Fair Value Accounting
FAS 105, 107, 115, 130, 133, 141, 142, 155, 157, 159
Bob Jensen
Emeritus Professor of Accounting
Trinity University in San Antonio
190 Sunset Hill Road
Sugar Hill, NH 03586
603-823-8482
rjensen@trinity.edu
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/
Bob Jensen’s Summary of Accounting History and Theory
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/theory.htm
“Not everything that can be counted, counts. And not everything that counts can
be counted.”
Albert
Einstein
1-0
Bill Belichick School of forecasting

A former assistant under Bill Belichick, Mangini arrived in New
York last year with an insider's knowledge of the Patriots' signstealing surveillance tactics and he shared the dirty little secret
with members of the Jets' organization, a person with knowledge
of the matter informed the Daily News yesterday.

It wasn't until the fifth Mangini-Belichick showdown - last
Sunday - that the Jets were able to catch the Patriots. Tipped off
by Jets security, an NFL security official confiscated a video
camera and tape from a Patriots employee at the Meadowlands,
and the evidence is believed to be damning
Rich Cimini, "Eric Mangini exposes Bill Belichick's spy games,"
NY Daily News, September 12, 2007 --- Click Here
1-1
Alternative Accounting Measures of Value
of Assets and Liabilities
“Skate to where the puck is going, not to where it is.”
Wayne Gretsky (as quoted for many years by Jerry Trites )
Historical Cost of Individual Assets and Liabilities
Summed in Balance Sheet (Book Value)
Historical Cost With Price Level Adjustments (PLA)
Entry Value (Replacement Cost, Current Cost)
1-2
Alternative Accounting Measures of Value
of Assets and Liabilities
“Skate to where the puck is going, not to where it is.”
Wayne Gretsky (as quoted for many years by Jerry Trites )
Exit Value (Net Liquidation Value)
Economic Value (Discounted Cash Flows, FCF, Residual Income)
Market Value of Entire Firm (Cash Versus Stock Trade)
Market Value of All Shares Outstanding
1-3
Alternative Accounting Measures of Value
of Assets and Liabilities
Skate to where the puck is going, not to where it is.
Wayne Gretsky (as quoted for many years by Jerry Trites )
Graduate student Derek Panchuk and professor Joan Vickers,
who discovered the Quiet Eye phenomenon, have just completed
the most comprehensive, on-ice hockey study to determine where
elite goalies focus their eyes in order to make a save. Simply put,
they found that goalies should keep their eyes on the puck. In an
article to be published in the journal Human Movement Science,
Panchuk and Vickers discovered that the best goaltenders rest
their gaze directly on the puck and shooter's stick almost a full
second before the shot is released. When they do that they make
the save over 75 per cent of the time.
"Keep your eyes on the puck," PhysOrg, October 26, 2006 --http://physorg.com/news81068530.html
1-4
1-5
FAS 33 from 1979-1984 (ended with FAS 82)
1-6
Knotted Strings
South American Indian culture apparently used layers of knotted
strings as a complicated ledger.
Two Harvard University researchers believe they have uncovered
the meaning of a group of Incan khipus, cryptic assemblages of
string and knots that were used by the South American civilization
for record-keeping and perhaps even as a written language.
Researchers have long known that some knot patterns represented a
specific number. Archeologist Gary Urton and mathematician
Carrie Brezine report today in the journal Science that computer
analysis of 21 khipus showed how individual strings were combined
into multilayered collections that were used as a kind of ledger.
Thomas H. Maugh, "Researchers Think They've Got the Incas'
1-7
Numbers,"
Los Angeles Times, August 12, 2005
Origins of Double Entry
Accounting are Unknown

1300s A.D. crusades opened the Middle East and Mediterranean
trade routes

Venice and Genoa became venture trading centers for commerce

1296 A.D. Fini Ledgers in Florence

1340 City of Massri Treasurers Accounts are in Double Entry
form.

1494 Luca Pacioli's Summa de Arithmetica Geometria
Proportionalita (A Review of Arithmetic, Geometry and
Proportions)
1-8
Going Concern and Accrual Accounting
Evolved in the 1500s

Venture accounting over the life of a venture with interim
statements evolved in The Netherlands

1673 Code of Commerce in France requires biannual balance
sheet reporting

Charge and Discharge Agency Responsibility and Stewardship
Accounting in English trust accounting
1-9
Limited liability Corporations
(divorced professional management
from ownership shares)

1555 A.D. Russia Company

1600 A.D. East India Company

1670 A.D. Hudson's Bay Company

England's Joint Stock Companies Act of 1844 required depreciation
accounting for railroads, mining, and manufacturing (although the
concept of depreciation dates back to Roman times).
1-10
Speculation Fever and Stewardship
Fraud and corruption festered and grew with the
trading of joint stock, especially after 1600 A.D. The
South Seas Company scandal (reporting stock sales as
income and paying dividends out of capital) led to
England's Bubble Act in 1720 A.D. that focused on
misleading accounting practices that helped managers
rip off investors, especially by crediting stock sales to
income.
1-11
Laissez-Faire Accounting survived endless
debates and scandals until the Great
Depression in 1933

Much of the debate focused on capital maintenance (e.g., failure to charge off
depreciation and failure to provide for replacement of operating assets), but
governments did not legally impose auditing requirements and serious GAAP until
the U.S. securities laws in the early 1930s. Accountants were vocal in reform
movements, but governments were slow to react with legislation and courts failed to
establish consistent GAAP.

