关于IASB发布的金融资产减值“预期损失模型”的分析

2009年11月15日，IASB（国际会计准则理事会）发布了金融工具项目第二阶段的《金融工具：摊佘成本和减值》征求意见稿，针对以摊余成本计量的金融资产（或金融资产组合），提出了以预期损失为基础的新减值方法。根据该征求意见稿，以摊余成本计量的金融资产（或金融资产组合）的初始账面金额，     

金融资产预期损失减值模型探讨

一、引言金融危机爆发后,二十国集团(G20)领导人金融峰会和金融稳定理事会(FSB)呼吁国际会计准则理事会(IASB)和各国会计准则制定机构改善金融工具会计准则、降低金融工具会计准则的复杂性,倡议建立全球统一的高质量会计准则。IASB与美国财务会计准则委员会(FASB)共同成立了金融危机咨询小组(FCAG),联手启动了"金融工具确认和计量"改进项目。2009年6月25日,IASB就金融工具减值运用预期损失模型发布征询信息,于11月5日发布《金融工具:摊余成本     

实际利率法在商业银行贷款业务中的应用

《企业会计准则第22号——金融工具确认和计量》中,金融资产或金融负债的后续计量采用实际利率法的核算,实际利率法的核算较为复杂,涉及实际利率的确定、摊余成本的确定、减值对摊余成本的影响,实际利息收入的计算以及减值以后贷款利息的计算等问题。根据《企业会计准则》的规定,商业银行应当对持有至到期投资、债券、债券回购、拆借、贷款等金融资产采用实际利率法进行计量。对一般的存款(如活期存款、定期存款)分类为其他金融负债,使用实际利率法进行计量。本文主要讨论实际利率法在贷款业务中的运用。     

实际利率法在商业银行贷款业务中的应用

《企业会计准则第22号——金融工具确认和计量》中,金融资产或金融负债的后续计量采用实际利率法的核算,实际利率法的核算较为复杂,涉及实际利率的确定、摊余成本的确定、减值对摊余成本的影响,实际利息收入的计算以及减值以后贷款利息的计算等问题。根据《企业会计准则》的规定,商业银行应当对持有至到期投资、债券、债券回购、拆借、贷款等金融资产采用实际利率法进行计量。对一般的存款(如活期存款、定期存款)分类为其他金融负债,使用实际利率法进行计量。本文主要讨论实际利率法在贷款业务中的运用。     

新准则接轨国际凸现差异——实际利率摊余成本法在银行贷款业务中的应用

随着我国金融体制改革的不断深入,引进国际会计准则对于我国建设现代商业银行具有重要作用。今年,财政部发布了《金融工具的确认和计量暂行规定(试行)》,标志着我国金融业沿用多年的会计标准将与国际会计准则开始全面接轨。在当前我国银行业务中存贷业务仍然占据主导地位,对于贷款成本、收益、损失的计量原则变动会在很大程度上影响整个银行的业绩情况。国际会计准则对贷款和应收款会计计量的主要原则是:在初始确认时以公允价值计量;在后续计量中使用实际利率按摊余成本计量。实际利率摊余成本法的应用是国际会计准则与我国现行贷款会计计量…     

IFRS9中金融资产两分类法的相关问题研究

《国际财务报告准则第9号—金融工具》(IFRS9)中将金融资产分为以摊余成本计量与以公允价值计量两类。本文简要分析了IFRS9中新的金融资产两分类法的优越性以及实施过程中可能存在的问题,并重点对如何改进我国金融资产确认和计量提出了建议。     

金融工具摊佘成本和减值准则变化对中国银行业的影响

国际会计准则委员会（IASB）于2009年11月5日公布了“金融工具：摊余成本和减值”草案（以下简称草案）。该草案较之前对采用摊余成本计量的金融工具（包括贷款、应收账款和持有到期的投资等）在计量和披露方面都有重大变化，一经生效，将对银行业产生深远影响。本文就草案理念及其在中国银行业的应用进行分析探讨，     

实际利率法下金融资产部分转移的会计实务

根据会计准则,对于贷款和应收款项,应当采用实际利率法,按照摊余成本进行计量。而在实务工作中,企业通常仅根据合同利率和账面余额进行初始确认和后续计量,这可能会引发后续损益确认的问题。本文以一则租赁实务（金融资产部分转移）为例,论述实际利率法和摊余成本在损益计量方面的运用。     

