RDG Filings is committed to providing its clients with the best XBRL service(s) available. This includes keeping our clients up to date with XBRL Tagging ideas, XBRL service updates as well as recent XBRL Filings for better understanding of the XBRL filing process.

XBRL News & Blogs

Preparing for the iXBRL Mandate – 2019 & Beyond

November 15th, 2019

RDG is one of the largest filers of iXBRL documents with the Securities & Exchange Commission.

Below are some details that we hope will shed some light for you regarding the iXBRL mandate.

What is iXBRL?:

iXBRL is short for Inline eXtensible Business Reporting Language. It is essentially a hybrid of your EDGAR & XBRL documents:   HTML + XBRL = iXBRL

Why iXBRL?:

Potential benefits the SEC has outlined regarding the move to iXBRL:

  • Gives the preparer full control over the presentation of XBRL disclosures within the HTML filing.
  • Helps eliminate inconsistencies between HTML and XBRL filings and improve the quality of the data.
  • Enhance the usability of disclosures (already tagged in XBRL) for reviewers and investors who no longer have to view the XBRL data separately from the EDGAR document.

When do you begin filing in iXBRL?

Filers will be required to file with iXBRL with their first Form 10-Q filed for a fiscal period ending on or after:

  • Large accelerated filers that use U.S. GAAP will be required to comply beginning with fiscal periods ending on or after June 15, 2019.
  • Accelerated filers that use U.S. GAAP will be required to comply beginning with fiscal periods ending on or after June 15, 2020.
  • All other filers will be required to comply beginning with fiscal periods ending on or after June 15, 2021.

To review the notes from our June 2019 Webinar on iXBRL implementation, please click here.

Protected: EDGAR System Update, Monday September 30th, Password Requirements

September 27th, 2019

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Tagging Changes for Taxonomy Update

May 18th, 2018

Since the accounting landscape is constantly evolving, the FASB updates the US-GAAP taxonomy annually – adding concepts, removing others and sometimes restructuring existing sections.

Typically, RDG transitions to the latest taxonomy after the calendar year end filing period is complete and this year is no different.

From SEC.gov:

“The [SEC] strongly encourages companies to use the most recent version of taxonomy releases for their XBRL exhibits to take advantage of the most up-to-date tags related to new accounting standards and other improvements. The SEC suggests that filers consider transitioning to the 2018 taxonomies for the earliest reporting period that ends after March 12, 2018, but not for reporting periods that end before March 12, 2018.”

It is always our goal at RDG to create quality XBRL consistent with the most current structure of the taxonomy and latest industry standards. Because of this, tagging from one period to the next will not always be the same. If you would like one of our CPA, XBRL AICPA Certified team members to assist in a higher level review of your document please let us know.

For more information, please visit: Why did my XBRL tagging change from the last filing?

Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or concerns.

What’s a Dimension?

February 27th, 2018

A dimension is a term used in XBRL very often, yet many struggle to understand what dimensions are in XBRL tagging. RDG is hoping to help clarify what exactly a dimension is. We will also have a follow-up post about proper use and placement of dimensions.

Dimensions are used in XBRL to add depth to particular numeric values that can’t be fully expressed using only the US-GAAP concept alone. Dimensional tagging is needed when facts need additional context applied beyond the concept and date.

Dimensions consist of two parts: “Axes” and “Members”. The Axis of the dimension acting as an umbrella for a category of items, and the Member describing the specific item.

For example, the Property, Plant, and Equipment table will have most of the line items tagged with the same US-GAAP concept, even when each line item clearly represents a different category of PP&E. So, to add the necessary depth and to distinguish each line item from the other line items, a dimension would be added.

In this case, the axis “Property, Plant and Equipment, Type [Axis]” would be added to each line item along with a “Member” such as “Land (Member) or Building (Member)”. Most of the time, the US-GAAP taxonomy’s structure will dictate how and when dimensions are used. The SEC has stated that it would prefer the pre-defined dimension schedules to be utilized when possible, but it does allow for the creation of unique dimensions if they are needed.