Creation of the SEC in an effort to regain public trust in financial reporting and
equity investing.

Many firms did have independent audits and conformed to the best GAAP traditions
of the day (thereby giving some evidence that Agency Theory works
sometimes.) Agency theory hypothesizes that it is in the best interest of
management to contract for protection of investors and avoid scandalous
asymmetries
of information.
1-12
After 1933, the AICPA and the SEC seriously attempted to
generate accounting standards, enforce accounting standards,
and provide academic justification for promulgated standards.

ASRs of the SEC

In a 3-2 vote the SEC followed George O. May's efforts to mandate external
audits of securities traded across state lines in the U.S.

1939-1959 A.D.: Accounting standards were generated by the AICPA's
Committee on Accounting Procedure (CAP) that issued Accounting Research
Bulletins (51 ARBs) --- but the tendency was to overlook controversial issues
such as off-balance sheet financing, public disclosure of management forecasts,
price-level accounting, current cost accounting, and exit value
accounting. Controversial items avoided by the CAP included management
compensation accounting, pension accounting, post-employment benefits
accounting, and off balance sheet financing (OBSF). The CAP did very little to
restrain diversity of reporting.
1-13
After 1933, the AICPA and the SEC seriously attempted to
generate accounting standards, enforce accounting standards,
and provide academic justification for promulgated standards.

1960-1972 A.D.: Accounting standards in the U.S. were generated by the AICPA's Accounting Principles
Board (APB) that had more members than the CAP and a mandate to attack more controversial reporting
issues. The APB attacked some controversial issues but often failed to resolve their own disputes on
such issues as pooling versus purchase accounting for mergers.

1972-???? A.D. Accounting standards in the U.S. were, and still are, being generated by the Financial
Accounting Standards Board (FASB) that has seven members, including required members from
industry, academe, and financial analysts in addition to members from public accountancy. FASB
members must divorce themselves from previous income ties and work full time for the FASB. The
formation of the FASB was a desperation move by CPA's to stave off threatened takeover of accounting
standards by the Federal Government (there were the Moss and Metcalf bills to do just that under
pending legislation in the U.S. House and Senate). Unlike the CAP and APB, the FASB has a full-time
research staff and has issued highly controversial standards forcing firms to abide by pension accounting
rules, capitalization of many leases, and booking of many previous OBSF items (capital leases, pensions,
post-employment benefits, income tax accounting, derivative financial instruments, pooling accounting,
etc.). The road has been long and hard on some other issues where attempts to issue new standards (e.g.,
expensing of dry holes in oil and gas accounting and booking of employee stock options) have been
thwarted by highly-publicized political pressuring by corporations.
1-14
In 2007 International Harmonization
is Becoming a Reality

In Year 2008 foreign corporations may file reports with the SEC
and be listed on U.S. stock exchanges using IASB standards
rather than FASB standards without reconciling the two.

The U.S., Canada, and other nations are working toward
adoption of IASB standards in place of domestic accounting
standards.
1-15
Fair Value Accounting Under the IASB & FASB

IASB is exploring with FASB accounting for fair-value accounting as
part of a wider project on measurement. It is in the context of this
long-planned effort, and not some recent reaction, that the IASB is
planning to and will explore issues related to fair-value accounting.

IAS 32 and 39 Require Fair Value Accounting for Financial
Instruments in Many Instances
1-16
Fair Value Accounting Under the IASB & FASB
The main problem of fair value adjustment is that many
(most?) of the adjustments cause enormous fluctuations
in earnings, assets, and liabilities that are washed out
over time and never realized. The main advantage is
that interim impacts that “might be” realized are
booked. It’s a war between “might be” versus “might
never.” The war has been waging for over a century
with respect to booked assets and two decades with
respect to unbooked derivative instruments,
contingencies, and intangibles.
1-17
Fair Value Accounting Under the IASB & FASB

Holder, Hopkins, and Wablen (The Accounting Review, 2004, pp.
453-472) found, in a sample of 200 banks, that fair value
accounting gave rise to more than five times more earnings
volatility than traditional GAAP earnings.

Much of the volatilty washes out over time such that earnings
increases and decreases from fair value adjustments have zero
effect on cash in most instances. This is misleading for going
concerns.
1-18
Fair Value Accounting Under the IASB & FASB

Hirst and Hopkins (Journal of Accounting Research, 1998, pp. 4775) found, in a sample of 200 banks, that fair value accounting
improved bank equity analyst judgments about risk and value.

Ahmed, Kilic, and Lobo (The Accounting Review, 2006, pp. 567588) found that fair value booking of derivatives after FAS 133
was far more important than mere disclosures in footnotes for
banking financial statements.

More study needed for non-financial business firms.
1-19
Fair Valuing Debt
Better/Worse Credit Standing = Loss/Gain
Barge (James Barge, senior vice president and controller
for Time Warner) also cited as problematic the
hypothetical case of a company whose creditworthiness
is downgraded by the rating agencies. By marking down
the debt's value on its balance sheet, the company would
realize more income, a scenario Barge called
"nonsensical." He warned of a host of such effects
arising under fair value when a company changes its
capital structure.
1-20
Fair Valuing Debt
Better/Worse Credit Standing = Loss/Gain

Actually there is potential gain from buying back debt
cheaper due to lowered credit rating.

