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.

 
 
Jun 24

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
6/24/2005 5:47 AM 

Been a while since a Sarbanes-Oxley tidbit came this way...

This one will do. PricewaterhouseCoopers interviewed "CEOs of 341 privately-held product and service companies identified in the media as the fastest growing U.S. businesses over the last five years." (Go to www.cfodirect.com . You might have to register to get to the story link.)

Thirty percent of the private company CEOs said that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has had or will have an impact on their businesses. Most of the "already affected" companies have been "improving their control documentation and testing, updating governance procedures, and strengthening their code of conduct or ethics." They view Sarbanes-Oxley compliance as a best practices issue, a way of preventing future problems rather than a cure for existing ones.

Only a third of those CEOs had invested considerable time in the process, and about half of the CEOs (in the 30% of the total group) were upbeat about the cost versus benefit equation: they expect a favorable payoff. The companies adopting Sarbanes-Oxley compliance policies tended to be the larger ones in the sample; they may have been concerned with their positioning because they expected to sell to another firm or go public.

Well, thirty percent is certainly not a majority of the survey. But - it's a surprisingly strong showing when you consider that private companies aren't even required to conform to the Act. It certainly runs counter to the typical press stories and to the posture of outfits like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

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.