These financial statements and related notes are presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, and are expressed in U.S. dollars. The Company’s fiscal year-end is December 31.

b) Basis of Consolidation

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of WordLogic Corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiary 602531 British Columbia Ltd. (the “Subsidiary”), an entity incorporated under the laws of the Province of British Columbia, Canada. The Subsidiary does not have any operations. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

The preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of net revenue and expenses in the reporting period. We regularly evaluate our estimates and assumptions related to the useful life and recoverability of long-lived assets, stock-based compensation and deferred income tax asset valuation allowances. We base our estimates and assumptions on current facts, historical experience and various other factors that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities and the accrual of costs and expenses that are not readily apparent from other sources. The actual results experienced by us may differ materially and adversely from our estimates. To the extent there are material differences between our estimates and the actual results, our future results of operations will be affected.

The Company considers all highly liquid instruments with original maturities of three months or less when acquired, to be cash equivalents. The Company had no cash equivalents at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

The Company considers its receivables to be fully collectible; accordingly, no allowance for doubtful accounts is required. The Company recognizes an allowance for doubtful accounts on specific accounts identified at risk based on the age of the outstanding receivable and the inability or unwillingness of its customers to make the required payments.

Property and equipment are stated at cost and are amortized over their estimated useful lives as follows:

Asset	Method	Rate

Computer equipment	Straight-line	33.3%
Computer software	Straight-line	100.0%
Furniture and fixtures	Declining balance	20.0%
Other equipment	Declining balance	20.0%

Amortization is recorded at one-half of the normal rate in the year of acquisition. We have compared the depreciation taken using the declining balance method to the straight-line method and have determined the difference to be immaterial for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.

Upon retirement or disposition of equipment, the cost and accumulated amortization are removed from the accounts and any resulting gain or loss is reflected in operations. Repairs and maintenance are charged to expense as incurred and expenditures for additions and improvements are capitalized.

The Company evaluates the carrying value of its long-lived assets under the provisions issued by the FASB which requires impairment losses to be recorded on long-lived assets used in operations when indicators of impairment are present and the undiscounted future cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the assets’ carrying amount. If such assets are impaired, the impairment to be recognized is measured by the amount by which the carrying amount of the assets exceeds the fair value of the assets. Assets to be disposed of are reported at the lower of the carrying value or fair value, less costs to sell.

Software development costs are recorded in accordance with the provisions issued by the FASB as follows. Costs incurred to establish the technological feasibility of computer software to be sold, leased, or otherwise marketed are expensed as incurred as research and development costs. Once technological feasibility is established, the cost of producing product masters for the software is capitalized. Capitalization of the software development costs ceases and amortization of the capitalized costs commences when the product is available for general release to customers. Capitalized costs are amortized based on the greater of (a) the ratio of current gross revenues to the total current and anticipated future gross revenues, or (b) the straight-line method over the remaining estimated economic life of the product.

Expenditures relating to the development of new products and processes, including significant improvements to existing products, are charged to operations as incurred.

The Company accounts for income taxes under the provisions issued by the FASB which requires recognition of deferred tax liabilities and assets for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the consolidated financial statements or tax returns. Under this method, deferred tax liabilities and assets are determined based on the difference between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. The Company computes tax asset benefits for net operating losses carried forward. The potential benefit of net operating losses has not been recognized in these financial statements because the Company cannot be assured it is more likely than not it will utilize the net operating losses carried forward in future years.

The Company recognizes revenue related to sales and licensing of data entry software in accordance with standards issued by the FASB; accordingly revenue will only be recognized when the price is fixed or determinable, persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the service is performed, and collectibility is reasonably assured.

The Company earns revenue from the sale of its software products and from royalties earned on software licensing agreements. Revenue from the sale of software products is recognized at the point of delivery, which occurs when customers either download the software or are shipped software products. Royalty revenue is recognized in accordance with the terms of licensing agreements and when collectibility is reasonably assured, which is usually on receipt of royalty payments.

The Company has not established a formal policy affecting warranty or returns. No estimate of returns from sales has been made.

The Company follows paragraph 825-10-50-10 of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification for disclosures about fair value of its financial instruments and paragraph 820-10-35-37 of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (Paragraph 820-10-35-37”) to measure the fair value of its financial instruments. Paragraph 820-10-35-37 establishes a framework for measuring fair value in accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP), and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. To increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures, Paragraph 820-10-35-37 establishes a fair value hierarchy which prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs. The three levels of fair value hierarchy defined by Paragraph 820-10 35-37 are described below:

Level 1 Quoted market prices available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date.

Level 2 Pricing inputs other than quoted prices in active markets included in Level 1, which are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reporting date.

Level 3 Pricing inputs that are generally observable inputs and not corroborated by market data.

The carrying amounts of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities, such as cash and accrued expenses, approximate their fair values because of the short maturity of these instruments. The Company’s note payable approximates the fair value of such instrument based upon management’s best estimate of interest rates that would be available to the Company for similar financial arrangement at December 31, 2011. The Company does not have any assets or liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring or a non-recurring basis, consequently, the Company did not have any fair value adjustments for assets and liabilities measured at fair value at December 31, 2011, nor gains or losses are reported in the statement of operations that are attributable to the change in unrealized gains or losses relating to those assets and liabilities still held at the reporting date for the period ended December 31, 2011.

The Company’s operations are in Canada, which results in exposure to market risks from changes in foreign currency rates. The financial risk to the Company’s operations results from fluctuations in foreign exchange rates and the degree of volatility of these rates. Currently, the Company does not use derivative instruments to reduce its exposure to foreign currency risk.

