Isda says more work needed on accounting standard
The International Swaps and Derivatives Association (Isda) has filed comments on the draft standard “Financial Instruments and Similar Items”, proposed by the Joint Working Group of Standard Setters (JWG).
“Isda welcomes the JWG’s initiative... however, our committee strongly agreed that a fair value model based on guidance contained in the draft standard would be significantly flawed,” said Robin Doyle, a vice-president at JP Morgan Chase and chair of Isda’s North American Accounting Committee.
As regards the proposed valuation methodology, Isda said the hierarchy would be too restrictive: “It may be more appropriate in some circumstances to refer to the market exit price for a similar asset on the reporting date, than attempt to adjust for an out-of-date market exit price for the same asset. Flexibility and fair judgment are tantamount in making appropriate fair valuations for an instrument.”
Although Isda agreed that a full fair value accounting model would eliminate the need for hedge accounting in many cases, it also believes that the “concept of hedge accounting remains relevant where financial instruments are used to hedge forecasted transactions like the future acquisition or disposal of non-financial items, or forecasted foreign currency revenues and expenses.”
On the issue of presentation and disclosure, Isda is pressing for further consideration by the JWG, suggesting that “wherever possible, disclosure should be based on information firms use to manage their businesses in order not to impose dual reporting burdens. At the same time, the disclosures must be carefully considered to ensure that they do not reveal proprietary trading information to competitors.”
Isda has also written to the JWG that it does not believe that “a period of two years is adequate for the implementation of an accounting standard that fundamentally changes the way entities will account for financial instruments”.
The association added that it recommends international standard setters to consider developing separate projects addressing each of the major areas covered in the Draft Standard, rather than tackling all the issues with a single document.
Rob Stevens, a managing director at CSFB and Isda’s European accounting committee chairman said: “In addition to comments on the technical aspects of the document, Isda is also concerned that the sheer volume of material covered in this draft resulted in a flawed consultation process. Addressing the issues through smaller, more focused projects would allow for a better assessment of the impact of implementation.”
“We suggest that the standard setters engage various constituents to field-test narrow segments of the guidance. We believe that taking the initiative to do this work early in the standard setting process will help greatly in providing rules that are clear and easy to apply to real business transactions. Otherwise we would find ourselves in a situation similar to that being experienced with SFAS 133, ‘Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities’, SFAS 140 and IAS 39, ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’, where volumes of questions and answers need to be written just so constituents can understand how to apply the rules”, warned Isda.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Risk, portfolio margin, regulation: regtech to the rescue
A white paper outlining the complexity of setting the course for risk, margin and regulation
Prop shops recoil from EU’s ‘ill-fitting’ capital regime
Large proprietary trading firms complain they are subject to hand-me-down rules originally designed for banks
Revealed: the three EU banks applying for IMA approval
BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and Intesa Sanpaolo ask ECB to use internal models for FRTB
FCA presses UK non-banks to put their affairs in order
Greater scrutiny of wind-down plans by regulator could alter capital and liquidity requirements
Industry calls for major rethink of Basel III rules
Isda AGM: Divergence on implementation suggests rules could be flawed, bankers say
Saudi Arabia poised to become clean netting jurisdiction
Isda AGM: Netting regulation awaiting final approvals from regulators
Japanese megabanks shun internal models as FRTB bites
Isda AGM: All in-scope banks opt for standardised approach to market risk; Nomura eyes IMA in 2025
CFTC chair backs easing of G-Sib surcharge in Basel endgame
Isda AGM: Fed’s proposed surcharge changes could hike client clearing cost by 80%
Most read
- Industry urges focus on initial margin instead of intraday VM
- For a growing number of banks, synthetics are the real deal
- Did Fed’s stress capital buffer blunt CCAR?