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.

 
 
Aug 29

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
8/29/2005 6:40 AM 

A fitting end to summer.

In June, the word spread that the Justice Department was considering an indictment of Number Four KPMG - making a sure-fire subtraction from the ranks of the Big Four, and a likely addition to the graveyard of failed auditors. At the end of the summer, we've got the conclusion. It's like the television season, only played in reverse.

All summer long, the guessing game was played. Would the Justice Department go nuclear? The SEC appeared concerned that it would; they devised contingency plans for handling the next auditing season should there be only three firms. Would there be a "deferred prosecution agreement" a la Time Warner and Bristol Myers Squibb? Before this summer, only lawyers were familiar with the term; over the summer, it became commonplace phrase.

And in the end, that's what KPMG got: another lease on life thanks to a deferred prosecution agreement. The firm's partners will get socked with a $456 million settlement over the next 16 months, averaging $300,000 per partner. It will face severe oversight and restrictions on its tax business. But it will survive.

Having had a near-death experience, will KPMG go in the complete opposite direction of its errant ways? It doesn't have much choice: it's going to be subject to enough ongoing monitoring that it might be difficult to deviate from the straight and narrow. Will it reinvent itself and maybe be a model of behavior for the other Big Four? Too soon to tell. But the firm is capable of adapting: read Lynnley Browning's excellent account of their evolution in becoming a tax shelter powerhouse in this Saturday's NY Times. Maybe the firm can put some of that desire and innovation into becoming the premier auditing firm, now that they've got something to prove.

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.