道德標準對有效公允價值的重要性【外文翻譯】

1、<p>　　本科畢業(yè)論文（設計）</p><p>　　外 文 翻 譯</p><p>　　題 目 新環(huán)境下公允價值在我國應用的若干問題 </p><p>　　外文題目 Ethics is Imperative to Effective Fair Value </p><p>　　

2、Reporting: Weaving Ethics into Fair Value </p><p>　　外文出處 St. John's University </p><p>　　外文作者 Teresa M.Cortese-Danile、The Peter J、 </p>&l

3、t;p>　　R.David Mautz Jr.、Irene M. McCarthy </p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　Ethics is Imperative to Effective Fair Value</p><p>　　Reporting: Weaving Ethics into Fai

4、r Value</p><p>　　Executive Summary</p><p>　　The use of fair value measurement in accounting has been a source of concern for accountants and auditors, legislators, regulators and market particip

5、ants. The role of fair value measurement (also known as “mark to market” accounting) in precipitating the near-collapse of financial markets in 2008 has been debated by Congress, the Securities and Exchange Commission (S

6、EC) and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), among others.</p><p>　　Congress explicitly considered the impact of fair value accounting in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. A

7、lthough the SEC concluded, in its report to Congress, that fair value accounting did not contribute to the failures of major financial institutions, the PCAOB has been actively issuing Staff Audit Practice Alerts to assi

8、st auditors in identifying matters that could affect audit risk. The ethical application of fair value measurement remains a critical concern.</p><p>　　Background</p><p>　　The Conceptual Framewo

9、rk of Accounting identifies relevance and reliability as the primary qualitative characteristics of useful financial information. While both are theoretical ingredients of ideal information, a tension exists between rele

10、vance and reliability in practice. The accounting profession’s perennial devotion to historical cost measurement reflects an overriding concern with the reliability of financial reports. Moreover, the historical cost of

11、an asset in an arm’s length transactio</p><p>　　The Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (FASB’s) gradual embrace of fair value measurement in recent years reflects an attempt to provide more relevant info

12、rmation about values after the initial transaction date. However, one of the costs of this shift has been an increased threat to the reliability of financial reports. This article explores some of the ethical implication

13、s of fair value reporting and argues that education can play an important role in mitigating the inherent threat to relia</p><p>　　The current economic environment may trigger certain risk factors associated

14、 with misstatement due to fraudulent financial reporting, including incentives, pressures and opportunities present in the reporting entity.</p><p>　　Prior to the issuance of Statement of Financial Accountin

15、g Standards No.157, Fair Value Measurements, there were varying definitions of fair value. Generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) guidance for applying those definitions was limited. Guidance related to fair val

16、ue measurements was contained within the broad spectrum of existing pronouncements, and the differences in that guidance created inconsistencies in the application of GAAP.</p><p>　　The Financial Accounting

17、Standards Board (FASB) addressed the need for increased consistency and comparability in fair value measurements, and in September 2006 issued Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) No.157 to address those needs and expand

18、disclosures related to fair value measurements. FAS No.157 has been codified into FASB Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosure. Topic 820 defines fair value, establishes

19、a framework for measuring fair valu</p><p>　　The FASB emphasizes the notion that fair value be based on an exit price and not an entry price. There is a distinction made between observable inputs and unobser

20、vable inputs. Observable inputs are based on market data obtained from independent sources. Unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements) emanate from the entity’s own assumptions based on the best information available.<

21、;/p><p>　　The importance of inputs cannot be underestimated, for it is these upon which reliance is placed and these which are most susceptible to manipulation. Observable inputs, used in Level 1 and 2 fair val

22、ues, include the data sources and market prices that are available and visible outside the entity. Observable inputs are external to the entity and more objective than the internal unobservable inputs of Level 3. Unobser

23、vable inputs are the data and analysis that are developed within the entity to a</p><p>　　The Impact of Fair Value on the Current Economic Environment</p><p>　　The notion of unobservable inputs

24、was intended to allow for situations in which there was little or no market activity for the asset or liability at the measurement date. In those situations the reporting entity need not have taken all possible efforts t

25、o obtain information about market participant assumptions. Additionally, though the reporting entity was expected not to ignore information about market participant assumptions, it was given the leeway to pursue the info

