IFRS Technical Accounting

Big 4 advisory quality.
Without the cost or the lead time.

From your fact pattern to a fully referenced, audit-ready IFRS position paper.

Built by Chartered Accountants, for Corporate Reporting professionals

How it works

The rigour behind the paper.

Rescript works the way a Senior Technical Accounting Manager would. Gathering context, asking the right questions, identifying the right standards, and producing a paper that holds up under scrutiny.

01

Upload your documents. Set the context.

Contracts, prior period memos, accounting policies, KPI definitions, audit committee reports. Rescript ingests what a senior reporting team member would read before forming a view. Entity type, industry, reporting framework, and materiality all shape the analysis before a single question is asked.

Context a generalist AI cannot replicate
rescripttech.com/demo
INTAKE DOCUMENTS
New accounting paper
Complete all required fields. Rescript processes uploaded documents, generates targeted clarification questions, and runs triage automatically.
Entity and context
Entity name *
Hartwell Energy
Services plc
Industry context *
Oil and Gas, North
Sea
Reporting
framework *
IFRS
FRS
101
FRS
102
Assessment level *
Group
Entity
Document uploads
PDF Hartwell_ARA_Extract_FY24.pdf 2.4 MB
PDF North_Sea_Inspection_Contract.pdf 1.1 MB
+ Prior period memo
PDF preferred · Word supported
02

Rescript reads your documents before asking anything.

Before generating a single question, Rescript extracts relevant contract clauses, maps them to the applicable IFRS standards, and identifies which standards are engaged. The clarification questions that follow are grounded in your specific documents, not generic IFRS checklists.

Clause extraction, not keyword search
rescripttech.com/demo
INTAKE DOCUMENTS
Extracting context from your documents
Hartwell Energy Services plc · North Sea Inspection Contract
Extracted contract clauses
Clause 6.2 – Subcontractor substitution
"Hartwell retains full discretion to select, replace, or substitute any subcontractor at any time without prior operator consent..."
Clause 7.1 – Primary obligation
"Hartwell accepts full responsibility for the quality and delivery of inspection services regardless of subcontractor performance..."
IFRS 15 – Principal vs. Agent (B34–B38) ENGAGED
IAS 37 – Provisions REVIEWING
03

Answer targeted questions. Not a generic checklist.

Rescript generates clarification questions from your specific fact pattern and documents. Each question carries an accounting rationale explaining why it matters, with answer options calibrated to your transaction. Where facts are uncertain, state an assumption. It will be disclosed in the paper.

Questions a Big 4 manager would ask
rescripttech.com/demo
INTAKE DOCUMENTS
Clarification
Answer each question below. Responses refine triage and generation.
6 of 6 answered ✓ Complete
Subcontractor substitution
Does Hartwell retain full discretion to select and substitute subcontractors, or has it already committed to a specific named subcontractor before entering the inspection contract?
Under IFRS 15.B37(a), an entity primarily responsible for fulfilling the promise to provide the specified service is a principal. Whether Hartwell can substitute subcontractors freely is relevant to whether it, not the subcontractor, bears primary responsibility for service delivery.
Hartwell retains full discretion to select and substitute subcontractors at any time without operator consent
Hartwell typically identifies a subcontractor before contract signing but retains a formal right of substitution
Not sure – proceed on stated assumption
04

Standards identified. Reasoning shown. Nothing is a black box.

Rescript confirms which IFRS standards apply to your fact pattern and explains why, including standards considered and not engaged. Every routing decision is visible and auditable. No silent assumptions, no unexplained outputs.

Transparent reasoning, auditable at every step
rescripttech.com/demo
INTAKE DOCUMENTS
Applicable Standards
Based on your fact pattern and clarification responses, Rescript has identified which IFRS standards apply and how they interact.
This paper concerns whether Hartwell acts as principal or agent under IFRS 15 in respect of North Sea inspection contracts. Clarification responses support principal classification: Hartwell bears primary responsibility for service delivery (IFRS 15.B37(a)), absorbs inventory risk (IFRS 15.B37(b)), and sets pricing independently (IFRS 15.B37(c)). IFRS 15.B34 is directly engaged against the fact pattern.
IFRS 15 – Revenue from Contracts with Customers
ENGAGED
Principal vs. agent assessment. All three B37 indicators directly engaged against the fact pattern.
IAS 37 – Provisions and Contingent Liabilities
NOT ENGAGED
No provisions, contingent liabilities, or contract issues identified in the background facts.
Conclusion: Principal – gross revenue recognition
05

Download a paper written like a Big 4 advisory memo.

Conclusion-led, verbatim IFRS citations, working assumptions flagged explicitly. Every paragraph reference maps to the authoritative standard text, not a paraphrase or a recalled approximation. Research, drafting, and review cycles that previously took days, completed in hours. Not a starting point. A near-final draft.

