Text/HTML
Text/HTML
If you are a registered user please log in to see more postings.
 

The AAO Weblog covers accounting issues and current events as they relate the practice of investment analysis.

 
 
Apr 20

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
4/20/2007 7:25 AM 

A story on Yahoo! Finance about a Grant Thornton survey of controllers and CFOs showed that "less than 15 percent (14.18%) say they plan on making use of the fair value option."

Hmm. That's not inconsequential at all: it could be enough to introduce non-comparability into the broader financial reporting landscape.

On the other hand, the story doesn't mention the survey size, or the survey technique. And there's no full length story on the Grant Thornton website - at least not in the press room section - that might flesh things out a bit more.

Of those responding "yes, we're going for it", 84% said they expected to apply the option to financial investments and 68% said they'd apply it to equity method investments. Firm commitments will get the fair value treatment, said 68% of the respondents. But less than half said they'd be applying it to the debt issued by their own firm.

The one weird finding was to this question: "Early adoption of the fair value option is permitted only if Statement 157, Fair Value Measurement, is also adopted early. Do you plan to adopt Statement 157 early?

Yes, said 5.97 % of the respondents. No, said the rest. If the two standards (157 and 159) must be adopted simultaneously upon choosing the fair value option, how can 14% expect to take the option without early adopting 157? It's possible they don't understand that you can't do one without the other. That's not a comforting thought.

Tags:
 

Pension & Other Benefit Plans: A Look Ahead


    Investors in firms with defined benefit pension plans always face the risk of suddenly being pushed farther back in line when it comes to being served their returns. Variability in plan assets and variability in benefit plan obligations are the reason: poor asset returns coupled with sinking interest rates always spell tough times for defined benefit plan funding. In that regard, this year’s asset returns combined with the Fed’s “Operation Twist” add up to “Operation Agony” for defined benefit pension plans. If trends continue along their current path, firms that may have anticipated moving to more realistic pension accounting - like Honeywell, AT&T and Verizon already have done - might forego that decision. It could be just too painful. 

    Pensions aren’t the only kind of benefit plan affected by Operation Twist. Other postemployment benefit (OPEB) plans share much the same accounting model as pensions, including the calculation of a projected benefit obligation that similarly incorporates a discount rate - one that will also be affected by Operation Twist. The net OPEB obligations were slightly less than pension obligations at the end of 2010, but also promise to grow in 2011. Investors perceive them as less threatening than pension obligations because they don’t require funding. Strangely, there are a number of firms that are recognizing income from these benefit plans - without ever creating a dime of cash for investors.

A recent edition of The Analyst’s Accounting Observer dissects these issues, and is available only to paid subscribers. A condensed version is available for free upon request. To receive it, send an e-mail to Brenda Rappold at brappold@accountingobserver.com, with “PENSIONS” in the subject line.

For information about subscribing to The Analyst’s Accounting Observer, click here.