Another example of the use of dimensions is in The Statement of Changes in Equity. The Statement of Changes in Equity differs from the other main financial statements in that each line item is separated into constituent values that amount to the total in the final column. To differentiate the constituent values in each column, a dimension is applied to each of the facts in addition to the concepts and dates. This is done by adding an Axis and Member to the particular fact.

See example below:

Why did my XBRL tagging change from the last filing?

January 16th, 2018

One of the common questions we receive regarding XBRL tagging is, “Why did the tagging of the document change this period when compared to a previous filing?” This is a great question, with two short answers.

The first reason is that RDG Filings is consistently working to improve the quality of XBRL tagging on a quarterly basis to be consistent with the latest US-GAAP taxonomy and to remain in line with evolving industry standards.

The second is that the US-GAAP Financial Reporting Taxonomy is updated on an annual basis by FASB. This may or may not result in tagging changes in your document depending on which areas of the taxonomy are adjusted. These changes usually result in updates to best practices, style-guides , and Accounting Standards adjustments by FASB, AICPA and XBRL-US.

Typically, the taxonomy changes are released by FASB in the fourth quarter of the calendar year, but are not supported by the SEC’s EDGAR System until after the first calendar quarter of the next year, so most updates to tagging happen between the end of the first calendar quarter and the filing of any XBRL documents filed after that point.

Our role at RDG is to make sure all of our clients documents are in line with the most recent EDGAR and XBRL guidelines as well as best practices.  When tagging changes are necessary, we will point out what changes were made using our interactive ThunderDome XBRL Viewer.

We are proud of the fact that our XBRL data quality is at the top (99th percentile) of our industry quarter after quarter. There are only a few filing agents that can claim such consistency. The effort of improving XBRL data quality is why RDG Filings was one of the founding members of the XBRL.us Center for Data Quality and why quality and version control of your documents is our main objective.

2017 Posts – Quick Links

October 12th, 2017

Translating your Print Invoice

October 12th, 2017

If you have ever printed with one of the big Financial Printers, please try to find your last invoice.  Chances are the invoice includes as many as 15 line items for each document.  Many of these line items are purposefully abstruse, and some are simply absurd.  Below you will find a translation from Invoice-ese into Real-talk.  If you see any of the following line items on your print invoice, they should raise a red-flag.

Let’s start with a simple one:

  • LINE ITEM: “Page(s) duplicated from a previous file and processed into new document”
  • TRANSLATION: “We’ve already created this part of the document in the past so no new work was necessary. However, we are taking this opportunity to bill you for the work once again.”

Here’s are two related doozies:

  • LINE ITEM: “File(s) converted to PDF”
  • TRANSLATION: “Although it takes only 1-2 seconds to create a PDF, that won’t stop us from charging you for it.”
  • LINE ITEM: “Electronic Digital Book Proof”
  • TRANSLATION: “We already charged for creating a PDF proof of your document, but we also want to charge for sending a fancy proof too. It only required a moment of time, but nonetheless… ka-ching.”

I saved my absolute favorite for last:

  • LINE ITEM: “Email(s), per address”
  • TRANSLATION: “We think we can get away with charging to send you an email, as if there was another way for us to send you your proofs.”

We here at RDG Filings have typeset & printed many thousands of Annual Reports, Proxies, and Transactional Documents, and we find it neither necessary nor reasonable to charge for processes that only require a few clicks of the mouse.  We provide both print quotes and print invoices that are simple & transparent.

RDG Filings offers fast turnaround, high-quality printed material, and quick delivery to transfer agents from our NYC area press facilities.

We will be happy to get a No-Obligation Quote for you.  Please contact us anytime!

