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.

 
 
Sep 29

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
9/29/2005 7:24 AM 

One of the perennial problems for the Financial Accounting Standards Board: its very existence is supposed to benefit investors more than any other constituency, yet they ignore it. Whenever FASB floats a new rule that might significantly increase reporting clarity, they're deluged with protests from financial statement preparers - while the investing community remains mum.

How come? Any number of possible reasons: many of them don't consider financial reporting important. (They get what they deserve.) They're too busy ("I have thirty stocks to follow and they turn over all the time...") They're free riders ("Someone else will study this - if any good comes out of their effort, I didn't have to spend my time on it.") Or they fear corporate good graces being turned off if they take a public stance on a controversial reporting issue. (See Altera and other analyst retaliation examples.)

The FASB is trying to more actively involve investors by building a ready task force of significant institutional investors. Diya Gullipalli describes FASB's plans in this morning's Wall Street Journal. Take a look at the roster:

"The task force includes asset-management firms like Fidelity Investments, Marsh & McLennan Cos.' Putnam Investments, T. Rowe Price Group Inc., Wellington Management Co., Mellon Financial Corp. and Capital Group Cos. The firms will make their staff available to the board to provide feedback on pending rules."

An excellent idea on FASB's part. Maybe they learned something about the political process when they were going through the stock option battles of the last few years. It'll be a challenge to keep the task force running effectively, but it's worth a try to get investors more involved.

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.