IASB relaxes stance on 'macro-hedging'
The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) today relaxed its stance on ‘macro-hedging’ with its latest proposal to improve derivatives accounting.
The proposal requires that the company split the macro portfolio into time periods based on expected re-pricing dates and designate assets or liabilities against them as hedged items. All the assets from which the hedged amount is drawn must be items whose fair value changes in response to the risk being hedged and that could have qualified for fair-value hedging under IAS 39 if hedged individually.
The IASB said the need for accounting guidance was driven by the increasingly prevalent use of financial instruments for both risk management and other operating purposes. The release of the exposure draft is part of a continuing process to ease the implementation of IAS 39, said the IASB.
“A standard on financial instruments is an essential element of any complete set of accounting standards,” commented David Tweedie, IASB chairman. “Implementing IAS 39 certainly poses challenges, but this reflects the fact that derivatives today are complex instruments, and IAS 39 bridges the world of traditional cost accounting and a model that relies more on market values.”
The IASB held a number of roundtable discussions in March with representatives of financial institutions to find a way to accommodate hedge accounting. “While the discussions did not produce complete agreement on the measurement of hedge ineffectiveness and deposit liabilities, the IASB’s approach set out in the exposure draft would mark an important advance by permitting macro hedging,” said the IASB.
All comments on the exposure draft must be with the IASB by November 14.
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.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
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. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
EU states take the slow road to new cross-border services ban
Late national transposition hampers foreign banks’ decisions on location of affected activities
Don’t mention the rules: the fight against prediction market abuse
For the CFTC to regulate new venues effectively, it must first redefine insider trading
Can the US FRTB revamp make the IMA great again?
Banks are finally presented with a viable internal models framework under Basel III’s market risk rules
UK rethinking tougher capital rules for US bank subsidiaries
US endgame draft would trigger UK Basel III trap floor for foreign banks, but PRA is reviewing
EBA proposes drastic overhaul to supervisory data reporting
Revamp will cut back the number of datapoints and integrate overlapping reports
CFTC wants to regulate prediction markets. Is it up to the task?
Former officials echo state gambling authorities’ concerns over agency’s ability to police betting risks
EBA seeks to allay Simm divergence concerns
EU validator pledges to co-ordinate with global regulators, but retains ability to act alone “if needed”
FRTB models find salvation in US Basel III proposal
Changes to P&L attribution test and NMRFs make IMA viable for US banks, risk managers say