未来现金流量折现法与五级分类计提贷款损失准备金的差异——以扬州市某银行6户样本贷款企业为例

未来现金流量折现法是《企业会计准则第22号——金融工具确认和计量》对有关贷款损失准备金计提方法的新规定,本文试以扬州市某银行6户样本贷款企业为实证,分析该方法与现行五级分类方法在计提贷款损失准备金上的差异,并分析了未来现金流量折现法实际运用过程中存在的问题,提出了进一步完善未来现金流量折现法计提贷款损失准备金的有关政策建议。     

实际利率法摊销规律探讨

2006年2月,财政部发布《企业会计准则第22号--金融工具确认和计量》.其中,第十四条将实际利率法解释为"按照金融资产或金融负债(含一组金融资产或金融负债)的实际利率计算其摊余成本及各期利息收入或利息费用的方法.     

Research Note: Revisiting Fair Value Accounting––Measuring Commercial Banks' Liabilities

IAS 39, Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement (IASB, 2000), requires assets to be marked to fair value if held-for-trading, available-for-sale purposes, or if they are derivatives; held-to-maturity securities, originated loans and originated securities are measured at amortized cost, providing they are not held-for-trading. Financial liabilities are measured at amortized cost except those that are held-for-trading or derivatives. A proposed amendment would accommodate improved fair value measurement of financial instruments. Commercial banks are greatly affected by any accounting standard concerning the recognition and measurement of financial instruments, whether related to assets or liabilities. This article demonstrates that the existing and proposed standards perpetuate the mismeasurement of interest rate risk for commercial banks. Under IAS 39 banks that have a balanced position, that is, no interest rate risk, counterfactually could show large changes in income through interest rate changes. An alternative accounting treatment, full fair value reporting of financial assets and liabilities, including all loans and deposits, is offered. Presently fair value data are mandated as footnote disclosure.     

Money Market Funds and Shareholder Dilution

This paper analyzes the effects of a share valuation technique, amortized cost valuation, on institutional money market funds (MMFs) and their investors. The possibility of arbitrage between securities priced at market value and amortized MMFs is investigated. It is found that significant dilution has taken place as a result of this valuation technique. Losses per share have been about 10 basis points per year. Evidence that arbitrageurs will take advantage of a misvaluation of the MMF and cause losses to other shareholders may suggest that some investors should reconsider the desirability of amortized MMFs for their investments.     

构筑我国金融衍生品市场安全网的若干思考

金融衍生品市场在为市场参与者提供有效风险管理工具的同时,又因其强大的杠杆特性也曾给金融衍生品市场带来了灾难性的损失。本文在客观阐述金融衍生品本质特征和主要风险表现的基础上,以中信泰富事件为线索,分析了导致衍生品交易重大亏损的主要原因,从立法、市场、内控和人才等方面提出如何构建我国金融衍生品市场安全网的建议。     

IAS 39 reclassification choice and analyst earnings forecast properties

In October 2008, the International Accounting Standards Board amended IAS 39 to allow banks to retroactively reclassify financial assets that previously were measured at fair value to amortized cost. By reclassifying financial assets, a bank can potentially avoid recognizing the unrealized fair value losses and thereby increase its income and regulatory capital during a market downturn. We examine the implications of the reclassification decision by banks for the properties of financial analyst earnings forecasts during 2008–2009, when economic conditions were highly volatile. We find that the reclassification choice during the financial crisis reduced analyst forecast accuracy and increased forecast dispersion. We also find that the observed decline in analyst forecasting ability is limited to the year of adoption when the economic environment was highly volatile.     

中国上市企业投资的资本成本敏感性估计

企业投资对资本成本的敏感性是识别货币政策利率传导渠道是否畅通以及IS曲线斜率的重要参数。本文基于新古典投资模型框架,使用2004-2017年中国上市公司非平衡面板数据,估计了中国上市企业投资的资本成本敏感性,并侧重检验了融资约束对企业投资资本成本敏感性的影响。估计结果显示:(1)上市企业投资的加权资本成本弹性显著为负,且已具有较强敏感性(长期弹性系数为-0.16～-0.27),价格型货币政策工具的传导条件在上市公司投资环节正逐渐具备 ;(2)对加权资本成本的结构性估计显示,企业投资主要对债务资本成本的变动较为敏感且系数显著为负,而对股权资本成本的变动敏感程度较低且不稳定;(3)与传统观点相反的是,非国有控股上市企业投资的资本成本敏感性显著低于国有控股上市企业;较强的融资约束是导致非国有控股上市企业投资的资本成本敏感性较低的重要原因,应重视民营经济面临较强的融资约束对价格型货币政策工具传导机制的负面影响。本文的研究为中国货币政策框架的转型以及价格型货币政策传导机制的有效性提供了微观经验证据的支持。     

