or IAS 38 branch.
Worked case: document the exit from every branch
Assume an observed reporting-date price of USD 0.995 per unit. The quantity reconciliation produces USD 746,250 for the 750,000 units. That calculation does not determine carrying amount. It checks the data and highlights a USD 3,750 difference from the stated reference value.
For each lot, the team completes six columns: verified fact, evidence, question, selected branch, next applicable Standard and open item. For the 500,000 units, it attaches the issuer terms and evidence of wallet control. For the 250,000 units, it adds the intermediary agreement and balance confirmation. If a direct redemption right is not demonstrated, the open-item column remains visible; it is not replaced by a favourable assumption.
The reviewer can then retrace the path. The file shows why a branch was opened, which condition closed it and what subsequent analysis remains. The decision tree is useful because it preserves that audit trail, not because it promises a universal answer.
Conclusion
A robust IFRS tree starts with holder rights rather than the token name. It separates lots, tests contractual rights, bounds the 2019 agenda decision and then distinguishes IAS 2 from IAS 38 when that decision applies. Cash presentation and measurement follow in identified controls.
BECTRA’s deliverable is a decision matrix supported by contracts, confirmations, control evidence and open issues. It gives the finance director and reviewer a dated decision trail that can be updated when the facts or Standards change.
Further reading
Sources
Official sources reviewed on 11 November 2026. The IFRIC decision addresses a subset of cryptoassets; this article does not automatically extend it to stablecoins carrying contractual rights.
• IFRS Interpretations Committee, “Holdings of Cryptocurrencies”, June 2019 agenda decision: https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/supporting-implementation/agenda-decisions/2019/holdings-of-cryptocurrencies-june-2019.pdf
• IFRS Foundation, IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation: https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ias-32-financial-instruments-presentation/
• IFRS Foundation, IAS 2 Inventories: https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ias-2-inventories/
• IFRS Foundation, IAS 38 Intangible Assets: https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ias-38-intangible-assets/
• IFRS Foundation, IFRS 9 Financial Instruments: https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ifrs-9-financial-instruments/
• IFRS Foundation, IAS 7 Statement of Cash Flows: https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ias-7-statement-of-cash-flows/
• IFRS Foundation, “Intangible Assets” project, status and October 2026 IASB Update: https://www.ifrs.org/projects/work-plan/intangible-assets/
Comments