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.

 
 
Jul 25

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
7/25/2007 3:26 AM 

Early this year, many companies took advantage of their options - their fair value options, that is - and adopted Statement 159 as of the beginning of the year. That recent standard lets companies apply fair value accounting to many balance sheet items that have been reported at historical cost or some variation thereof.

Some companies chose to game the standard, skeevily: they'd flush losses in their held-to-maturity or available-for-sale portfolios through retained earnings by the implementation process. Then they'd replace those portfolio securities with the same kind and go back to using historical cost accounting for them.

(Subscribers to The Analyst's Accounting Observer: see Volume 16, No. 7, dated June 13, for more details and names.)

Some companies had second thoughts about the legitimacy of such an approach after SEC Deputy Chief Accountant James Kroeker warned that the Commission might challenge such treatments - and a number of companies changed their minds. (Again: complete list of the recanters is in The Analyst's Accounting Observer, Volume 16, No. 7, dated June 13.)

Last week, another company changed its mind: Cadence Financial issued a non-reliance 8-K last week indicating it was pulling its first quarter 2007 10-Q and earnings release on the grounds that it was rescinding its fair value treatment of "a securities transaction involving fixed rate collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) and adjustable rate mortgage-backed securities." The revised 10-Q should be out today.

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.