IFRS 9 · Transportation

IFRS 9 ECL Calculator
for Transportation

Pre-configured for transportation and logistics entities with freight receivable defaults, cross-border receivable FX risk, fuel surcharge receivables, and seasonal tourism-linked adjustments.

Benchmark rates loaded. These are illustrative only. Replace with entity-specific historical loss data for IFRS 9 compliance.

Provision Matrix

Define aging buckets, enter gross carrying amounts and historical loss rates. Per IFRS 9.B5.5.35.

Forward-Looking Adjustment

Required by IFRS 9.5.5.17. Purely historical rates are not IFRS 9 compliant.

Advanced Features

Optional: probability-weighted scenarios, movement schedule, specific assessment, and entity details.

IFRS 9 ECL Audit Working Paper Template — free PDF

Practical audit guide covering the simplified approach provision matrix methodology, forward-looking adjustment documentation template, probability-weighted scenario framework, IFRS 7.35H movement schedule template, common ISA 540 findings on ECL estimates, and industry benchmark loss rates for 12 sectors.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

IFRS 9 Expected Credit Losses for Transportation

Transportation and logistics companies carry trade receivables primarily from freight and cargo services, with the nature and risk profile varying significantly between modes (road, rail, sea, air) and between B2B freight and passenger operations. Under IFRS 9, these receivables require ECL assessment using the simplified approach. The key challenge for transportation entities is the diversity of counterparties — from large multinational shippers with strong credit to small freight forwarders operating on thin margins — and the cross-border nature of many transactions, which introduces jurisdictional risk in the event of counterparty insolvency. Seasonal patterns are significant for tourism-linked transport operators, and fuel surcharge receivables create an additional layer of billing complexity that can generate disputes.

Receivable Characteristics — Transportation

Freight receivables are typically billed on 30–60 day terms and represent the core receivable category for logistics companies. These can be segmented by customer type: large corporate shippers (low default risk, high individual values), freight forwarders (moderate risk, acting as intermediaries), and spot-market customers (higher risk, limited relationship history). Fuel surcharge receivables are billed separately and may carry higher dispute risk because surcharge calculations can be contested. Demurrage and detention receivables (charges for container/equipment retention beyond the free period) are frequently disputed. Passenger ticket receivables are largely prepaid and therefore minimal for most operators. Cross-border receivables from international shipments introduce FX risk and jurisdictional complexity.

Forward-Looking Factors

Freight volume indices are the most directly relevant forward-looking indicator for transportation ECL. The Baltic Dry Index (for maritime freight) and road freight indices signal demand conditions that affect shipper financial health. Fuel price forecasts affect both operating costs and surcharge disputes. Global trade volume data and container throughput figures provide macro-level indicators. For passenger transport operators linked to tourism, consumer confidence and seasonal travel demand forecasts are relevant. Economic growth forecasts in key trade corridors indicate future freight demand and customer creditworthiness.

Key forward-looking indicators for transportation:

  • Freight volume indices (Baltic Dry, road freight)
  • Fuel price forecasts
  • Trade volume and container throughput data
  • Consumer confidence (for passenger transport)
  • Seasonal tourism forecasts

Regulatory and Audit Context

Auditors of transportation entities should verify that the receivable segmentation reflects the risk differential between different customer types and service lines. Cross-border receivables should be assessed with consideration of jurisdictional recovery risk — the ability to enforce payment varies significantly between jurisdictions. For entities with significant IFRS 16 fleet leases, the interaction between operating lease receivables (if the entity subleases) and trade receivables requires careful classification. Common audit findings include: failure to separately assess demurrage/detention receivables (which carry higher dispute risk), inadequate consideration of FX risk on cross-border receivables, and insufficient forward-looking adjustment during freight market downturns.

Transportation entities with significant cross-border operations should consider jurisdictional recovery risk when assessing ECL for international receivables, particularly in jurisdictions with weak enforcement mechanisms.

Worked Example — EuroFreight Logistics AG

EuroFreight Logistics AG operates road and intermodal freight services across Europe with €4.6M in trade receivables. The customer base includes 15 major corporate shippers (60% of receivables), 80 freight forwarders (30%), and approximately 200 spot-market customers (10%). The FL factor of 1.05× reflects a slight softening in European freight volumes and rising fuel costs affecting shipper margins.

Bucket Amount Rate ECL
Not yet due €2.800.000 0.32% €8.960
1–30 days €900.000 0.74% €6.660
31–60 days €450.000 2.10% €9.450
61–90 days €240.000 6.30% €15.120
91–180 days €140.000 14.70% €20.580
180+ days €70.000 42.00% €29.400
Total €4.600.000 €90.170

Forward-looking adjustment factor: 1.05× applied to all buckets. Rates shown above are adjusted rates (historical × FL factor).

Typical receivable profile: Transportation receivables include freight billing receivables (30–60 day terms), fuel surcharge receivables, demurrage and detention receivables, passenger receivables (largely prepaid), and cross-border receivables with FX risk. Freight receivables from logistics customers are the largest category with moderate concentration risk.

Frequently Asked Questions — Transportation

Should freight receivables and demurrage/detention receivables be assessed separately?
Yes, this is recommended. Demurrage and detention charges are frequently disputed by customers because the calculations can be complex and contested. Historical loss rates for demurrage receivables are typically 2–3× higher than for standard freight receivables. Separating them in the provision matrix (or applying different loss rates) produces a more accurate ECL estimate.
How should cross-border freight receivables be treated for ECL?
Cross-border receivables carry additional risk factors: FX exposure, jurisdictional enforcement challenges, and potentially different business practices regarding payment. If cross-border receivables represent a material portion of total receivables, consider either segmenting them in the provision matrix or applying an ECL overlay that accounts for the additional risk. The IFRS 9 ECL should be measured in the presentation currency, with FX movements on the receivable recognised separately.
What freight market indicators should be used for forward-looking adjustments?
The Baltic Dry Index (for maritime), road freight rate indices, and container throughput data are the most directly relevant. These leading indicators reflect demand conditions that affect shipper financial health and willingness to pay. Fuel price forecasts are important because rising fuel costs squeeze shipper margins and increase the likelihood of disputes on surcharge components. Global trade volume data from the WTO or CPB World Trade Monitor provides macro context.
Do passenger ticket receivables require ECL assessment?
Passenger tickets are typically prepaid, so the entity does not carry trade receivables for individual passengers. However, corporate account receivables from travel management companies, charter operators, and tour operators do require ECL assessment. Similarly, receivables from code-share or interline partners in the airline industry require assessment based on the partner's creditworthiness.
How do seasonal patterns affect transportation ECL?
Seasonal patterns vary by mode. Tourism-linked transport (airlines, cruise, coach) has peak season receivables in Q3 (Northern Hemisphere summer) with different credit characteristics than off-season. Freight logistics may have peak periods around major retail seasons (pre-Christmas shipping). Agricultural freight is seasonal by harvest. The ECL estimate should consider whether seasonal receivables carry different credit risk and whether the reporting date timing affects the receivable balance composition.