Stewart Walker


Hackers Breached the SEC and Profited Off Pre-Public Information

September 22nd, 2017

The SEC has reported that the EDGAR system was hacked by nefarious actors in 2016, and they were able to access companies’ financial disclosures before they were released publicly.  Although the SEC was able to patch the breach in their security systems and protocols fairly quickly, Chairman Jay Clayton admitted “that some may have used it to make illegal profits.”

You can read more here, here, and here.

Coming on the heels of the massive data breach at Equifax earlier this month, this news might rattle the cages of security-conscious public companies.  In his statement on the incident, Clayton also made clear that the SEC is “continuing to investigate the breach and its possible consequences,” and it seems likely that the SEC will be making inquiries regarding the path that pre-public financial information takes as it wends from the companies themselves, through the filing agents, and finally to the SEC.

As Reuters states in their article on the hack, “Cyber criminals have targeted financial information hubs before — the Hong Kong stock exchange and the Nasdaq stock exchange in New York were targeted by hackers in 2011.”  Hackers and cyber thieves see considerable money to be made accessing pre-public information, and they have proven as much by targeting stock exchanges and now even the SEC.

This is why RDG has always made the security of our clients’ pre-public information our highest priority.

RDG is proud of the fact that we do not send any of our clients’ documents overseas to be converted.  We also take pride in the fact that all our staff is US-based, as this is a central aspect of our commitment to both data security and customer service.  Another important part of our commitment to both data security and quality is the fact that all our EDGAR conversion and XBRL tagging software is proprietary.  We have built all our own tools for maximum security and quality, and we maintain all our tools and data on our own SSAE16 certified secure servers, which are located in a world-class co-location facility with redundant storage capacity, multiple back-ups for power, dual and backup internet connections, and full hardware redundancy.

We encourage public companies to ask their SEC filing agent some very important questions:

  • Do you send any part of my documents to a 3rd party for EDGAR conversion or XBRL tagging?
  • Do you send any part of my documents overseas for EDGAR conversion or XBRL tagging?
  • Are all of your employees US-based?
  • What are your security protocols and procedures?

Please contact us if you have any questions about the hack of the SEC or about RDG’s service.

We will be looking forward to hearing from you. Get in touch with us anytime!

Stewart Walker


IFRS Companies to Begin Filing XBRL in 2018

September 12th, 2017

On March 1, 2017 the SEC posted the IFRS Taxonomy.  A full eight years after the start of the XBRL mandate for US GAAP companies, the SEC has finally announced the mandate for IFRS companies to submit XBRL files for 20-F and 40-F filings.

IFRS filers will have to begin submitting XBRL exhibits with fiscal periods ending on or after December 15, 2017.

How does this impact SEC Foreign Private Issuers (FPI) that use IFRS?

SEC Forms 20-F and 40-F (and some 6-Ks*) will require XBRL tags to be applied to each number in the Base Financials, including all of the facts in the Notes to the Financial Statements.

It cannot be denied that this will require some additional work for IFRS companies’ financial reporting teams.  However, there is value in IFRS companies beginning to file XBRL structured data and adding their data to the currently existing wealth of structured data that has been submitted to the SEC by US GAAP companies since 2009.  XBRL structured data is computer-readable and enhances the value, access, and usability of the financial information that SEC issuers file.

RDG filings is one of the leading providers of full-service XBRL tagging solutions in the country, and we create the highest quality XBRL data available.  We have been filing XBRL under the US GAAP taxonomy since the beginning of the mandate, and we are very excited that the IFRS taxonomy is finally going to be made live.  As one of the founding members of the XBRL US Center for Data Quality, RDG has the experience and the expertise to provide IFRS companies with excellent customer service and the highest quality XBRL data.

RDG has always made a strong commitment to creating the highest quality, most useable XBRL data possible, and we employ Certified Public Accountants and experienced auditing/accounting professionals to provide personal service to all of our clients.  As a result of this commitment, the XBRL data that RDG builds has been ranked by a leading independent expert as being filed error free 99% of the time.