The Company’s functional currency is the Canadian dollar and these financial statements have been translated into U.S. dollars in accordance with standards issued by the FASB. The Canadian dollar based accounts of the Company’s foreign operations have been translated into United States dollars using the current rate method. Assets and liabilities of those operations are translated into U.S. dollars using exchange rates as of the balance sheet date; income and expenses are translated using the weighted average exchange rates for the reporting period. Translation adjustments are recorded as accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), a separate component of shareholders’ equity.

On January 1, 2006, the Company adopted standards issued by the FASB, which requires the measurement and recognition of compensation expense for all share-based awards made to employees and directors, including employee stock options and shares issued through its employee stock purchase plan, based on estimated fair values. In March 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting Bulletin 107 (“SAB 107”) relating to this standard. The Company has applied the provisions of SAB 107 in its adoption of this standard. The Company adopted the FASB standard using the modified prospective transition method, which requires the application of the accounting standard as of the beginning in 2006. The Company’s financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007 reflect the impact of this standard. In accordance with the modified prospective transition method, the Company’s financial statements for prior periods do not include the impact of this standard.

The Company’s determination of estimated fair value of share-based awards utilizes the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The Black-Scholes model is affected by the Company’s stock price as well as assumptions regarding certain highly complex and subjective variables. These variables include, but are not limited to the Company’s expected stock price volatility over the term of the awards and actual and projected employee stock option exercise behaviours.

The Company reports net loss per share in accordance with provisions of the FASB. The provisions require dual presentation of basic and diluted loss per share. Basic net loss per share excludes the impact of common stock equivalents. Diluted net loss per share utilizes the average market price per share when applying the treasury stock method in determining common stock equivalents. As of December 31, 2011, there were 4,540,000 vested common stock options and warrants outstanding, which were excluded from the calculation of net loss per share-diluted because they were antidilutive.

The Company reports its comprehensive income (loss) in accordance with provisions of the FASB. For the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Company’s only component of comprehensive loss was foreign currency translation adjustments.

In September 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2011-08, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Goodwill for Impairment. The guidance in ASU 2011-08 is intended to reduce complexity and costs by allowing an entity the option to make a qualitative evaluation about the likelihood of goodwill impairment to determine whether it should calculate the fair value of a reporting unit. The amendments also improve previous guidance by expanding upon the examples of events and circumstances that an entity should consider between annual impairment tests in determining whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Also, the amendments improve the examples of events and circumstances that an entity having a reporting unit with a zero or negative carrying amount should consider in determining whether to measure an impairment loss, if any, under the second step of the goodwill impairment test. The amendments in this ASU are effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is permitted, including for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed as of a date before September 15, 2011, if an entity’s financial statements for the most recent annual or interim period have not yet been issued. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-05, “Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income”, which is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011. ASU 2011-05 will become effective for the Company on December 1, 2012. This guidance eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. In addition, items of other comprehensive income that are reclassified to profit or loss are required to be presented separately on the face of the financial statements. This guidance is intended to increase the prominence of other comprehensive income in financial statements by requiring that such amounts be presented either in a single continuous statement of income and comprehensive income or separately in consecutive statements of income and comprehensive income. The adoption of ASU 2011-05 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, “Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs”, which is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011. This guidance amends certain accounting and disclosure requirements related to fair value measurements. Additional disclosure requirements in the update include: (1) for Level 3 fair value measurements, quantitative information about unobservable inputs used, a description of the valuation processes used by the entity, and a qualitative discussion about the sensitivity of the measurements to changes in the unobservable inputs; (2) for an entity’s use of a nonfinancial asset that is different from the asset’s highest and best use, the reason for the difference; (3) for financial instruments not measured at fair value but for which disclosure of fair value is required, the fair value hierarchy level in which the fair value measurements were determined; and (4) the disclosure of all transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. ASU 2011-04 will become effective for the Company on December 1, 2012. We are currently evaluating ASU 2011-04 and have not yet determined the impact that adoption will have on our financial statements.

In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-02, “Receivables (Topic 310): A Creditor’s Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring”. This amendment explains which modifications constitute troubled debt restructurings (“TDR”). Under the new guidance, the definition of a troubled debt restructuring remains essentially unchanged, and for a loan modification to be considered a TDR, certain basic criteria must still be met. For public companies, the new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and applies retrospectively to restructuring occurring on or after the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. ASU 2011-02 has become effective for the Company on September 1, 2012. The Company does not believe that the guidance will have a material impact on its financial statements.

In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-29, “Business Combinations (Topic 805): Disclosure of supplementary pro forma information for business combinations.” This update changes the disclosure of pro forma information for business combinations. These changes clarify that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. Also, the existing supplemental pro forma disclosures were expanded to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. We are currently evaluating the impact of this ASU; however, we do not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on our financial statements.

In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-28, “Intangible –Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): When to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts.” This update requires an entity to perform all steps in the test for a reporting unit whose carrying value is zero or negative if it is more likely than not (more than 50%) that a goodwill impairment exists based on qualitative factors, resulting in the elimination of an entity’s ability to assert that such a reporting unit’s goodwill is not impaired and additional testing is not necessary despite the existence of qualitative factors that indicate otherwise. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. We are currently evaluating the impact of this ASU; however, we do not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on our financial statements.

Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior period’s financial statements to conform to the current period’s presentation.

a) Basis of Presentation

b) Basis of Consolidation