毕业论文外文翻译-设定收益制养老金会计新准则

1、外文翻译原文2New Accounting Rules for Defined Benefit Pension PlansMARCH 2021 - Issued in September 2006, Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) 158, Employers Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement PlansAn Amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R), sign

2、ificantly changes the balance-sheet reporting for defined benefit pension plans. Before SFAS 158, the effects of certain events, such as plan amendments or actuarial gains and losses, were granted delayed balance-sheet recognition. As a result, a plans funded status (plan assets minus obligations) w

3、as rarely reported on the balance sheet. SFAS 158 requires companies to report their plans funded status as either an asset or a liability on their balance sheets, which will cause reported pension liabilities to rise significantly. Although SFAS 158 also applies to postretirement benefit plans othe

4、r than pensions and to not-for-profit entities, the focus below is on for-profit businesses with defined benefit pension plans. Balance-Sheet Reporting Under SFAS 158Under SFAS 87, prepaid or accrued pension cost, which is the net of a firms pension assets, liabilities, and unrecognized amounts, is

5、reported on the balance sheet. SFAS 158 arguably improves financial reporting by more clearly communicating the funded status of defined benefit pension plans. Previously, this information was reported only in the detailed pension footnotes. Under SFAS 158, companies with defined benefit pension pla

6、ns must recognize the difference between the plans projected benefit obligation and its fair value of plan assets as either an asset or a liability. The projected benefit obligation is the actuarial present value of the benefits attributed by the pension plan benefit formula for services already pro

7、vided. As a result, the complex and conceptually unsound “minimum pension liability rules, which are used when the accumulated benefit obligation is less than the fair value of pension plan assets, has been eliminated. (The accumulated benefit obligation is similar to the projected benefit obligatio

8、n but does not include expected future salary increases in the calculation of the present value of actuarial benefits.) In addition, the unrecognized prior service costs and actuarial gains and losses that were previously relegated to the footnotes are now recognized on the balance sheet, with an of

9、fsetting amount in accumulated other comprehensive income under shareholders equity.Income Reporting Under SFAS 158SFAS 158 does not change the computation of periodic pension cost, which remains a function of service cost, interest cost, expected return on pension plan assets, and amortization of u

10、nrecognized items. It does, however, impact the reporting of comprehensive income. Specifically, actuarial gains or losses and prior service costs that arise during the period are recognized as components of comprehensive income. In addition, the amortization of actuarial gains or losses, prior serv

11、ice costs, and transition amounts recognized before implementing SFAS 158 require a reclassification adjustment to comprehensive income.Applying SFAS 158Exhibit 1 presents pension footnote data for three companies: Lockheed Martin, Glatfelter, and AMR Corp. Lockheed Martin represents a classic examp

12、le of a scenario SFAS 158 is designed to eliminate: namely, reporting a pension asset when the pension plan is actually underfunded. Specifically, Lockheed Martins pension obligation ($28,421 million) exceeds its plan assets ($23,432 million), meaning the plan is underfunded by the difference, $4,98

13、9 million. Previously, Lockheed Martins unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs (totaling $7,108 million) enabled it to report a pension asset of $2,119 million ($7,108 $4,989).The data for Glatfelter and AMR in Exhibit 1 indicate other likely scenarios under SFAS 158. Glatfelte

14、r, while overfunded by $155.3 million, would reduce its reported pension asset by $90 million under SFAS 158. Although AMR currently recognizes a pension liability of $882 million, SFAS 158 would require AMR to significantly increase its reported pension liability to $3,225 million.An Illustration o

15、f the Transition to SFAS 158The following example uses the actual 2005 data from Exhibit 1 to illustrate how each of these companies would record the transition to the new rules. Because SFAS 158 is generally first effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2006, the actual numbers these c

16、ompanies record upon transition to SFAS 158 will differ from those in this example. For simplicity, the illustration ignores tax effects.Exhibit 1 shows that each of the three companies reports additional minimum liabilities and related intangible assets on its balance sheet. These items are elimina

