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 24

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
4/24/2007 5:15 AM 

Referring to the bit I wrote on the Grant Thornton survey on the expected usage of Statement 159, reader Patricia D. had this to say about my comment that it seemed strange that "14% of those surveyed said they'd use Statement 159, but only 5% said they'd early adopt 157" - strange in that you can't do an early adoption of 157 without simultaneously adopting 159.

Patricia points out that "the article didn't state that the 14% were expecting to adopt 159 early. Couldn't it be that the remainder of respondents who are planning to make use of the fair value option but aren't planning for early adoption with standard 157 are just going to wait for the effective date?"

Right she is. In all the excitement surrounding Statement 159 (excitement for some of us, anyway) I didn't take the article the right way. It really didn't say that the 14% were early adopting 159, just that they were considering adopting it. On the other hand, it seems a bit surprising to me - based on the buzz surrounding the topic lately - that only 5% of those polled said they were considering early adoption. I guess it depends on who you're polling -but there's no additional color at this time on the Grant Thornton press release web page.

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.