解析会计计量属性选择对财务分析的影响

由于经济高速发展,企业组织和经济业务日益复杂,根据资产的性质选择不同的计量属性进行计量已经成为现代财务会计的必然选择。因为选择的计量属性不同,财务报告所反映出的结果存在差异,历史成本计量属性,在通货膨胀的情况下,会失去资产计量的客观性,非历史成本计量属性虽然理论上更加符合决策的要求,但是如果没有有力的监管,也会给经营者留下很大的利润操作空间。经过严格监管的非历史成本计量属性的选择可以给使用者提供更加丰富的财务分析指标。     

财务会计计量模式的必然选择:双重计量

本文认为双重计量模式,即历史成本计量(含摊余成本计量)和公允价值计量是历史和时代的必然选择。本文指出三点:首先,在财务会计中,双重计量是必然的选择;其次,本文对两种计量属性的特点作了详细分析;最后,通过IASB制定的IFRS9发现了双重计量模式,特别是公允价值会计改进的曙光。     

财务困境成本理论与实证研究综述

本文对财务困境成本的存在性、分类、计量以及经验估计等相关理论和实证研究进行综合评述,最后探讨财务困境成本的未来研究方向,指出基于公司财务特征、公司治理和股权结构等多维视角研究财务困境成本的影响因素,并提出构建预期财务困境成本指数具有理论意义和应用价值。     

A POLITICAL ECONOMY OF SSAP22: ACCOUNTING FOR GOODWILL

In late 19th century Britain it was widely accepted by leading authorities that «goodwill» was simply the purchase of sufficient expected «surplus profits» to persuade the owners of a business to part with its net assets and control, and that this expenditure should be capitalized and amortized against those surplus profits as they are realized. Although this method remains the conventional wisdom, and dominates current international regulation and practice, its conceptual foundation appears lost to modern scholars, for whom the «problem» of accounting for goodwill is «insoluble». In the first part of the paper the concepts of Marx's political economy are employed to elaborate the conventional method, which is argued to be necessary to allow the capital markets to observe the generation and realization of profit and the rate of return on capital. From this perspective, the heavily criticized decision of the UK authorities in SSAP22 to encourage the write-off of goodwill against capital is an anomaly requiring explanation. It is usually explained as either the ASC's acceptance of economic income accounting as the ideal for financial reporting, or its acquiescence to powerful managerial interests. In the second part, these explanations are criticized, and an alternative hypothesis advanced which is consistent with the limited evidence available. That, although the capital markets usually want purchased goodwill to be capitalized and amortized, in the peculiar circumstances of the UK, where unusually large portions of its manufacturing industry were closed or run down in the acquisitions and merger boom of the 1980's, writing-off purchased goodwill against capital was in the collective interest of investors because it helped to hide from public view the fact that dividends were being paid from capital.     

Why and How UK Firms Hedge

This paper attempts to differentiate among the theories of hedging by using disclosures in the annual reports of 400 UK companies and data collected via a survey. I find, unlike many previous US studies, strong evidence linking the decision to hedge and the expected costs of financial distress. The tests show that this is mainly because my definition of hedging includes all hedgers and not just derivative users. However, when the tests employ the same hedging definition as previous US studies, financial distress cost factors still appear to be more important for this sample than samples of US firms. Therefore, a secondary explanation for the strong financial distress results might be due to differences in the bankruptcy codes in the two countries, which result in higher expected costs of financial distress for UK firms. The paper also examines the determinants of the choice of hedging method distinguishing between non‐derivative and derivatives hedging. My evidence shows that larger firms, firms with more cash, firms with a greater probability of financial distress, firms with exports or imports and firms with more short‐term debt are more likely to hedge with derivatives. Thus, differences in opportunities, in incentives for reducing risk and in the types of financial price exposure play an important role in how firms hedge their risks.