17、ted under SFAS 158. In addition, pension assets and liabilities and accumulated other comprehensive income are adjusted so that their ending balances conform to the amounts required under SFAS 158. The necessary journal entries to accomplish the transition, using 2005 data, are presented in Exhibit

18、2.Exhibit 3 shows the balance-sheet reporting for each company after posting the entries in Exhibit 2, and exposes several important points. First, each company reports its funded status as either a pension asset or liability. Second, the balance in accumulated other comprehensive income equals the

19、amount of previously unrecognized items. In this example, and likely for many companies with defined benefit plans, the amount of this contra-shareholders equity will increase under SFAS 158, even potentially generating negative shareholders equity. The transition to SFAS 158 might impose costs on l

20、everaged firms due to the increased likelihood of tightening restrictive debt covenants. Finally, the balance-sheet presentation, and each companys funded status, should be easier to understand after SFAS 158 is implemented.Subsequent Application of SFAS 158SFAS 158 does not impact the amount of per

21、iodic pension cost reported on the income statement, but it does impact the reporting of comprehensive income. For example, assume that after implementing SFAS 158 Lockheed Martin were to report the financial results in Exhibit 4. Again, these amounts are for illustrative purposes only.Exhibit 5 sho

22、ws the required journal entries. The first entry records the service cost, interest cost, and expected return on plan assets components of periodic pension cost. The second entry reclassifies the amortization items from accumulated other comprehensive income to periodic pension cost, and the third e

23、ntry adjusts the pension liability and accumulated other comprehensive income for the difference in actual pension returns above expectations during the year.Author: Kenneth W. Shaw Nationality: ColumbiaOriginate from: The CPA Journal 译文二设定收益制养老金会计新准那么2021年3月SFAS公布了158号 ?雇主对既定福利养老金和其他退休后方案的会计处理?对FAS

24、B第87、88、106号准那么做了修订，显著改变了资产负债表对设定收益制下养老金的列报。在SFAS 158公布之前，一些特定事项的影响，像养老金方案的修改，精算所得和精算损失，是准许在资产负债表中递延确认的，以至于养老金净资产养老金资产减去养老金负债很少在资产负债表中列报。SFAS 158要求公司在资产负债表中以资产或是负债的形式列报养老金净资产，这将会引起养老金负债的显著上升。尽管SFAS158也应用于其他退休福利方案以及非盈利组织，但是我们这里主要是讲盈利组织的设定收益方案。SFAS 158对资产负债表列报的要求 SFAS158对于预付或应付的养老金本钱，即一个公司养老金净资产、净负债以及

25、未确认的金额是在资产负债表中列报的。SFAS158论证性地提高了财务报告要求，公司需要更加清楚地提供有关设定收益养老金方案的信息。而之前只要在财务报表附中披露就行了。SFAS158要求实行设定收益制养老金方案的公司必须将预计养老金负债总额和养老金资产的公允价值之差确认为一项资产或负债。预计养老金负债总额是根据养老金方案公式对职工已提供的效劳精算所得的当前价值。结果复杂、抽象、不确定的“最小养老金负债准那么被删掉了，之前它运用于累积的养老金负债小于养老金资产的公允价值的情况。累积养老金负债与预期养老金负债类似，但是它没有包含预期未来上涨工资的现值。除此之外，先前在附注中披露的未确认前期效劳本钱以

26、及精算所失和所得，现在要求在财务报表中进行披露，作为一个对所有者权益项下综合收益进行抵消的科目。SFAS 158 对利润表的要求SFAS158并没有改变当期养老金本钱的计算，当期的本钱依旧取决于原来的效劳本钱，利息本钱，养老金资产的预期收益率，以及未确认工程的分摊。然而SFAS158确实对综合收益产生了影响。具体来说，期间内发生精算所得和精算损失以及前期效劳本钱都确认为综合收益的组成局部。除此之外，实施SFAS158之前，对精算所得、精算损失、前期效劳本钱和转换金额的分期确认在计入综合收益前需要重分类调整。SFAS 158的实施图表1表示的是Lockheed Martin, Glatfelte