Audit-file quality from first generation
rescripttech.com/demo
INTAKE DOCUMENTS
IFRS 15 — Principal vs. Agent Assessment
Hartwell Energy Services plc · FY2025 · Privileged and Confidential
✓ IFRS citations verified
⚠ 1 working assumption
Conclusion: Principal
⚠ Working assumption: Hartwell retains genuine substitution discretion throughout the contract. Disclosed in Section 3.
Executive Summary
Indicator Analysis — IFRS 15.B37(A)(B)(C)
↓ Download
Word (.docx)
↓ Download
HTML
The output

A paper your audit team will recognise.

Conclusion-led. Structured to audit-file standard. Written in the register of a senior technical accounting memo, with verbatim IFRS citations and working assumptions disclosed throughout.

  1. Conclusion-led executive summary – the accounting conclusion stated up front, with the full reasoning set out below. Not a discussion paper.
  2. Key judgements identified before they are resolved – the accounting tensions named and framed explicitly. The structure an audit team expects to find in the file.
  3. In-depth technical analysis covering every dimension of the accounting question – the alternative treatment addressed directly and dismissed on the facts, not ignored.
  4. Auditor considerations – a dedicated section anticipating what the audit team will probe, before they ask.
  5. Financial statement impact quantified – the presentation difference between treatments stated, with data requirements identified where inputs are needed.
  6. Verbatim IFRS citations, working assumptions disclosed, draft disclosure note included – ready for the audit file from first generation.

↓ Download Word (.docx) – formatted for the audit file, ready for senior reviewer annotation.

The paper shown is a representative output generated by Rescript for an illustrative fact pattern.

RESCRIPT Privileged and Confidential
IFRS 15 – Principal vs. Agent Assessment, Third-Party Subcontractor Inspection Services
Hartwell Energy Services plc · FY2025 · Group Finance Accounting Paper
✓ IFRS citations verified ⚠ 2 working assumptions Conclusion: Principal
Prepared byGroup Financial Controller
Applicable standardsIFRS 15, IAS 10
Paper referenceHES-FY25-PvA-01
VersionDraft for Review
Section 1 of 11

Management concludes that Hartwell Energy Services plc acts as principal in its inspection service contracts across both the North Sea and West Africa portfolios. Revenue is recognised at the gross contracted day-rate per inspection event, with subcontractor costs presented within cost of sales.

"The conclusion rests on three independently substantiated judgements. All three principal indicators in IFRS 15.B37 are met: Hartwell bears full quality and completion responsibility at its own cost if a subcontractor fails (IFRS 15.B37(a)); Hartwell bears the service-delivery equivalent of inventory risk (IFRS 15.B37(b)); and Hartwell prices the day-rate independently of subcontractor cost (IFRS 15.B37(c))."

The agent alternative was considered and rejected. Under that treatment, only the net margin between the day-rate and subcontractor costs would be recognised as revenue. That characterisation is inconsistent with the contractual substance: Hartwell does not earn a commission for arranging a service that a subcontractor delivers directly to the operator. The operator has no relationship with any subcontractor; the entire performance obligation rests with Hartwell. Management is satisfied that no feature of the arrangement displaces the principal conclusion. Two monitoring points arise. First, the working assumptions underpinning the analysis should be confirmed by reference to executed contracts before this paper is finalised...

continues through sections 2 to 11 below

2.
Purpose and Scope
3.
Background
4.
Applicable Accounting Standards
5.
Key Judgements and Estimates
6.
Accounting Treatment
7.
Financial Statement Impact and Disclosures
8.
Auditor Considerations

Continues through sections 9 to 11 below – IFRS appendix, disclosures, and citations register.

Request your Demo →
Why trust it

The standard your auditors expect. Before they ask.

Rescript was built against real Big 4 audit-quality output, calibrated to the standard a technical accounting review team would apply when assessing a position paper in the file. Not a general notion of quality. The specific standard.

The expertise behind Rescript

Leadership experience across Big 4 Audit and FTSE Corporate Reporting

Built by practitioners who have prepared and reviewed technical accounting papers on both sides of the audit relationship. The tool reflects what that experience teaches about what holds up under scrutiny.

On IFRS citations

Fabricated references are a known problem. Rescript is built differently.

Fabricated IFRS paragraph references have caused real professional embarrassment for teams relying on generalist AI tools. Rescript cites IFRS by design, not by recall. Every paragraph reference is verified against the authoritative standard text. Nothing is approximated and nothing is silently filled.

Citations are either verified against source text or flagged for independent review in the appendix. Nothing is approximated.

By the numbers

What Rescript delivers.

11
Sections, every paper

Every paper structured to the standard your auditors expect, from executive summary through to disclosure note and IFRS appendix.

<15min
From fact pattern to paper

From fact pattern to a fully structured, audit-ready position paper in under 15 minutes.

Days Hours
End-to-end workflow

Research, drafting, and review cycles that previously took days, completed in hours.

Get started

The output quality, without sharing a single confidential detail.

Request a demo and see Rescript generate an audit-ready position paper against an illustrative scenario. No real data required.

No account required to request a demo
No confidential data required
Pricing discussed during the demo conversation
Response within one business day