26、rmation if it was reasonab</p><p>　　For example, a Level 3 input would include a financial forecast developed using the reporting entity’s own data if there is no information reasonably available, without un

27、due cost and effort, that indicates that market participants would use different assumptions.2 Such latitude in professional standards clearly set the stage for the liberties taken by financial institutions in valuing th

28、e bad assets on their books. The extent to which Level 3 measurements contributed to the economic crisis was </p><p>　　The crisis has demonstrated that markets are ineffective in controlling unethical practi

29、ces driven by greed.</p><p>　　Consider the case of subprime mortgage-backed securities. These represent one of the instruments for which there were substantial write-downs. The fair value of financial instru

30、ments collateralized by assets, such as homes with declining values, is difficult to approximate due to the difficulty of estimating the value of the underlying homes. When there are falling house prices that may not sup

31、port the value of a mortgage and the mortgage backed security held as investments by banks and other in</p><p>　　In spite of the flagrant deception perpetrated by financial institutions, according to the Fin

32、ancial Crisis Advisory Group, accounting standards were not a root cause of the financial crisis. Instead, the crisis has exposed weaknesses in accounting standards and their application. The weaknesses primarily involve

33、d:</p><p>　　the difficulty of applying fair value (“mark-to-market”)accounting in illiquid markets</p><p>　　the delayed recognition of losses associated with loans, structured credit products, a

34、nd other financial instruments by banks, insurance companies and other financial institutions</p><p>　　issues surrounding the broad range of off-balance sheet financing structures, especially in the U.S.<

35、/p><p>　　the complexity of accounting standards for financial instruments, including multiple approaches to recognizing asset impairment</p><p>　　The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to

36、ok into consideration the view held by some that fair value accounting contributed to bank failures. Two sections of the Act recognize fair value as a possible influence on the degree to which financial institutions were

37、 viewed as having potential solvency problems. Section 133 of the Act required that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) report to Congress on the effect of mark-to-market fair value accounting on the recent bank

38、 failures</p><p>　　Specifically, this study was required to evaluate the effect of fair value accounting on bank failures and bank balance sheets. It was required to: (a) address the way the FASB develops ac

39、counting standards, (b) describe alternate possible accounting methods, and (c) evaluate the quality of financial reporting information provided under Topic 820. The study was issued by the SEC staff on December 30, 2008

40、, and concluded that Topic 820 did not contribute to the bank failures in 2008. The report d</p><p>　　Recent Efforts by Standard-Setters and Regulatory Agencies </p><p>　　Three FASB Staff Positi

41、ons (FSPs) were issued on April 9, 2009 which revised and clarified Topic 820:</p><p>　　FSP FAS 157-4, Determining Fair Value When the Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significant

42、ly Decreased and Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly (codified as Topic 820)</p><p>　　FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2, Recognition and Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary Impairments (codified as Topi

43、c 320)</p><p>　　FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments (codified as Topics 825 and 270, respectively).</p><p>　　[The] Treadway Commission repor

44、t... outlined causal factors associated with fraudulent financial reporting, identifying tone at the top as a critical factor</p><p>　　Topic 320 defines key classifications of securities and accounting treat

45、ment for the classifications, whereas Topics 825 and 270 extend disclosure requirements on all fair value assets and liabilities on the balance sheet and/or footnotes to interim periods. All three FSPs are tied together

46、in concept and purpose.</p><p>　　Most relevant to this article is FSP FAS 157-4. It is not our intent to engage in a detailed discussion of the FSP, but instead to point out that there is no change in the un

47、derlying principles set forth in Topic 820. FSP FAS 157-4 primarily clarifies the fair value measurement process and expands the disclosure requirements. It provides a list of tests of market activity. This list of tests

48、 can be found in ASC 820-10-35-51A. The tests provide guidance to help the reporting entity evaluate facto</p><p>　　The FSP does not prescribe a methodology for making adjustments to transactions when estima

49、ting fair value, so it offers no detailed specified tests for measuring fair value. If there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity, then a change in valuation technique or the use of multipl

50、e valuation techniques is considered appropriate. Determining the price at which willing market participants would transact if there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level </p><p>　　The FASB