27、r, and AMR Corp三家公司在财务报表附注中对养老金披露的数据。Lockheed Martin的例子很经典，它代表了SFAS 158试图改变的现状实际上养老金资金筹集缺乏却仍报告一项资产。特别是Lockheed Martin的养老金负债($28,421 million)超过了它的养老金资产($23,432 million)，说明养老金资金短缺4,989 million。之前Lockheed Martin未确认的净损失和前期效劳本钱(totaling $7,108 million)使它报告了$2,119 million的养老金资产($7,108 $4,989)。 图标1中有关Glatf

28、elter和AMR的数据预示在SFAS 158准那么下其他类似的情形。Glatfelter尽管报告了$155.3 million的净资产，按照SFAS 158的要求需要减少$90 million的资产。虽然AMR近期确认了高达$882 million的养老金负债，但按照SFAS 158的要求，AMR还要将养老金负债提高到$3,225 million。如何向SFAS 158过渡下面的例子采用图表1 中2005年的实际数据来阐述以上三个公司在向新准那么过渡时所做的记录的。由于SFAS 158大致上是在2006年11月15号的会计年度末生效的，因此这些公司在转变中所记录的实际数字会与例子有所不同。为

29、了简化，在阐述过程中我们将忽略税收的影响。 图表1显示了这三个公司分别在资产负债表上报告了额外的最小负债额和相应的无形资产。SFAS15把这些工程都给删除了。除此之外，养老金资产、养老金负债和累计综合收益需要调整使最终的平衡与SFAS158要求的数字相等。这种转变所做主要的分录，我们用2005年的数据在图表2中展示。 图表3展示了图表2的分录过继到三个公司的资产负债表的结果，我们可以看到重要的几点。第一，每个公司的养老金状况不是报告为一项资产就是一项负债。第二，计入综合收益后的收入与前期未确认的金额相等。在这个例子中以及其他类似的拥有设定收益制养老金方案的公司按照SFAS158进行调整后，所有

30、者权益金额会有所下降，甚至增加了少数股东权益。向SFAS过渡可能增加杠杆公司的本钱，因为增加限制性条约的可能性下降了。最后公司的资产负债表和基金状况在实施SFAS158后会更容易理解。 肯尼斯w.肖国籍：哥伦比亚出处：注册会计师 原文1The logic of pension accounting2. Pensions as an expense. Early approaches to pension accounting In the USA and UK, private-sector employer-sponsored pension arrangements began to ap

31、pear in the second half of the 19th century, and were often associated with large organizations such as railways, insurance companies and banks (Hannah, 1986: 1012; Chandar and Miranti,2007: 206). Accounting for these arrangements was often very simple. The cost recognized by the employer was effect

32、ively the cash paid in a given period. Some schemes operated on a pay-as-you-go basis, where the employer made no advance provision for retirement benefits. In this case, the cost each period equaled the benefits paid. In a scheme where the employer made contributions to an external fund invested in

33、 securities, out of which benefits would be paid, or made notional contributions to an internal account, the cost would be the contributions arising in each period, possibly augmented by interest on notional contributions if these were not used to purchase securities. However, many employers granted

34、 pensions to enable employees to retire, even though no advance provision had been made. The expense-as-you-pay accounting for pensions was rationalized through the gratuity theory of retirement benefits (McGill et al., 2004: 16).This theory proposed that retirement benefits were awarded to retirees

35、 at the discretion of the employer, as a kindly act on the part of an employer towards old retainers who have served him faithfully and well (Pilch and Wood, 1979: 2). Paying a pension was not necessarily an act of pure benevolence, because it could allow an employer to retire an employee who was no

36、 longer performing adequately, without incurring public criticism. The gratuity theory implied that the employer received an efficiency gain when superannuated employees retired, and that the appropriate point at which to recognize the cost of pensions was as the pensions were paid. If the employer