Actually there is potential loss from buying back debt
cheaper due to improved credit rating.

Chasteen and Ransom (Acctg. Horizons, June 2007, pp.
119-136) advocate immediate recognition of such gains
& losses and future carrying of debt at risk free rates.
1-21
Fair Value Accounting Under the IASB & FASB
Barge also cited where the acquisition of intangible assets that a
company does not intend to use as a further example of fair
value's potentially worrisome effects. Under current GAAP, their
value is included in goodwill and subject to annual impairment
testing for possible write-off. But if, as FASB is contemplating, the
value of those assets would be recorded on the balance sheet along
with that of the associated tangible assets that were acquired,
Barge worries that an immediate write-off would then be required
— even though it would not reflect the acquiring company's
economics.
1-22
Key FASB Standards on Fair Value Acctg.










FAS 105 --- Disclosure of OBSF and market risks of instruments
FAS 107 --- Requirements for disclosure of FV
FAS 115 --- HTM vs. AFS vs. Trading
FAS 130 --- OCI offset instead of current earnings
FAS 133 --- FV required for derivative instruments
FAS 141 --- Identify and FV intangibles in acquisitions
FAS 142 --- Must est. FV of “Goodwill” remaining
FAS 155 --- Requires FV acctg. for hybrid securities
FAS 157 --- Defines FV and hierarchy of meas. pref.
FAS 159 --- FVO for financial instruments
1-23
Key FASB Standards on Fair Value Acctg.










FAS 105 --- 1990
FAS 107 --- 1991 to be effective in 1993
FAS 115 --- 1993 to be effective in 1994
FAS 130 --- 1997 to be effective in 1998
FAS 133 --- 1998 but later delayed until 2000
FAS 141 --- 2001
FAS 142 --- 2001
FAS 155 --- 2006
FAS 157 --- 2006
FAS 159 --- 2007 to be effective in 2008
1-24
FAS 105 in 1990
Disclosure of OBSF Market and Credit Risk

The face, contract, or notional principal amount

The nature and terms of the instruments and a discussion of their credit and
market risk, cash requirements, and related accounting policies

The accounting loss the entity would incur if any party to the financial
instrument failed completely to perform according to the terms of the contract
and the collateral or other security, if any, for the amount due proved to be of
no value to the entity

The entity's policy for requiring collateral or other security on financial
instruments it accepts and a description of collateral on instruments presently
held.

This Statement also requires disclosure of information about significant
concentrations of credit risk from an individual counterparty or groups of
counterparties for all financial instruments.
1-25
FAS 107 effective in 1993
Disclosure of Fair Value of Fin. Instruments
This Statement extends existing fair value disclosure
practices for some instruments by requiring all entities
to disclose the fair value of financial instruments, both
assets and liabilities recognized and not recognized in
the statement of financial position, for which it is
practicable to estimate fair value. If estimating fair
value is not practicable, this Statement requires
disclosure of descriptive information pertinent to
estimating the value of a financial instrument.
Disclosures about fair value are not required for certain
financial instruments listed in paragraph 8.
1-26
FAS 115 effective in 1994
FV Reporting of AFS Investments in Debt/Equity

Debt securities that the enterprise has the positive intent and
ability to hold to maturity are classified as held-to-maturity
securities and reported at amortized cost.

Debt and equity securities that are bought and held principally
for the purpose of selling them in the near term are classified as
trading securities and reported at fair value, with unrealized gains
and losses included in earnings.

Debt and equity securities not classified as either held-to-maturity
securities or trading securities are classified as available-for-sale
securities and reported at fair value, with unrealized gains and
losses excluded from earnings and reported in a separate
component
of shareholders' equity.
1-27
FAS 130 effective in 1998
Reporting Other Comprehensive Income (OCI)
This Statement requires that an enterprise
(a)
classify items of other comprehensive income by
their nature in a financial statement and
(b)
display the accumulated balance of other
comprehensive income (AOCI) separately from
retained earnings and additional paid-in capital
in the equity section of a statement of financial
position.
1-28
FAS 133 effective in 2000
Amended by FAS 137, 138, 149, 155, and 159
Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging Activities






Financial Derivatives & Scandals Explode in the Early 1990's
Video or Audio clip from CBS Sixty Minutes SIXTY01.avi or SIXTY01.mp3
Audio clip from John Smith of Deloitte & Touche in August
1994 SMITH01.mp3
Examples of derivative contracts that even the professional analysts could not
decipher

The derivatives that Merrill Lynch wrote that drive Orange County into
bankruptcy

Other derivatives fraud summaries are at
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/fraud.htm#DerivativesFraud
Video and audio clips of FASB updates on FAS 133

Audio 1 --- Dennis Beresford in 1994 in New York City BERES01.mp3

Audio 2 --- Dennis Beresford in 1995 in Orlando BERES02.mp3
Derivative
Financial Instrument Frauds --- Off line --- Click Here
1-29
FAS 133 effective in 2000
Amended by FAS 137, 138, 149, 155, and 159
Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging Activities

Requires booking of most derivative financial instruments at fair
value (with some exceptions for NPNS, regular-way, insurance
contracts, weather derivatives, short sales, interest-strips, etc.)

Derivatives are to be marked to current fair value at least every
90 days and on reporting dates. Changes in fair value are to be
charged or credited to current earnings unless the derivatives
qualify for hedge accounting treatment as cash flow, fair value,
or FX hedges. Not all economic hedges qualify for hedge
accounting relief from current earnings.

