公允价值会计和当前金融危机

1、本科毕业论文（设计）外 文 翻 译外文出处 CPA Journal 外文作者 Jonh M.Trussel and Laura C.Rose 原文：Fair Value Accounting and the Current Financial CrisisThe accounting for financial assets and liabilities is a complex issue that has been evolving toward the use of fair value. Both the FASB and IASB provide the option of usi

2、ng fair value accounting in reporting financial assets and liabilities and certain other items. This move is not without controversy. Many have opined that the use of fair value accounting, as opposed to historical cost accounting, has helped cause the turmoil the financial markets. Research indicat

3、es that the exclusive use of one accounting method may not be efficient for financial institutions. The authors believe that the FASB should consider an alternative accounting approach that would incorporate both systems and mitigate the inefficiencies of using just one accounting method.In seeking

4、to explain the current financial crisis, the spotlight has turned to fair value accounting and financial institutions. FASB issued SFAS 157. Fair Value Measurements, in September 2006. Shortly thereafter, the problems related to the sub prime mortgage market began to surface. Many began to question

5、whether or not the current distress in financial institutions is related to the new accounting standard. Did the new standard exacerbate the problems or merely illuminate them?In October 2008. Then President George W. Bush signed into law the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA), the

6、so-called bailout bill. Under section 132 of the EESA. Congress gave the SEC the authority to suspend the use of fair value accounting under SFAS 157. Section 133 requires the SEC to conduct a study of the fair value accounting as stipulated in SFAS 157. See Exhibit 1 for excerpts from these two sec

7、tions of the EESA. Note that in Section 133, Congress even calls on the SEC to review the process used by the Financial Accounting Standards Board in developing accounting standards. This is a much broader mandate than just studying a single accounting standard.The use of fair value accounting has b

8、een expanding in reporting standards under generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) in recent years. SFAS 157 defines fair value and provides methods of deriving fair values for different types of financial assets and liabilities. Fair value accounting stands in contrast to historical cost ac

9、counting, which reports assets at the original price paid and (in some cases) with costs allocated over time used. The current controversy questions whether financial assets and liabilities of financial institutions should be reported on the balance sheet at fair value or, as they had traditionally

10、been reported, at historical cost. Another option to consider is an approach that incorporates both fair value and historical cost accountingSFAS 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS 157 defines fair val

11、ue as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (paragraph 5). Application of fair value may also affect a companys income statement, because unrealized gains and losses may result f

12、rom the adjustments to fair value. SFAS 157 was designed to establish a single definition of fair value to be used where required in other FASB standards resulting in increased consistency and comparability in fair value measurements. SFAS 157 also attempts to improve the quality ol information in f

13、inancial statements by expanding the disclosures about fair value measurements. It is important to note that the new standard does not require any new classes of assets to be measured at fair value.Prior to the issuance of SFAS 157, there were inconsistencies in how fair value was determined. This s

14、tatement provides guidelines for how companies formulate fair value when prescribed under GAAP. For example, in SFAS 115. Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities (1993), companies are required to record investments in securities at faire value under some circumstances and am

15、ortized (historical) cost under others. SFAS 157s biggest change relates to how companies determine fair value when there is no an active market. SFAS 157 provides a three-tier system of classifying assets. Level one asset has an active market with observable market prices. These assets include publ

16、icly traded securities that have a quoted price and that are actively traded on a national securities exchange. Level two assets do not have directly observable market prices. They are marked-to-market using inputs from observable market prices of similar assets. These may be prices of similar secur

17、ities, interest rates, commercial real estate, and the like. Level three assets do not have observable market prices for the asset or similar assets, or the market may be illiquid. In this latter category, companies have to use more subjective estimates of fair value. According to SFAS 157, level th

18、ree consists of unobservable inputs, such as those that reflect the reporting entitys own assumptions about what market participants would use to price the asset (including risk), developed using the best information available under a cost-benefit analysis. There is no requirement to verify whether

19、the assumptions are in line with those of market participants. These thinly traded assets and liabilities are measured using estimates based on the value the company believes a hypothetical third party would pay for them. The question becomes how to value illiquid, unique, or complex assets. Should

20、companies apply their own models? Some investors worry that this option gives company management too much discretion. The complexity of such assets suggests that it may not be possible to find a widely acceptable method.A related standard, SFAS 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Fin

21、ancial Liabilities., was issued in February 2007 and became effective for most companies on November 15. 2007. This standard gives companies the option of accounting for certain financial assets and liabilities at fair value. The optional adoption covers interest rate swaps, bonds, stocks, warranty