51、 recognizes that the determination of whether a transaction is orderly is indeed more difficult if there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity. However, such circumstances do not provide con

52、clusive evidence that transactions are not orderly (distressed or forced). ASC 820-10-35- 51E provides guidance to assist in determining if a transaction is not orderly, but in 51F indicates that the entity need not unde

53、rtake all possible efforts and should not ignore inf</p><p>　　In general, fair values in the financial statements are frequently developed with the assistance of a valuation expert. Those valuations should t

54、o be audited by independent CPAs. Notwithstanding, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) has expanded audit requirements and the resulting implications have become apparent in field application of Topic 8

55、20’s guidelines. (CCH Accounting Research Manager, Current Economic Crisis et al.)</p><p>　　The PCAOB also issued Staff Audit Practice Alert No. 3, Audit Considerations in the Current Economic Environment, o

56、n December 5, 2008. The purpose of this practice alert is to assist auditors in identifying matters related to the current economic environment that could affect audit risk. Several audit risk considerations are provided

57、 in the alert including fraud risk considerations. The practice alert points out that the current economic environment may trigger certain risk factors associated wi</p><p>　　Resource: Cortese-Danile, Teresa

58、 M St.John's University.Review of Business[J]. 2010,4：50-54.</p><p><b>　　譯文：</b></p><p>　　道德標準對有效公允價值的重要性</p><p>　　報告：將道德標準編進公允價值</p><p><b>　　概要&l

59、t;/b></p><p>　　公允價值作為會計計量屬性，已經引起了會計師、審計師、立法者、監(jiān)管機構和市場參與者的關心。在2008年金融市場中，公允價值計量的角色(也就是熟知的“市場估價”會計)，已經被國會、美國證券交易委員會(SEC)和美國上市公司會計監(jiān)管委員會(美國上市公司會計監(jiān)管委員會)等等爭論過。</p><p>　　國會明確考慮了公允價值會計在2008年緊急經濟穩(wěn)定行動下的

60、影響。雖然美國證券交易委員會在其向國會提交的報告中推斷，公允價值會計不會是主要金融機構失敗的原因，美國上市公司會計監(jiān)管委員會一直在積極發(fā)行人員審計實踐警報協(xié)助審計人員識別可能會影響審計風險的問題。公允價值計量的道德運用仍然是一個關鍵問題。</p><p><b>　　背景</b></p><p>　　會計的概念框架作為主要的質量特征有用的財務信息識別具有相關性和可靠性

61、。而這兩個都是理想信息的理論成分，二者之間的張力在實踐中具有相關性和可靠性。會計行業(yè)對歷史成本計量的多年獻身，反映了財務報告可靠性的一個首要考慮。此外，一項資產的歷史成本計量，在一條胳膊那樣的長度上的交易可以說是在交易日期最可靠的分析方法。隨著時間的流逝，歷史成本變得越來越不相關。</p><p>　　美國財務會計準則委員會(FASB)近幾年的循序漸進的公允價值計量，反映了試圖提供在最初的交易發(fā)生日的價值更多的相

62、關信息。不過,其中一個費用的變化增加了財務報告可靠性的威脅。本文探討了公允價值報告的一些倫理問題，并認為教育可以起到緩解的內在威脅以公允價值會計的可靠性提出了重要的作用。</p><p>　　目前的經濟環(huán)境可能引發(fā)某些由于虛假財務報告引起的危險因素，包括報告主體中的獎勵、壓力和機會。</p><p>　　第157號財務會計準則在發(fā)行前聲明，關于公允價值計量，有不同的公允價值定義。公認會計原

63、則指導應用這些定義是有限度的。公允價值計量的指導是包含在現(xiàn)有的廣泛的聲明中的，而指導中的差異使工人會計原則在應用中產生了矛盾。</p><p>　　美國財務會計準則委員會(FASB)表明在公允價值計量中，增加一致性和可比性的需要性，并于2006年9月發(fā)布了財務會計標準第157號文件(表達了這種需要，并且擴大披露了與公允價值計量的關系。財務會計準則的第157號文件已經被編入到沒過財務會計標準委員會的會計標準編碼中的