Hedge accounting rules under FAS 133 and its
amendments are very complex.
1-30
Key FAS 133 and IAS 39 Terms
Notional | Underlying | Net Settlement | Little or No Initial Investment
Financial Instrument
| Derivative Instrument
Purchase Commitment | Firm Commitment | Forecasted Transaction | Speculation
Stand Alone | Cash Flow Hedge | Fair Value Hedge | FX Hedge
Purchased Options | Written Options | Long Forwards | Short Forwards | Swaps | Futures Contracts
European versus American versus Asian options
Spot Price, Forward Price, Strike Price, Premium, Intrinsic Value, Time Value
Freestanding, Embedded, Structured (tailormade rather than convential financing)
OCI versus Firm Commitment | Delta
1-31
FAS 141 effective in 2001
Purchase Method Req. for Business Combinations

In contrast to Opinion 16, which required separate recognition of intangible
assets that can be identified and named, this Statement requires that they be
recognized as assets apart from goodwill if they meet one of two criteria—the
contractual-legal criterion or the separability criterion. To assist in identifying
acquired intangible assets, this Statement also provides an illustrative list of
intangible assets that meet either of those criteria.

In addition to the disclosure requirements in Opinion 16, this Statement
requires disclosure of the primary reasons for a business combination and the
allocation of the purchase price paid to the assets acquired and liabilities
assumed by major balance sheet caption. When the amounts of goodwill and
intangible assets acquired are significant in relation to the purchase price paid,
disclosure of other information about those assets is required, such as the
amount of goodwill by reportable segment and the amount of the purchase
price
assigned to each major intangible asset class.
1-32
FAS 142 effective in 2001
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets Acquired

Purchased goodwill and other intangibles in business combinations are to be
revalued each reporting date and written down to the extent that its historical
cost valuation has been impaired. The historical cost is no longer to be
amortized except in the case of intangibles with finite lives. In theory the cost of
purchased intangibles could stay on the books for many, many years.

This Statement provides specific guidance for testing goodwill/ingangibeles for
impairment. Goodwill will be tested for impairment at least annually using a
two-step process that begins with an estimation of the fair value of a reporting
unit. The first step is a screen for potential impairment, and the second step
measures the amount of impairment, if any. However, if certain criteria are
met, the requirement to test goodwill for impairment annually can be satisfied
without a re-measurement of the fair value of a reporting unit.
1-33
FAS 155 effective in 2006
Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments

Permits fair value re-measurement for any hybrid financial instrument that
contains an embedded derivative that otherwise would require bifurcation

Clarifies which interest-only strips and principal-only strips are not subject to
the requirements of Statement 133

Establishes a requirement to evaluate interests in securitized financial assets to
identify interests that are freestanding derivatives or that are hybrid financial
instruments that contain an embedded derivative requiring bifurcation

Clarifies that concentrations of credit risk in the form of subordination are not
embedded derivatives

Amends Statement 140 to eliminate the prohibition on a qualifying specialpurpose entity from holding a derivative financial instrument that pertains to a
beneficial interest other than another derivative financial instrument.
1-34
FAS 155

Permits fair value measurement for certain hybrid financial
instruments that contain an embedded derivative that would
otherwise require bifurcation under Statement 133.

Amends Statement 133 to require evaluation of all interests in
securitized financial assets. thus eliminating the exemption in
Statement 133 accounts for certain hybrid instruments. As a
result, entities will have to determine if such interest may be:
1. Freestanding derivatives,
2. Hybrid financial instruments containing embedded
derivatives requiring bifurcation, or
3. Hybrid financial instruments containing embedded
derivatives that do not require bifurcation

Clarifies that only the simplest and most direct separation of
interest and principal cash flows need not be evaluated for
embedded
derivatives
1-35
FAS 155

Clarifies that concentrations of credit risk in the form of
subordination are not embedded derivatives.

Amends Statement 140 to allow a QSPE to hold passive derivative
instruments that pertain to beneficial interest that are or contain a
derivative financial instrument

Irrevocable election on an instrument by instrument basis with all
changes in fair value recognized in earnings.

The fair value election should be made at the time the financial
instrument is acquired, issued or there is a new basis in a
previously recognized financial instrument.

