The Case Against Asset Revaluations

The upward revaluation of non-current assets is a common feature of contemporary accounting in Australia. This paper presents a case against the practice. The effects of revaluations are examined and possible reasons why firms revalue are considered. It is argued that asset revaluation is theoretically unsound, being inconsistent with the accounting structure within which it occurs. It is concluded that there are significant costs but few obvious benefits associated with revaluation.     

Asset Revaluations and the Mitigation of Underinvestment

Asset write-ups or revaluations are a common feature of Australian accounting and reporting practice. This paper adopts the perspective that efficiency rather than opportunism is the reason for revaluations. It argues asset revaluations are a low-cost mechanism for mitigating underinvestment problems induced by the presence of risky debt and exacerbated by the manner in which conventional borrowing limitations are written. It is hypothesized that revaluation should be positively related to the presence of growth opportunities, financial leverage and the presence of borrowing limitations; and negatively related to a firm's ability to finance growth internally. The empirical results generally support the hypothesized relationships.     

Fixed Asset Revaluations and Managerial Incentives

The study attempts to explain why Australian companies revalue their fixed assets, when a revaluation, by itself , has no discernible direct effect on cash flows and is costly to carry out. A revaluation is hypothesised to affect contracting and political costs. It may also help resolve problems associated with information asymmetries, or be used to signal information to investors. The results support the proposition that economic forces help explain the decision to revalue assets.     

The SEC's Ban on Upward Asset Revaluations and the Disclosure of Current Values

Prior to 1930, the upward revaluation of fixed assets was common in the United States. By 1940 the practice was virtually extinct, and for decades thereafter U.S. corporations which were registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have been constrained both from making upward asset revaluations, and from presenting supplementary information about the ‘current values’ of fixed assets. These changes were effected without the publication of any rules or guidelines by either the SEC or the U.S. accounting profession. This paper traces the early history of SEC activities and policies in relation to ‘write-ups’, using primary source materials which include minutes of SEC meetings, internal memoranda prepared by SEC staff, and reports of SEC decisions in stop-order proceedings. These documents show that, initially, SEC staff actively ‘discouraged’ write-ups through the exercise of administrative discretion in the course of assessing whether documents filed with the Commission were adequate to support the registration of prospectuses or securities. Later, formal decisions to reject the use of ‘appraisals’ were based on findings that estimates of current values had been arrived at arbitrarily or capriciously. Over a twenty-five-year period no decisions were located which formally rejected write-ups or the disclosure of current values when they were based on defensible estimates of current market prices. However, subsequently these decisions were cited as precedents for the rejection of the use of both ‘appraisals’ and estimates of market prices as the basis for valuing assets in all financial reports lodged with the SEC. By the 1940s, the SEC was using its registration powers to ‘censor'financial statements which referred to estimates of current values, regardless of the evidence used to arrive at those estimates. By the 1950s, the SEC had extended its policy of censorship to prevent any disclosure of estimates of ‘current values’— even when those disclosures were only made in ‘supplementary’ notes in takeover documents.     

Asset Revaluations and Assessment of Borrowing Capacity

Prior research has found support for contracting, political cost and information asymmetry explanations for managements’ decision to revalue non-current assets. This study proposes that asset revaluations occur to signal available borrowing capacity via an increase in collateral values at the time of increases in secured debt and that the economic benefits associated with an asset revaluation will be greatest for firms when they are experiencing times of declining cash flows from operations. Results imply that firms that have undertaken an asset revaluation are more likely to be experiencing declining cash flows from operations than firms that have not revalued. This study also investigates whether the incidence of valuations coincides with increases in levels of secured borrowings due to lenders’ demands for current values of assets offered as collateral. The evidence indicates that firms are more likely to record an asset revaluation if they have increased their secured borrowings, and that most non-year-end revaluations emanate directly from contracting with lenders.     

The adequacy of fixed asset disclosures under U.S. GAAP

Prior to 1995, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) required publicly-traded, capital-intensive registrants to prepare detailed supplemental schedules summarizing the activity in fixed asset-related accounts. This study examines these previously-mandated schedules and illustrates how current aggregated reporting requirements potentially conceal insights that could be gained with finer information. This is a significant issue, as current disclosures under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are similar to the former SEC requirements. The analysis supports the conclusion that stakeholders in capital-intensive U.S. firms are at an informational disadvantage relative to stakeholders in similar firms reporting under IFRS.     