37、wanted to earmark some earnings in a distinct pension reserve before employees retired, then this would be regarded as an appropriation of profit rather than as an expense. Even in structured pension schemes, the employer might include clauses denying the existence of an enforceable contract, stress

38、ing that pension benefits were paid entirely at the employers discretion and could be discontinued at any time (Stone, 1984: 24).However, the gratuity theory rapidly came under challenge from the view that pensions constitute deferred pay, and that employees in effect sacrifice current income in exc

39、hange for the expectation of income in the future. On this basis, early accounting theorists such as Henry Rand Hatfield suggested that employers should include in operating expenses the amount necessary to provide for future pensions (Hatfield, 1916: 194). A number of commentators observed that the

40、 calculation of such an expense was potentially highly complex, but they suggested that the calculations fell within the domain of actuaries (Stone, 1984: 26).Members of the actuarial profession had already been involved in advising on appropriate contribution rates for pension schemes involving eit

41、her external or internal notional funding. In accounting terms, the employer would measure the annual cost of pension provision either directly in terms of amounts calculated by actuaries, if the route of internal funding was followed, or through the contributions (themselves determined by actuaries

42、) to an external pension fund. In the case of external funding, cost would be equal to contributions due for the period, and, other than short-term accruals,pension expense would be based on cash payments (or other assets transferred) to the pension fund.2.2. The beginnings of accounting regulationE

43、arly authoritative accounting pronouncements endorsed this essentially cash-based approach to pension cost determination. The Committee on Accounting Procedure of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) issued Accounting Research Bulletin No. 47 Accountingfor Costs of Pension

44、Plans in 1956, and expressed the view that costs based on current and futureservices should be systematically accrued during the expected period of active service of the covered employees (CAP, 1956). On closer analysis, systematic accrual implied that employers would use the method recommended by t

45、he actuary for funding the pension plan to determine the pension expense in respect of current service. This approach was endorsed by the Accounting Principles Board (APB) in their Opinion No. 8 Accounting for the Cost of Pension Plans, issued in 1966. APB 8 is entirely cost-based there are referenc

46、es to balance-sheet pension accruals and balance-sheet pension prepayments or deferred charges but no explanation of these terms or how they are to be determined. Much of the Opinion addresses not the issue of determining normal cost (the annual cost assigned, under the actuarial cost method in use,

47、 to years subsequent to the inception of a pension plan or to a particular valuation date) but rather past service cost (pension cost assigned under the actuarial cost method in use, to years prior to the inception of a pension plan) and prior service cost (pension cost assigned, under the actuarial

48、 cost method in use, to years prior to the date of a particular actuarial valuation). The Opinion goes to great lengths to provide guidance on how these components of pension cost should be recognized, recommending spreading of the costs over a period up to 40 years. A number of features of the acco

49、unting treatment of pension costs need to be highlighted. First although it is not made explicit, there is an under-lying desire to arrive at a pension expense in each period that is not materially different from the employers contributions to the pension fund. APB 8 notes the amount of the pension

50、cost determined under this Opinion may vary from the amounfunded (APB, 1966: para. 43), but this situation is not analyzed in detail. For unfunded pension plans, costs are to be determined using an actuarial cost method. The criteria for the selection of an appropriate actuarial cost method are that

51、 the method isrational and systematic and should be consistently applied so that it results in a reasonable measure of pension cost from year to year.Author: Christopher J. Napier Nationality: EnglishOriginate from: The CPA Journal译文一养老金会计的逻辑2养老金费用在19世纪后期的美国和英国，出现了私人部门雇主赞助的养老金方案，主要集中于铁路公司和保险业、银行业等大型

52、机构(Hannah, 1986: 1012; Chandar and Miranti,2007: 206)。这时的养老金会计往往非常简单。雇主确认的本钱实际上就是一定期间内支付的现金。很多养老金方案是都是在职工退休后进行支付，雇主并没有提供进一步的退休福利。在这种情况下，每段期间内的本钱就是该期间的现金支付。在某些方案中，雇主提供资金投资于外部的证券，用取得的收益支付养老金，或是向内部的账户提供资金。如果基金没有被用来购置证券，本钱将会是每段时间内的效劳本钱并计上合理的利率。然而，很多雇主为了能让雇员退休情愿支付养老金，但是并没有提供进一步的福利。现收现付制养老金会计是建立在“酬金理论(McG