1-36
Upon adoption, applies to existing hybrid financial
instruments that had been bifurcated under the requirements
of Statement 133.
FAS 155
The Bifurcation Model
Paragraph 12 of Statement 133:
Yes
No
2. Would the
embedded
feature be a
derivative if it
was freestanding?
(Par 12c)
No
Do Not Bifurcate
1-37
Yes
3. Is it clearly
and closely
related to the
Host contract?
(Par 12a)
Yes
No
Bifurcate
1. Is the hybrid
carried at fair
value through
earnings?
(Par 12b)
FAS 155
Paragraph 14 of FAS 133
However, interest-only strips and principal-only
strips are not subject to the requirements of this Statement
provided they
(a) initially resulted from separating the rights to receive
contractual cash flows of a financial instrument that, in and
of itself, did not contain an embedded derivative that
otherwise would have been accounted for
separately as a derivative pursuant to the provisions of
paragraphs 12 and 13 and
(b) do not incorporate any terms not present in the original
financial instrument described above.
1-38
FAS 155
However, interest-only strips and principal-only strips are not subject
to the requirements of this Statement provided those strips (a)
represent the rights to receive only a specified proportion of the
contractual interest cash flows of a specific debt instrument or a
specified proportion of the contractual principal cash flows of that
debt instrument and (b) do not incorporate any terms not present in the
original financial debt instrument described above. An allocation of a
portion of the interest or principal cash flows of a specific debt
instrument as reasonable compensation for stripping the instrument or
to provide adequate compensation to a servicer (as defined in
Statement 140) would meet the intended narrow scope of the
exception provided in this paragraph. However, an allocation of a
portion of the interest or principal cash flows of a specific debt
instrument to provide for a guarantee of payments, for servicing in
excess of adequate compensation, or for any other purpose would not
meet the intended narrow scope of the exception.
1-39
FAS 155
•
Nullified Issue D1 Application of Statement 133 to
Beneficial Interests in Securitized Financial Assets. Impact
of Issue D1 was to defer the bifurcation requirements of
Statement 133
•
Holders of beneficial financial interests must analyze
arrangements that govern the payoff structure and the
subordination status of the financial instrument
Prepayment risks in such structures could result in meeting
the 13(b) requirements of Statement 133
1-40
FAS 157 effective in 2006
Fair Value Measurements
The changes to current practice resulting from
the application of this Statement relate to
 the
definition of fair value,
 the
methods used to measure fair value, and
 the
expanded disclosures about fair value
measurements.
1-41
FAS 157
All accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value
measurement and include such items as:

Investment securities –
Statement 115

Derivatives – Statement 133

“Short sales” of securities –
AICPA Audit Guides for certain
industries

1-42
Investments carried at fair value
by investment companies


Certain assets and liabilities
measured at fair value in a
business combination –
Statement 141:

Intangible assets

In process R&D
Assets measured at fair value for
an impairment test – Statements
142 and 144:

Long-lived assets held for
sale

Reporting units

Goodwill
Differences Between Statement 157 and
Current Practice
1-43
Issue
Current Practice
Statement 157
Definition
Various definitions of fair value –
Amount at which an asset or liability
could be bought or sold in a current
transaction between willing parties, that
is, other than in a forced liquidation sale
Price that would be received for an
asset or paid to transfer a liability
between market participants at the
measurement date.
Transaction Entry Price
Presumed equal to fair value
May not be representative of fair
value; provides indicators of when
the transaction price may not be
fair value.
Highest and Best Use
Current practice is to value assets in
continued use unless identified for
disposition
Independent of the reporting
entity’s intent: considered from
market participant perspective
Use of Market Data in
Valuations
Use of market data encouraged. In
some circumstances entity intent
permitted to be considered in
valuations.
Valuation techniques must
maximize use of market observable
data and minimize use of
unobservable data
Hierarchy
No current mandated hierarchy.
Three levels distinguished between
observable and unobservable
inputs.
SOURCE: DELOITTE
Differences Between Statement 157 and Current
Practice
Issue
Current Practice
Statement 157
Defensive Value
-
New concept
Principal/Most Advantageous Market
-
Newly defined concept
Market Participants
Current guidance on
market participants is
unclear. Buyer-specific
intent may be considered
Buyer-specific intent should be
dismissed if different from that of other
multiple market participants
Block Discounts
Broker-dealers and
investment companies
permitted to apply block
discounts
Eliminated for all companies in relation
to actively traded securities
Restricted Securities
Restrictions on marketable
securities not required to
be considered in the
valuation if the restriction
terminated within one year.
Fair value measurement should include
the effect of a restriction, if the
restriction is an attribute of the security
which would pass to market
participants.
Model Risk
1-44
SOURCE: DELOITTE
-
Assessed as a component of the fair
value measurement
Statement 157 – Valuation Hierarchy
Statement 157 provides three main approaches to measuring fair value.
Fair Value
Hierarchy
Level 3
Level 1
Level 2
Market- based
Extrapolate
Objective
1-45
Income/FCF
Model
Subjective
FAS 157
Level 1 Inputs --- Paragraphs 24-27
Quoted prices of identical items in active
markets (full rather than thin markets)
Fungible goods
No timing distress
Options versus commodities markets
1-46
FAS 157
Level 2 Inputs --- Extrapolations from Markets or Sales
a. Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets
or reliable component cost markets.
b. Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that
are not active, that is, markets in which there are few transactions for the
asset or liability, the prices are not current, or price quotations vary
substantially either over time or among market makers (for example, some
brokered markets), or in which little information is released publicly (for
example, a principal-to principal market)
c. Inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability
(for example, interest rates and yield curves observable at commonly quoted
intervals, volatilities, prepayment speeds, loss severities, credit risks, and
default rates)
d. Inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable
market data by correlation or other means (market-corroborated inputs).
1-47
FAS 157
Level 2 Inputs (Examples)
a. OTC swaps, options, and forward contracts
Extrapolations from Bloomberg databases
b. Appraisals based on similar-item sales
Such as real estate in the same neighborhood
(Supposed to be full-market estimates rather than
thin-market estimates such as a single offer)
c. Jewelry value estimates based upon markets
for components like gold in the jewelry
1-48
FAS 157
Level 2 Enron Energy Services (EES) Example
a. Long-term contracts for power to companies such as
Eli Lili. Stripper fanatic Lou Pai was CEO of EES.
b. Enron sold 7% of EES to institutions for $130 million
c. Enron thereafter valued EES at $1.9 billion and
recorded a $61 million profit due to change in FV.
d. Within two years most of EES contracts became
liabilities totaling over $500 million. No write downs
were taken until Enron declared bankruptcy.
1-49
FAS 157
Level 2 Enron Energy Services (EES) Example
a. Fair value accounting may lead to unearned income
being recognized up front.
b. Fair value accounting may lead to inconsistencies
between valuations upward vs. valuations downward
c. Plunges CPA auditors into valuation’s stormy seas.
CPAs have no special comparative advantages here!
d. Assets may flip flop to liabilities and vice versa overnight
1-50
FAS 157
Level 3 Inputs in Paragraphs 30-32
Unobservable inputs shall reflect the reporting entity’s own
assumptions about the assumptions that market
participants would use in pricing the asset or liability
(including assumptions about risk). Unobservable inputs
shall be developed based on the best information available
in the circumstances, which might include the reporting
entity’s own data. In developing unobservable inputs, the
reporting entity need not undertake all possible efforts to
obtain information about market participant assumptions
1-51
FAS 157
Level 3 Expert Opinion and Value Models
a. Residual Income (RI) and Free Cash Flow (FCF)
Models
(Highly sensitive to terminal values & perpetuity)
(Highly sensitive to missing variables)
(Intangibles are highly volatile)
(Highly sensitive to non-stationarity)
(Competition & Law destroys excess returns over time)
b. Subjective appraisals with explicit analysis of
underlying assumptions
(Subjectivity leads to high variations in opinion)
(Moral hazard --- scandalous S&L appraisals)
(Value is so dependent upon unforeseeable events)
1-52
FAS 157
Level 3 Examples
a. Bonds of a bankrupt firm
b. Asset retirement obligation
c. Pollution abatement obligation
d. Enron’s booking of “fair value” of gas contracts
1-53
FAS 157
Level 3 Enron “Mark-to Market” Example
a. Long-term contracts for gas to electric utilities
such as Scithe Energies.
b. Estimate gas profits over 10-20 years forward and
record present value as an asset as current FV earnings.
c. Increased gas price estimates increased value of asset
and changes in FV taken into earnings. Eventually, the
booked receivable from Scithe was $1.5 billion that
could not possibly be collected ever.
d. No write down took place until after Enron declared
bankruptcy in December 2000. Huge bonuses, however,
were paid to Enron executives all along.
1-54
FAS 157
 Determining
primary or most advantageous
market
 Assigning
and Monitoring Statement 157
hierarchy levels
 Credit
1-55
risk in valuing liabilities
FAS 157-a
Application of FASB Statement No. 157
to FASB Statement No. 13
Objective
 1. This FASB Staff Position (FSP) amends FASB Statement No. 157, Fair Value
Measurements, to exclude FASB Statement No. 13, Accounting for Leases, and
its related interpretive accounting pronouncements that address leasing
transactions.
Background
 2. The Exposure Draft preceding Statement 157 proposed a scope exception for
Statement 13 and other accounting pronouncements that require fair value
measurements for leasing transactions. At that time, the Board was concerned
that applying the fair value measurement objective in the Exposure Draft to
leasing transactions could have unintended consequences, requiring
reconsideration of aspects of lease accounting that were beyond the scope of the
Exposure Draft.
1-56
FAS 157-a
Application of FASB Statement No. 157
to FASB Statement No. 13

