IAS 39 still unacceptable, says European official
Frits Bolkestein, European commissioner for the internal market, taxation and customs union, said last week that standards for the treatment of derivatives are still not suitable for adoption, despite recent concessions by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), Risknews, sister publication, FX Week , reports.
Financial instruments standards IAS 32 and 39 are due for adoption by all listed EU companies in 2005, but the commission fears they will cause excess volatility in financial statements, which will destabilise stock markets.
The IASB has been under pressure from politicians and companies to change the treatment of derivatives. Revisions were published last month in response to this, but these have not allayed concerns. The revisions brought the International Accounting Standards closer to the equivalent standard under US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), but the IASB has not adopted the US version’s exception for the internal netting of hedges. Corporate treasuries previously said this exception would remove a significant amount of potential volatility in accounts.
The IASB has confirmed that it is still considering the issue of macro hedging - where a whole portfolio of different instruments is hedged on a net basis - and discussed the issue further at its board meeting last week.
All International Standards are due for final publication in March, but will not be adopted until approved by the European Commission. Bolkestein suggested that a working group might have to reconsider the standards before approval is given.
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
Esma denies need for new competitiveness mandate
MEP wants explicit requirement; Esma official says it’s already covered in existing rulebook
US regulators cut FRTB’s IMA capital hit by 59%, Isda finds
Trade body pushes for further changes to cross-product netting, default risk charge
US FRTB glitch could spit out negative capital charges
Effort to recognise risk diversification between IMA and standardised approach went too far
Euronext, LCH back Esma as exchange super-regulator
National oversight hurts Europe, exchange officials say – but some are not ready to accept a single watchdog
Double, but no trouble? CVA capital hit may lack clout
Industry opinion mixed around Basel III endgame derivatives charge
Amid debanking drama, banks try to say ‘no’, safely
A basic risk management tool – the ability to turn a customer away – has become a political football
Erba myth: will US banks choose new capital measure?
B3E gives US banks a dilemma – adopt expanded risk-based approach, or a new standardised alternative
Illiquid assets pricing still needs expert judgement, say banks
EU regulators want more transparency in valuations, but some asset prices remain elusive