Corporates have been made to escalate their reporting efforts after IAS 34 interim demands became compulsory in 2007, with the average length of the half-yearly financial report up by 27%.

‘A question has to be asked whether all the new rules were required in the first place,’ said Deloitte audit partner Isobel Sharp.

Deloitte has been monitoring the situation closely since the rules came into force for reporting starting on or after 20 January 2007.

‘The UK Listing Authority issued the new rules in late December 2006, effective for periods beginning on or after 20 January 2007. The results suggest the notice was not adequate and perhaps over a year should be allowed, with early adoption permitted so that precedents can be set for others.’

Previously, the optional standard was bypassed by most corporates because compliance meant they could expose themselves to extra disclosures on estimates which changed significantly between interim and annual reports.

Many companies used to drop parts of their interim statements to avoid the extra disclosure.The situation appears to be even more acute because a large number of companies are still not providing required information, despite the surge in report length.

Of 289 companies surveyed, 25% failed to provide a responsibility statement in their half-yearly reports, which is now a requirement for all listed companies.

Sharp added: ‘A quarter of companies did not include the new responsibility statement, which was probably an oversight caused by unfamiliarity with the rules. But is this rule a necessity or a nicety?’

Deloitte’s review considered the impact of the EU Transparency Obligations Directive, which introduced more detailed and extensive requirements for half-yearly financial reports, including compliance with IAS 34 and shorter reporting deadlines.

Of 30 companies put under even closer scrutiny, 30% did not comply with the requirements of IAS 34 fully. This was mainly due to missing disclosures on segments, accounting policies and earnings per share.