3. However, respondents to the Exposure Draft indicated that the
fair value measurement objective for leasing transactions was
generally consistent with the fair value measurement objective
proposed by the Exposure Draft. Others in the leasing industry
subsequently affirmed that view. Based on that input, the Board
decided to include lease accounting pronouncements in the scope
of Statement 157.

4. Subsequent to the issuance of Statement 157, which changed in
some respects from the Exposure Draft, constituents have raised
issues stemming from the interaction
1-57
FAS 157-a
Application of FASB Statement No. 157
to FASB Statement No. 13


Proposed FSP on Statement 157 (FSP FAS 157-a) 1 FSP FAS 157-a between the
fair value measurement objective in Statement 13 and the fair value
measurement objective in Statement 157.
5. Constituents have noted that paragraph 5(c)(ii) of Statement 13 provides an
example of the determination of fair value (an exit price) through the use of a
transaction price (an entry price). Constituents also have raised issues about
the application of the fair value measurement objective in Statement 157 to
estimated residual values of leased property. These issues, as well as other issues
related to the interaction between Statement 13 and Statement 157, would
result in a change in lease accounting that requires considerations of lease
classification criteria and measurements in leasing transactions that are beyond
the scope of Statement 157 (for example, a change in lease classification for
leases that would otherwise be accounted for as direct financing leases).
1-58
FAS 157-a
Application of FASB Statement No. 157
to FASB Statement No. 13
6. The Board acknowledges that the term fair value will be left in
Statement 13 although it is defined differently than in Statement
157; however, the Board believes that lease accounting provisions
and the longstanding valuation practices common within the
leasing industry should not be changed by Statement 157 without
a comprehensive reconsideration of the accounting for leasing
transactions. The Board has on its agenda a project to
comprehensively reconsider the guidance in Statement 13 together
with its subsequent amendments and interpretations.
1-59
FAS 159 effective in 2008
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities

Allows entities to voluntarily choose to measure eligible financial
instruments at fair value (the “fair value option”)
(Exceptions for items covered by some other standards such as
consolidated entities, pensions, post-employment contracts, leases,
and financial insurance contracts)