64、第820條——公允價值計量和披露。第820條定義了公允價值，為測量公平價值，建立了一個框架，并且要求對公允價值計量進行披露，意欲在公允價值標準衡量的方式上提供清晰性和一致性。</p><p>　　美國財務會計標準委員會強調公允價值的觀念是建立在一個出口的價格和沒有入境的價格。沒有分別觀察的輸入和觀察的投入。觀察數據，是根據獨立的渠道獲得的市場數據。（3級測量）不可觀察數據出自該公司自己的假設的基礎上可獲得的最佳信

65、息。</p><p>　　投入的重要性不能被低估，因為它是這些賴以依靠放置，這些是最容易受到操控。觀察數據，在1級和2公允價值所使用，包括數據源和市場價格可用外實體可見。觀察數據是外部的實體，比第三級內部不可觀察數據更加客觀。不可觀察輸入的數據和分析，開發(fā)的實體內，以評估其公允價值。事實上，第3級的投入是不可觀察的資產或負債的投入。這些都是輸入，反映了我們對假設市場參與者的報告主體的假設，將使用自己的資產定價或責

66、任。</p><p>　　公允價值對當前經濟環(huán)境的影響</p><p>　　無形投入的概念是為了考慮到在資產或負債測量的日子，只有很少或甚至沒有市場活動的情況。在這些情況下的報告主體不需要采取一切努力去獲取關于市場參與假設的信息。此外，盡管報告主體期望可以無視市場參與假設的信息，假如在不花費無故的成本和努力的情況下可以去獲取合法信息，那么它已經留了余地去追求信息。</p>&

67、lt;p>　　例如，一個三級的投入在不必要的成本和努力下，如果沒有信息是可以合法獲得的，那么將包括使用報告試題數據的財務預測開發(fā)，這表明市場參與者會使用不同的假設。這樣的專業(yè)標準的范圍給金融機構自由地估算他們的不良資產設了一個清楚的舞臺。三級測量在一定程度上為還不為人所知的經濟危機做出了貢獻。三級測量的過高定價，允許被金融機構用作為加速經濟危機影響的催化劑來使用。</p><p>　　這個危機已經表明，市場

68、在控制由貪婪引起的違反道德的做法是無效的。</p><p>　　考慮到次級抵押貸款證券的情況。這些代表了實質性減值的一種工具。金融工具的公允價值資產抵押證券，比如房屋的股票貶值,這是很困難的近似，因為潛在的房屋的價值估計存在著難度。當不支持抵押貸款的價值或抵押貸款的安全性給銀行和投資者拿去投資，房產價格會有所下降的時候，為缺乏客觀測量房屋價值去支持這些債務的能力，創(chuàng)造了不確定性。這已經引起了在證券中的缺乏信心的投

69、資及造成了不活躍的市場。實體必須清算其持有的這些抵押貸款證券，收到的價格就有可能被認為不代表內在公允價值、“被迫”或“痛苦”的價格。當市場不活躍的時候，問題就是這些市場交易參與者和經紀人的報價是否是公允價值的可靠的統(tǒng)計。</p><p>　　金融危機咨詢小組根據此次金融危機中金融機構的公然欺騙行為得出會計準則不但沒有對金融危機的根源做出解釋，而且這場危機暴露了會計準則及其應用程序的弊端，這些弊端主要有：</

70、p><p>　　在流動性差的應用市場公允值（“盯市場”）比較困難。</p><p>　　結構性信貸產品，與銀行，保險公司和其他金融機構的其他金融工具延遲確認的損失與貸款相關的。</p><p>　　問題圍繞資產負債表外融資結構范圍很廣，尤其是在美國。</p><p>　　為金融工具，包括多種方法的會計準則的復雜性認識資產減值。</p>

71、<p>　　2008年的緊急經濟穩(wěn)定法案提到了一些對公允價值會計準則導致銀行倒閉的看法。該法承認的兩部分認為公允價值作為一個有可能影響在何種程度上的金融機構被視為具有潛在的償付能力問題的一個尺度。</p><p>　　具體來說，這項研究需要以評估對銀行倒閉銀行資產負債表和公允價值會計的影響。它被要求：（a）財務會計準則委員會制定會計標準。（b）描述可能替代的會計方法。（c）820的主題下，評價財務報

