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 28

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
7/28/2006 6:17 AM 

A few months ago, McAfee announced that it was investigating its option dating practices over a stretch beginning in the 1990's; it later received an SEC subpoena relating to the matter. Yesterday, they announced that the investigation was not completed, but complete enough to warn investors not to rely on its annual financial statements for the fiscal years 2003, 2004, 2005, and the quarterly statements contained in those years plus those issued for the first quarter of 2006.

From the 8-K: "McAfee believes that it is more likely than not that the amount of such additional adjustments relating to prior periods will be material and that McAfee will restate its financial statements in at least one, and potentially several, prior periods." No surprises in that statement; it pretty much fits the pattern of the disclosures about restatements seen so far. And no numbers yet, but there was one other interesting statement in the 8-K:

"... in the event that a restatement of these financial statements is required, it likely will affect financial statements for prior periods." Which is a bit of a warning, not a strong one, not to rely on the financials too far back in time. It also leads you to believe that they may be finding problems as far back as 2000, because of the May 30 8-K filed when their general counsel was dismissed. In that disclosure, they mentioned that the investigation had turned up one episode involving an improper grant and the general counsel.

So, we have to wait for a fuller story. In the meantime, the New York Times covers the IRS exam side, something that hasn't been discussed nearly as much as the SEC and Attorney General investigations. Link here.

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.