非金融企业债务融资工具非公开定向发行研究

为促进银行间债券市场需求的差异化、多样化,活跃市场交易、推动市场发展,中国银行间市场交易商协会于2011年4月29日发布《银行间债券市场非金融企业债务融资工具非公开定向发行规则》。这是我国银行间债券市场发行方式上的一大创新。本文在对银行间债券市场发展历程进行回顾的基础上,对非公开定向发行的主要特点与运行制度安排进行了详细分析。比较了非公开定向发行与公开发行的六点差异。在此基础上,本文列举了推出非公开定向发行方式的四点重要意义。最后,本文对发展中应予重视的五类风险进行了系统剖析。     

地方政府债务管理及危机处置的国际经验借鉴

地方政府举债是工业化、城市化的必然选择,合理举债有利于地方财政的高效运转,但若监管错位、过度举债则有可能引发债务危机。自2014年起,我国赋予地方政府发债权,随着近年来收益类专项债的扩容,地方政府债务规模不断扩大,同时融资平台、政府引导基金等各种形式的隐性债务风险依然突出。当前地方政府债务风险被视为“灰犀牛”,亟需引起重视和关注。本文通过梳理美国、日本、巴西地方政府债务危机产生的原因和处置方式,总结国外地方政府债务管理和危机处置的有效经验,并结合现阶段我国地方政府债务管理中存在的预算软约束、发行主体单一、债务透明度差、评级和监管缺位、预警和处置机制不完善等主要问题,提出相关对策建议。     

法制环境、管理者能力与企业债务契约

本文从管理者能力的视角出发,选取2010-2018年沪、深A股上市公司为样本,实证分析了管理者能力对债务契约的影响及其影响路径。研究证明:管理者能力越强,企业的债务期限结构越短、债务融资成本越低。进一步研究发现,在不同的法制环境中,二者的关系存在异质性,即管理者能力对债务期限结构、债务融资成本的影响在法制环境较高的地区较为显著。本文丰富了企业债务契约的影响因素,探寻了管理者能力影响债务期限结构、债务融资成本的路径。     

放松利率管制、过度负债与债务期限结构

放松利率管制不仅消除了信贷市场摩擦,而且可以通过调整贷款利率水平以实现信贷风险与资金成本之间的匹配,从而对企业资本结构选择产生影响。本文以2000-2015年我国A股非金融类上市公司为研究样本,从企业杠杆选择和债务期限结构两个方面来实证检验放松利率管制如何影响企业资本结构。检验结果发现:放松利率管制不仅显著抑制企业过度负债,加快资本结构调整速度,而且延长企业债务期限。进一步检验还发现,放松利率管制显著抑制企业短贷长投行为,降低企业现金与现金流之间的敏感性。以上问题的研究不仅在理论上证实了放松利率管制影响企业杠杆选择以及资本错配的具体作用机理,而且在实践方面对于我们进一步推进利率市场化进程,完善市场在资源配置中的决定性作用具有重要的政策启示意义。     

Reliability of Asset Revaluations: The Impact of Appraiser Independence

In this paper we examine whether there are differences in the reliability of asset revaluations made by boards of directors versus independent (external) appraisers. We use a sample of recognized Australian asset revaluations. As a first step we examine the determinants of the choice between director-based revaluations and those undertaken by independent appraisers. We find that independent appraisers are more likely to be used for revaluations of land and buildings and directors are more likely for investments, plant and equipment and identifiable intangibles. We interpret this as evidence of firms harnessing directors' knowledge of asset specificities. We also find that firms with less independent boards are more likely to use independent appraisers. We interpret this as evidence of substitutability between governance mechanisms.As for differences in reliability, we find that revaluations of plant and equipment that are made by independent appraisers are more reliable than those by directors. However, we are unable to detect a difference for other classes of non-current assets. We define reliability in terms of ex-post adjustments of recognized value increases. Reliability is determined by an examination of the extent to which upward revaluations are subsequently reversed.     