Changes in fair value recognized in earnings. (no OCI)

Election made on an instrument-by-instrument basis

Irrevocable
1-60
FAS 159 effective in 2008
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
FASB issued the FVO to:

Provide an opportunity to mitigate volatility in earnings
caused by a mixed attribute accounting model

Reduce the need for applying complex hedge accounting
provisions

Expand the use of fair value measurements

International convergence
1-61
FAS 159 effective in 2008
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
Scope:
•
Recognized financial assets and liabilities (but not forecasted transactions under FAS
133)
•
Firm commitments that would otherwise not be recognized at inception and that involve
only financial instruments
•
Written loan commitments
•
Certain rights and obligations under insurance contracts or warranty obligations
•
A financial host contract in a nonfinancial hybrid instrument
•
Certain nonfinancial assets and liabilities
1-62
FAS 159 effective in 2008
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
Advantages:

Eliminate arbitrary FAS 115 classifications that can be used by management
to manipulate earnings (which is what Freddie Mac did in 2001 and 1002.

Reduce problems of applying FAS 133 in hedge accounting where hedge
accounting is now allowed only when the hedged item is maintained at
historical cost.

Provide a better snap shot of values and risks at each point in time. For
example, banks now resist fair value accounting because they do not want to
show how investment securities have dropped in value.
1-63
FAS 159 effective in 2008
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
Disadvantages:
Combines fact and fiction in the sense that unrealized gains and losses due to fair value
adjustments are combined with “real” gains and losses from cash transactions. Many,
if not most, of the unrealized gains and losses will never be realized in cash. These are
transitory fluctuations that move up and down with transitory markets. For example,
the value of a $1,000 fixed-rate bond moves up and down with interest rates when at
expiration it will return the $1,000 no matter how interest rates fluctuated over the life
of the bond.

Sometimes difficult to value, especially OTC securities.

Creates enormous swings in reported earnings and balance sheet values.

Generally fair value is the estimated exit (liquidation) value of an asset or liability. For
assets, this is often much less than the entry (acquisition) value for a variety of reasons
such as higher transactions costs of entry value, installation costs (e.g., for machines),
and different markets (e.g., paying dealer prices for acquisition and blue book for
disposal). For example, suppose Company A purchases a computer for $2 million that
it can only dispose of for $1 million a week after the purchase and installation. Fair
value accounting requires expensing half of the computer in the first week even though
the computer itself may be utilized for years to come. This violates the matching
principle of matching expenses with revenues, which is one of the reasons why fair
value
proponents generally do not recommend fair value accounting for operating
1-64
assets.
FAS 159 effective in 2008
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
Disadvantages of Auditing FV
The purpose of this International Standard on Auditing (ISA) is to establish
standards and provide guidance on auditing fair value measurements and
disclosures contained in financial statements. In particular, this ISA addresses
audit considerations relating to the valuation, measurement, presentation and
disclosure for material assets, liabilities and specific components of equity
presented or disclosed at fair value in financial statements. Fair value
measurements of assets, liabilities and components of equity may arise from
both the initial recording of transactions and later changes in value.
1-65
FAS 159 effective in 2008
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
Exclusions:






Investments in consolidated entities
Financial obligations for items such as pension benefits and other deferred
compensation arrangements
Income tax assets and liabilities
Financial assets and liabilities recognized under leases as defined in Statement
13
Deposit liabilities, withdrawals on demand, of depository institutions
Financial instruments that are, in whole or in part, a component of
shareholder’s equity
1-66
IASB Discussion Paper
IASB publishes Discussion Paper on fair value
measurements November 30, 2006 with a May 1,
2007 Deadline. Expect new standard in 2008.

The Board’s objectives in this project are to:

(a) establish a single source of guidance for all fair value
measurements required by IFRSs,

(b) clarify the definition of fair value and related guidance in
order to more clearly communicate the measurement objective,
and

(c) enhance disclosures about fair value
1-67
IASB FVO in Amended IAS 39

The European Commission has published Frequently Asked Questions providing the
Commission's views on the following questions:

Why did the Commission carve out the full fair value option in the original IAS 39
standard?

Do prudential supervisors support IAS 39 FVO as published by the IASB?

When will the Commission to adopt the amended standard for the IAS 39 FVO?

Will companies be able to apply the amended standard for their 2005 financial
statements?

Does the amended standard for IAS 39 FVO meet the EU endorsement criteria?

What about the relationship between the fair valuation of own liabilities under the
amended IAS 39 FVO standard and under Article 42(a) of the Fourth Company Law
Directive?

Will the Commission now propose amending Article 42(a) of the Fourth Company
Directive?

1-68
What
about the remaining IAS 39 carve-out relating to certain
FAS Standards Greatly Affected by FV
FAS 32 --- Financial Instruments
FAS 39 --- Derivative Financial Instruments
FAS 41 --- Agriculture
1-69
IFRS Standards Greatly Affected by FV
IFRS 2 --- Share-based payments
(Categories of assets and liabilities to be measured at FV)
IFRS 3 --- Business Combinations
1-70
IFRC 13 and Fair Value

Question
What's the status of international accounting for customer loyalty
incentive awards such as airline miles, first class upgrades, hotel
discounts, restaurant discounts, etc.?