72、告提供的信息質量。這項研究是由美國證券交易委員會的工作人員在2008年12月30號發(fā)出的，并得出結論該820主題不支持2008年銀行倒閉（是由于應用公允價值計量）的說法。該報告建議為擴大披露的需要，更多的公允價值有被指導的必要性，并在財務報告上提出其他改進。（衛(wèi)生協(xié)調會計研究經理，820專題概述等人。）</p><p>　　按標準制定者和監(jiān)管機構最近所做的努力</p><p>　　在200

73、9年4月9日發(fā)布了三個FASB職員位置(FSPs)用來校正并且澄清820主題：</p><p>　　FAS中157-4，當資產或負債的規(guī)模和水平已大幅度減少和識別出交易是不正常的(編纂為主題820)時，可以確定交易費用價值。</p><p>　　FAS中115-2和FAS 124-2，非暫時性的缺陷的識別和陳述。(編纂為主題320)</p><p>　　FSP FA

74、S 107-1 and APB 28-1，關于用于交易費用價值的金融工具的臨時披露。(編纂為主題各自為825、270)</p><p>　　[該]特雷德韋委員會的報告...概述因果因素，相關的虛假財務報表，確定的頂部是一個關鍵因素</p><p>　　320定義主題的分類主要分類及會計處理方法的證券，而825和270延伸主題的所有資產的公允價值和負債在資產負債表和/或腳注披露規(guī)定的臨時期。

75、所有這三個金融服務商已經聯(lián)系在一起，理念和宗旨。</p><p>　　最相關的這篇文章是FAS的157-4。這不是我們的意圖進行了詳細討論的全漢，而是要指出的是，有沒有設定主題820規(guī)定的基本原則的改變。全漢主要闡明了FAS的157-4公允價值計量過程，并擴大了披露要求。它提供了一個市場活動的測試列表。這種測試列表中可以找到升序820-10-35-51A的。這些測試提供指導，幫助評估報告實體因素，以確定是否有在數

76、量和資產或負債的活動水平顯著下降。這應有助于用戶決定，如果市場成交量下降到這種地步的市場報價是公允價值，也沒有可靠的措施都有條不紊。</p><p>　　在沒有規(guī)定做出調整，估計公允價值交易的方法，因此它提供了計量公允價值沒有詳細指明的測試。如果出現(xiàn)了大幅下降的數量和活動水平，那么在估值方法的改變或多個估值技術的使用被認為是合適的。確定價格的市場參與者愿意在該會辦理，如果出現(xiàn)了在數量和活躍程度顯著下降，將需要做出

77、重大判斷使用。從這個指導部分共鳴是，每一個測試應用的方式將繼續(xù)需要做出判斷。因此，我們認為這樣的指導，允許在計量公允價值的實體相當大的余地。</p><p>　　財務會計準則委員會認識到，如果出現(xiàn)了在數量和活動量明顯下降，交易是否有秩序確實比較困難的。然而，這種情況并沒有提供確鑿的證據表明，交易也不是有序（苦惱或被迫）。升序820-10-35- 51E章提供指引，以協(xié)助確定，如果交易沒有秩序，但在51F章表示實體

78、不必采取一切可能的努力，不應忽略成本和精力，避免提供給它不必要的資料。</p><p>　　一般來說，在財務報表中公允價值經常開發(fā)出了一個估價專家協(xié)助。這些估值應該向被審計由獨立的會計師事務所。盡管如此，上市公司會計監(jiān)督委員會（PCAOB）已經擴大審計的要求和由此產生的影響已經成為該領域的課題820的應用準則。（衛(wèi)生協(xié)調會計研究經理，當前的經濟危機等。）</p><p>　　PCAOB的審

79、計實務工作人員也發(fā)出警報，3號審計事項在目前的經濟環(huán)境對2008年12月5日。這種做法的目的是提醒協(xié)助查明與當前的經濟環(huán)境可能會影響審計事項的審計風險。若干審計風險的考慮提供的警示包括欺詐風險的考慮。實踐警示指出，目前的經濟環(huán)境可能引發(fā)一定的風險和錯誤陳述，由于欺詐性財務報告，包括獎勵，壓力和機會在本報告實體的相關因素。此外，提到了PCAOB的工作人員對審計實務警示第2期，對審計事項有關的公允價值計量的金融工具和專家使用，于2007年1