持股金融机构对企业负债融资与债务结构的影响——基于上市公司的实证研究

本文通过对2007年至2011年我国A股615组配对公司的实证研究发现:持股金融机构不仅能够为企业带来更多的债务资金,包括短期债务资金和长期债务资金,而且有利于企业改变负债结构,即提高融资成本较低的短期债务融资比重,降低融资成本较高的长期债务。此外,相对于国有上市企业而言,民营上市公司持股金融机构更有利于改变其债务融资水平与债务结构。进一步区分金融机构类型后发现,持股金融机构对企业负债融资和债务结构的影响主要来自于持股非银行类金融机构。     

我国企业负债增加风险评价及分析

6月2日,韩国央行发布了《中国企业负债增加前景及风险评价》研究报告,报告阐述了我国企业负债增加的背景及存在的风险,并对风险进行了综合评价。本文通过对企业负债不良化的可能性、企业信用风险转移到政府的可能性及我国政府所采取的应对措施分析,可以看出,企业负债不良导致我国金融不稳定性发生的可能性很低,但即便如此,从中长期来看,有必要进一步采取措施有效防范和化解企业债务增加风险,保障企业能够平稳、健康发展。     

法制环境、金融发展与企业长期债务融资

本文分别从长期负债比率和债务期限结构两个方面,从法与金融的视角考察了我国地区法制环境、金融发展以及它们之间的相互作用对上市公司长期债务融资的影响。研究结果表明:我国地区法制环境的改善并不能使上市公司获得更多的长期债务融资,地区法制环境和金融发展的水平越高,上市公司获得的长期债务融资越少,然而在法制环境比较好的地区,金融发展水平的提高却有助于上市公司获得更多的长期债务融资。本文的研究结果不仅丰富了国内外的研究成果,而且有助于我们更加深入地了解我国上市公司长期债务融资偏低的制度因素。     

杠杆率重估与债务风险再探讨

现有研究流行以债务率(债务/GDP)指标衡量杠杆率及其债务风险,而关于该指标适用性的探讨却较为不足。理论分析表明,债务率指标忽略了与偿债能力相关的资产情况,存在学理上的缺陷和实践操作上的不足,不是衡量杠杆率的完美指标。本文构建并测算了宏观层面以资产负债率(债务/资产)指标衡量的杠杆率,为健全宏观杠杆率指标体系提供了有力补充。利用资产负债率、债务率与资本产出比之间的转化关系,本文克服了该杠杆率指标的估算难题,并结合国际清算银行和宾州世界表数据,重估了全球42个主要国家1950-2015年的杠杆率。在此基础上,本文初步检验了该指标的风险预测能力,并重新评估了中国的债务风险。中国债务率的上升主要来自于资本产出比而不是资产负债率的上升,债务问题的核心不在于资产负债率,而在于资产质量及其产出效率,这与欧美国家具有本质差异,相应地需要不同的解决思路。     

我国地方政府债务可持续性的综合分析框架

本文首先从地方政府的或有负债、债务安全性指标、资产负债表视角对当前我国地方政府的债务可持续性现状进行了静态分析,其次从跨期预算约束角度对政府债务可持续性进行了动态评估,最后根据地方政府债务性风险产生的原因,提出防范、化解和处置我国地方政府债务风险的建议.     

外债管理的国际经验与启示

本文研究了发达经济体（美、欧、澳、韩）和发展中经济体（俄、印）的外债发展历史和外债管理实践,并基于外债管理的国际经验提供可行性建议,旨在为加快推进我国的外债管理体制改革提供有益借鉴。     

Asset Revaluations in the Accounts of UK National Health Service Trusts

This paper reports the results of an investigation into the impact of the revaluation of fixed assets on the reported results of NHS ambulance services. It recalculates the accounting rate of return of individual trusts after removing revaluation adjustments and examines the published responses of trusts. The numerical analysis demonstrates that, in general, revaluation has depressed the stated rate of return in an inconsistent manner. Failure to meet the required rate of return may cause a trust to be subjected to additional monitoring and management reorganisation while the trusts respond by explaining deviations in the accounting return measure by referring to revaluations and other technical adjustments. Management decisions made in response to these accounting measures may be sub-optimal in delivering health care but appropriate in achieving the desired accounting outcome.     

Debt Finance and Capital Maintenance in Current Cost Accounting

The proper treatment of debt finance in current cost accounting has been the subject of considerable debate in the literature, and there is considerable variation in the official standards issued in different countries. Opposition to making a'gearing adjustment'against income seems to be due in part to doubts as to whether or not such treatment is compatible with physical capital maintenance. This article considers the financing implications of treating debt in this fashion in an entity (a) whose revenue is set at a level to ensure that replacement and financing costs are just covered and (b) which renders accounts on a discounted present value basis. It is shown that as long as debt is treated in a fashion consistent with the concept of'real income'employed there is no problem.