Answer
There is a deferred revenue and liability recognition for future
cost requirement. Allocation of the original sale is to be based
upon estimated fair value of components of the sale.
1-71
IFRC 13 and Fair Value

1. The main issue addressed in the Interpretation is the recognition and measurement of
obligations to provide customers with free or discounted goods or services if and when
they choose to redeem loyalty award credits.

2. One approach used at present is to accrue an expense at the time of the sale, when the
award credits are granted. The expense is based on the costs the entity expects to incur
to supply the free or discounted goods or services. The rationale for this approach is that
loyalty awards are incidental costs of securing the first sale, which should be recognised
when that sale is made.

3. A second approach is to divide the proceeds of the first sale into two components—an
amount that reflects the value of the goods or services delivered in the first sale and an
amount that reflects the value of the loyalty award credits. Proceeds allocated to the first
component are recognised as revenue at the time of the first sale. But proceeds allocated
to the award credits are deferred as a liability until the entity fulfils its obligations in
respect of the award credits, either by supplying the free or discounted goods or services
itself when customers redeem the credits, or engaging (and paying) a third party to do
so.1-72
IFRC 13 and Fair Value

4. The practical difference between the two approaches is the
measurement of the liability. The first approach measures the
liability on the basis of expected costs; the second on the basis of
selling prices.

5. The Interpretation requires entities to apply the second
approach. The requirement reflects the IFRIC’s view that loyalty
awards are separately identifiable goods or services for which
customers are implicitly paying. The general standard on revenue
recognition, IAS 18 Revenue, requires separately identifiable
components of sales transactions to be accounted for separately if
necessary to reflect the substance of the transactions.
1-73
A Formula to Remember for Later in the Day

ForwardRate(t) = [1 + y(t)]t/[1 + y(t-1)]t-1 – 1

The ForwardRate(t) is the forward rate for time period
t, y(t) is the multi-period yield that spans t periods, and
y(t-1) is the yield for an investment of t-1 periods --- for
example, if 6.5% is y(t) and 6.0% is y(t-1). Thus,
ForwardRate(2), the forward LIBOR for year 2, is
calculated as follows

ForwardRate(2) = (1.065)2/(1.06) – 1 = 0.07 or 7.0%
1-74
Checklist for Valuing a Company
Compilation of Financial Information: Financial statements and
federal income tax returns for the last three to five years should
be reviewed and the information "adjusted" and/or "weighted" to
more properly reflect future operations:

Audited vs. unaudited statements to reflect accurate levels of
inventories and receivables.

Determine latest work-in-process value -- particularly where
production costs have been expensed rather than capitalized.

Delete
extraordinary or non-recurring revenues or expenses.
1-75
Checklist for Valuing a Company

Adjust for differences in cash vs. accrual methods of reporting income.

Add back any "excess" owner/employee cash compensation and fringe
benefits.\

Determine net fair market value for tangible assets (eg., book value vs.
liquidation value vs. replacement value of equipment, obsolete or slow-moving
inventory, supplier return privileges, credits, etc.).

Determine undisclosed and/or disputed liabilities (eg., unfunded past service
costs or multi-employer obligations for pension plans, deferred compensation
plans; incentive bonuses; stock options; potential contract or tort claims;
potential unfunded sales income or payroll tax obligations).
1-76
Checklist for Valuing a Company
Valuation:
There is usually no "magic" correct value but rather an
appropriate range of values dependent upon the "fit" of
buyer and seller and the realism of the assumptions
utilized in the valuation methodology. Also,
consideration should be given to internal expressions of
valuation (eg., buy-sell agreements, insurance
arrangements, and deferred compensation and
noncompetition agreements).
1-77
Checklist for Valuing a Company
Obtain Outside Appraisal:
A qualified business appraiser can offer insights as to
comparable sales or to appropriate valuation calculation
assumptions (eg., industry risks and capitalization rates,
interest rates, etc.) as well as helpful analyses of
alternative valuation method approaches (eg.,
discounted cash flow analysis vs. liquidation value vs.
tangible/intangible asset valuation as set forth in
Revenue Ruling 59-60 as modified/amplified by Revenue
Rulings 65-192, 65-193, 68-609, 71-287, 80-213 and 83120; etc.).
1-78
Checklist for Valuing a Company
Strategic and/or Value Added Components:

Synergies

Supplementary product lines

Operating economies and/or vertical integration opportunities

New supply or distribution avenues

Limination of price and customer competition

R&D, Patents, Copyrights

Skilled and loyal work force

No huge owner dependencies
1-79
Checklist for Valuing a Company
Reductions or Add-Ons for Contingent Events:
Sometimes, it is appropriate to reduce or supplement a calculated
value for future possible contingencies (good and bad) -- eg., labor
union problems, plan closure obligations, multi-employer pension
plan obligations, unfunded past service pension costs, product
liability exposures, tax exposures, short-term lease rights,
uncertain supply or sales commitments or credit lines, patent
expirations or other intellectual property uncertainties and/or
exposures, as well as the prospect of greater profitability from
new customers, lines, technology or endeavors which have not yet
been reflected in historical financial results.
1-80
Free Online Real Estate Appraisals
Local Links --- ..\..\..\Tidbits\2007\tidbits070809.htm

Eppraisal.com --- http://eppraisal.com/

Realestateabc.com --- http://realestateabc.com/

Homegain.com --- http://homegain.com/

Zillow --- http://www.zillow.com/
1-81
Banking Concerns
BIS Paper 109 --- Online Click Here
Offline Click Here
1-82
1-83
The End
1-84