Don’t Wait

Don’t wait until you are drafting your 20-F or your 40-F to begin preparing for the XBRL tagging process.  The template creation and set up process is not insignificant, and it pays to begin the process early.  Please contact us to ask any questions and get a realistic and transparent flat-rate quote.  Some providers may try to overcharge you for this service, so it is very much worth your while to take a few moments to do your due diligence.

(*Unless an issuer has a Form F-3 shelf registration that it wants to keep current, there is no requirement for quarterly or semiannual financial statements or earnings press releases that are submitted to the SEC on Form 6 K to include the information in XBRL format.)

We will be looking forward to hearing from you. Get in touch with us anytime!

Stewart Walker


Presentation Differences between PDF files & HTML files

July 14th, 2017

A common question we receive at RDG is:  “Why does my PDF Proof look different then the HTML?”  The answer to this question partly requires changing it to:  “How is HTML different from PDF?”

The answer to the question about the differing presentations of the two formats lies in the foundations of these two document types.

HTML files are displayed in accordance to whichever Operating System/Browser you are using.  For example, using different web browsers such as Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox can affect the way an HTML is displayed/presented.  This is because the underlying code in the HTML file is communicating with the underlying code in the browser being used, and each browser interprets and displays HTML differently.  Additionally, the SEC has its own specific conversion process that dictates how the HTML is presented on the SEC’s website once it is filed.  RDG adheres to those SEC standards known as the EDGAR Filer Manual.

A PDF file, on the other hand, is not dependent on the Operating System/Browser to dictate how the file is displayed.  A PDF is usually not meant to be altered, and it is essentially a snapshot of a document as it would look were it to be physically printed out on 8.5×11 paper.  This is why the PDF file type is the preferred method for documents that are meant to be presented to an audience or physically printed out.

So the PDF proof can look different than the HTML version because when the HTML’s underlying code is converted into a PDF file, some of the characteristics of the HTML’s code can be stripped out by Adobe PDF’s differing interpretation of that underlying code.

That being said, when something doesn’t appear to be presenting correctly in the PDF proof, we strongly advise adjusting the scale/zoom feature in Adobe.  The screen on which the PDF is being viewed on can also affect how it is displayed.  If you are viewing the PDF on your phone versus viewing it on your computer, then there can be some differences in how it’s displayed.  This also applies to larger or smaller computer monitors.  Alternatively, if you are viewing it on your screen and something doesn’t look right, you will find that physically printing the document will show that issue is not in the document itself, but rather is just a function of how Adobe presents PDFs on screen.

Common Questions about PDF Proofs:

  • Why are the underlines missing in this table?
    1. Usually that is a direct result of the “zoom” or “scaling” feature in Adobe.
      1. Solution: Adjust the zoom/scaling in Adobe (zoom in or out) until the underlines appear correctly. You can also print the document to confirm the underlines are present.
      2. Alternate Solution: View the PDF on a different sized screen/monitor.
  • If issue still persists, please contact us and we will be happy to assist.
  • Why are the indents incorrect?
    1. HTML files can have margins as big or small as necessary to display the information. However PDF files have maximum margin limitations, which can create presentation differences on paragraphs that are fully justified. This is because Adobe is trying to adjust the presentation in a way that fits with its own parameters.
      1. Solution: Adjust the zoom in Adobe until the indents appear correctly, or print the document.
      2. Alternate Solution: View the PDF on a different sized screen/monitor.
  • If issue still persists, please contact us and we will be happy to assist.
  1. This can also occur in bulleted lists. The presentation of spacing between bullet points or within bullet points can be inconsistent based on how Adobe PDF interprets the HTML code.
    1. Solution: Adjust the zoom in Adobe until the indents appear correctly, or print the document.
    2. Alternate Solution: View the PDF on a different sized screen/monitor.
  • If issue still persists, please contact us and we will be happy to assist.

If you have any other questions regarding the presentation of a PDF file versus an HTML file, please feel free to contact us and we will be happy to assist.