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.

 
 
May 27

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
5/27/2005 6:37 AM 

It's the Freddy Krueger of restatement stories: "Nightmare On Software Street." The thing refuses to die.

Yesterday, Computer Associates filed a non-reliance 8-K on its 2001 and 2000 financial statements. They'd already been restated in April 2004 because of revenue recognition flaws. And now there are more, it seems: CA has found additional improper transactions in the years 1998 through 2001.

Some of them were "contemporaneous purchases and sales (or investments and licenses) of software products and services with the same or related third parties... [apparently] not ...negotiated on an arm's-length basis and [having] no valid commercial purpose." In short, they made themselves look bigger than they were by arranging sales for the sake of sales that contained no profit. It sounds like the website advertising game played in the mid-1990's where firms would sell each other advertising with no profits in them, just for the sake of making revenues look better.

Thought: if your local supermarket injected its turkeys with water to make them look plumper, wouldn't you be incensed? Would you want to pay for the water weight? How different from that scam are these kinds of deals?


While the transactions originated in 1998 through 2001, the accounting treatment has flow-through effects in the following years - all the way up to 2005. The company says the "impact on revenue and net income (loss) in subsequent periods is relatively small" and will restate its financial statements for fiscal years 2002 through 2004, as well as make adjustments in 2005 figures. Coming to EDGAR this summer.

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.