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.

 
 
Oct 13

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
10/13/2008 10:54 AM 

A note on IFRS/GAAP convergence, a subject that's been somewhat in the background these days. In the wake of the credit/liquidity turmoil, the IASB is seeking to overturn a difference in the two sets of standards: today it is considering the adoption of an exception in US GAAP that allows for the reclassification of trading securities into held to maturity. There's no such exception in international financial reporting standards.

Wait - there's more. the trustees of the IASC Foundation, the IASB's oversight board, is willing to overlook the normal due process of gathering comment and open discussion on such a move.

At a time when the IASB is seeking to become the globe's pre-eminent accounting standard-setter, with the interests of investors at stake, the actions taken by the trustees to bypass due process are bad enough. To do so in order "to seek a level playing field" with US GAAP is even worse; the "held for trading" transfer exception sought by the Board only adds to the complexity and inanity of attempts to mollify critics of fair value accounting for financial instruments. Seeking convergence in this regard may seem like a small matter, when in fact it's a giant step backwards.

Instead of being a global leader, the IASB is appearing to be a quite malleable standard setter. If it goes down this path, it will only be worsening investor concerns over the degree of political influence to which it will be subjected if it is the only accounting standard setter on the planet.

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.