Note also that Jetstar Asia's results are published as part of the Qantas Group results, together with Jetstar International. In Qantas' 2013 financial statements, they include Jetstar Asia's fleet as part of the Group, but not Jetstar Japan or Jetstar Pacific.
http://www.qantas.com.au/infodetail/...alReport13.pdf
Under "Investments accounted for using the equity method" in Page 30, I do not see any references to Newstar or Jetstar Asia. There are explicit references to Jetstar Hong Kong, Jetstar Japan and Jetstar Pacific (33%, 33%, 30% holding)
International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) would be a bit heavy to place here, and I'm no accounting expert myself. So let's settle on Wiki for what
"accounting by equity method" means
Equity method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Equity accounting is usually applied where the entity holds 20–50% of voting stock, since this implies significant influence on the decisions of the associate by the holding company. Equity accounting may also be appropriate where the holding falls outside this range and may be inappropriate for some entities within this range depending on the nature of the actual relationship between the investor and investee. The ownership of more than 50% of voting stock creates a subsidiary. Its financial statements consolidate into the parent's. The ownership of less than 20% creates an investment position carried at historic book or fair market value (if available for sale or held for trading) in the investor's balance sheet.
In theory, Newstar should have be accounted for in this section as Qantas holds 49%. The fact that they were not accounted for here could be:
1. Qantas failed to disclose (highly unlikely - their auditors would catch on)
2. They effectively own less than 20% (highly unlikely)
3. They effectively own more than 50%, even if on paper they own 49%. (Most likely the case)
IFRS allows for a company to be deemed a subsidiary even if the parent owns less than half of the company's voting rights, as in the link below
https://inform.pwc.com/inform2/show?...4136749&tid=15
2.7 Control is presumed to exist when the parent owns, directly or indirectly, more than half of the entity's voting power, unless in exceptional circumstances it can be clearly demonstrated that such ownership does not constitute control. The standard also sets out the following circumstances where control exists when the parent owns half or less of the entity's voting power. These circumstances are where it has:
Power over more than half of the voting rights by virtue of an agreement with other investors.
Power to govern the entity's financial and operating policies under a statute or an agreement.
Power to appoint or remove the majority of the members of the board of directors or equivalent governing body and control of the entity is by that board or body.
Power to cast the majority of votes at meetings of the board of directors or equivalent governing body and control of the entity is by that board or body.
Qantas does not need to disclose the "statutes", "agreements" or voting arrangements of Newstar so we will never know what these agreements entail.
I may be wrong, but the evidence suggests that Jetstar Asia functions as a subsidiary of Qantas, while respecting the letter of the law in Singapore.