53、ill et al., 2004: 16)根底上的，这个理论认为养老金是雇主对退休人员的一种奖励，“是雇主对为他忠诚效劳的退休老职工的善意施舍(Pilch and Wood, 1979: 2)。其实支付养老金并不是出于纯粹的善意，因为它能让雇主辞退那些工作效率不高的雇员，而不受到社会的指责。“酬金理论暗示雇主通过辞退落后的职工而使效率得到提高，对养老金本钱适宜的计量就是支付的养老金金额。如果雇主希望在一个特定的养老金储藏预留一些员工退休前的收入，这时他应该确认一局部利润而不是费用。即使在格式化的养老金方案中，雇主也可能会参加这样的条款，否认这是一种强制的合同，而强调养老金福利完全是根据自己意愿

54、老来支付，任何时候他都可以终止这项方案(Stone, 1984: 24)。然而另一种观点的出现马上让“小费理论受到了挑战。这种观点认为养老金其实是递延的工资，雇员实际上是牺牲了当前的收入而换取未来的收益。在这个根底上，Henry Rand Hatfield等人的早些理论认为雇主必须在营业外支出中计入“未来的养老金费用 (Hatfield, 1916: 194)。很多评论员评论说这种形式的养老金核算将会非常复杂，他们建议由精算师来完成这些计算。一些精算专家已经在建议为养老金方案提供一种利率，无论针对内部或是外部的名义基金。在会计处理上，雇主需要计算每年的养老金本钱，如果是内部的方案，将会直接采用

55、精算师的计算结果，如果是外部的基金方案，将采用外部的养老保险基金的奉献由精算师确定。外部的基金方案，养老金本钱等于某段时间的奉献，养老金费用是根据支付的现金来确定的，而不是应计负债。早期的权威会计采纳现收现付制来确认养老金本钱。AICPA在1956年发布会计研究公告第47准那么有关养老金本钱确实认，强调“养老金本钱必须将当前和未来的效劳本钱系统化地分摊到每个参加养老金方案的职工的预期工作年限中去 (CAP, 1956)。进一步的分析，“系统的分摊意味着雇主们将要采用精算师们建议的方法来确定当前雇员所提供的效劳本钱。APB在1966年公布的养老金方案本钱第8号会计准那么意见中也同意采取这种方法。

56、APB 8完全是以本钱为根底的，它建议在资产负债表中设置“养老金负债和“预付养老金工程，但是他们并没有对这些工程做出解释，也没有说明这些工程是如何决定的。?意见?的大局部内容并不是说明如何确认正常本钱在使用精算本钱下，每年的费用分配至养老金实施后的期间里或是到某一特定的日期，而是介绍过去本钱在使用精算本钱发下，将养老金本钱分配至养老金方案实施前几年，和前期效劳本钱在使用精算本钱下，将养老金本钱分配至养老金实施后到一个特定的精算估值日期。?意见?对于做如何确认养老金本钱组成工程提供了详细的指导，建议期间应该要长达40年以上，而且一系列的养老金会计处理方法特征需要被强调。虽然它没有言明，但是它的潜在意愿是要使确认的养老金费用不要与雇主提存的养老金数额有显著的差异。APB 8提到根据?意见?确认的养老金本钱可能会与雇主提存的养老金数额有所差异，但是并没有对这种情形做详细的分析。对于那些没有经费的养老金方案，本钱是根据权责发生制来核算的。应计本钱的核算方法的选择标准是能“合理、系统并得到一贯的应用，以使养老金每年都能得到合理的计量。 克里斯托弗J.纳皮尔国籍：英国出处：注册会计师五分钟搞定5000字