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.

 
 
Mar 12

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
3/12/2009 1:02 PM 

I tuned in the "mark-to-market" hearing this morning. Your tax dollars at work: Congressman Kanjorski threatened FASB chairman Bob Herz with fixing mark-to-market accounting in three weeks - or else.

Prepare for assimilation. Resistance is futile. The anti-MTM Borg are everywhere.

While all members of Congress present washed their hands of "wanting to interfere with accounting standard setting," they still blamed fair value reporting for making their constituents' houses worth less, and causing job losses and human suffering - therefore, it's up to the standard setters to "do something" about it. And they insisted on a specific date, because, well, a house on fire can't burn for months, you know. And a house on fire is what this is causing.

(I may have my metaphors mixed up. It was like watching a metaphor-tossing contest.)

After the inquiry turned into a "when are you going to fix it?" nagfest, Kanjorski asked Herz how long it would take to "fix" it. Herz replied that the FASB is preparing some examples of valuation and it could take four weeks for it to be completed - and that due process is necessary. Kanjorski invoked the legislative threat, basically stating: there are going to be acts passed in three weeks and we can fix this ourselves in one of them, Mr. Herz.

Herz promised that the Board would have the examples done - but not that it would necessarily "fix" the problem which is well beyond what accounting can fix. Expect more turbo-exposure drafts soon...

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.