22、obligations, and the like. This election can be made on an instrument-by- instrument basis, with the resulting unrealized gains and losses reported in earnings. The IASB also has a .standard that allows the use of fair value accounting for financial assets and liabilities (IAS 39, Financial Instrume

23、nts: Recognition and Measurement).Conceptually, the fair value option provided by SFAS 159 gives companies the opportunity of eliminating or mitigating the artificial volatility in reported earnings that occurs when assets and liabilities are measured and reported differently in the financial statem

24、ents. Presently. some assets are reported on the balance sheet using various bases, including fair value, historical cost, and the lower of cost or market. SFAS 159 gives companies the option of reporting most financial assets and liabilities at fair value, as explicated under SFAS 157.The U.S. Cong

25、ress, as well as many other commentators, believes that fair value accounting has aggravated the recent financial crisis. Some recent studies seem to support this suspicion. Fair value accounting, like historical cost accounting, may. under certain circumstances. be inefficient at providing informat

26、ion value. This is why the authors suggest a hybrid system that would incorporate both models, depending on the nature of the financial instrument. Although there has been a move toward fair value accounting for all assets and liabilities, standards setters like the FASB and IASB and regulators like

27、 the SEC should consider the value of using historical costs as inputs in certain circumstances.Source：John M. Trussel and Laura C. Rose. Fair Value Accounting and the Current Financial CrisisJ. CPA Journal, 2009,79(6):26-30 译文：公允价值会计和当前金融危机金融资产和负债的核算是一个复杂的问题，正逐步演变为关于公允价值的使用问题。FASB和IASB均提供了在金融资产和金融负

28、债以及其他项目中运用公允价值的不同方法。此举并非没有争议.很多人认为有认为，公允价值会计，而不是历史成本会计，使用帮助引起金融市场的动荡。研究表明，在一个专用的会计方法可能不适用于金融机构的效率。笔者认为，应考虑替代财务会计准则委员会会计方法，将两个系统合并和减少只用一个会计方法。在寻求解释当前的金融危机，大家的关注点已经转化到公允价值会计和金融机构。财务会计准则委员会颁布SFAS 157。公允价值计量，2006年9月。此后不久，有关次级抵押贷款市场的问题开始浮现。许多人开始怀疑是否在金融机构目前的困境是关系到新的会计标准。有没有新的标准的问题，或者仅仅是关注他们呢？2008年10月。当时的总

29、统布什总统签署法律的紧急经济稳定法案2008（EESA），所谓的救市法案。根据EESA 第132条规定。国会给美国证券交易委员会有权根据SFAS 157暂停公允价值会计的使用。第133条规定，证券交易委员会进行的一项研究公允价值会计在SFAS第157的规定。在第133条，国会甚至在美国证券交易委员会呼吁的“审查财务会计准则委员会在制定会计准则使用的过程。”这不只是一个单一的会计标准的研究的任务。公允价值会计的使用扩大，在财务报告中反应的已经超出了会计准则的接受范围内。 SFAS第157条规定了公允价值，并提供不同类型所产生的金融资产和负债。公允价值会计对比历史成本会计，在某些情况下，超过使用的

30、时间分配成本在原来的资产支付的价格报告。是否金融资产和金融机构负债的争议问题应在报告资产负债表，因为他们历来报道，按历史成本计量。另一个值得考虑的选择的方法，既包含公允价值又包括历史成本会计。SFAS第157条规定的公允价值，建立了计量公允价值的框架，并扩大对公允价值计量的披露。 SFAS第157定义为：（第5段）“熟悉市场情况的买卖双方在公平交易的条件下和自愿的情况下所确定的价格，或无关联的双方在公平交易的条件下一项资产可以被买卖或者一项负债可以被清偿的成交价格”公允价值的应用程式也可能影响公司的收益表，因为未变现收益及亏损可以从调整。 SFAS第157条的目的是建立一个单一的定义，提高公允价值的一致性和可比性，可以用在其他财务会计准则。SFAS第157条也试图通过扩大公允价值计量披露的财务报表中的质量信息。重要的是要注意到，新标准并不要求任何新的类别的资产以公允价值计量。SFAS第157号发布前，公允价值的确定不一致。本声明提供了企业根据规定的准则如何制定会计准则公允价值。例如，在财务会计准则115。对某些债务及股本证券（1993）投资的会计，公司必须记录证券投资在某些情况下的摊销历史成本。SFAS第157条的最大的变化涉及到公司如何确定公允价值时，有没有一个活跃的市场。 SFAS第157条规定了分类资产的三层