BoA mis-states derivatives positions by $345 million
Bank of America has contravened Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rules regarding its treatment of derivatives instruments and will recalculate all of its financial statements since 2002.
Bank of America could now face legal action or a fine from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the US financial regulator. But the bank is warning that uncertainties in the FASB 133 rules, which were introduced back in 1999, could cause further problems. It said 40 companies this year have been forced to restate their financial reports following rule clarifications, but the SEC declined to comment on the figure.
“This is not an isolated incident,” a spokesman for the bank told RiskNews. “There was general consensus out there that there was difficulty in understanding the rules,” he added. However, dealers such as Bank of America regularly provide guidance on rules regarding derivatives hedging rules to their own clients.
“The interpretations of how to apply [FAS 133] continue to evolve,” said Alvaro de Molina, the bank’s chief financial officer. “In light of recent interpretations, we reviewed our accounting treatment of certain hedge transactions and determined a restatement would assure that our financial statements adhere to the most recent guidance for accounting treatment of hedge transactions under [FAS 133].”
The SEC would not rule in or out any possible action against Bank of America.
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
Basel III endgame – a timeline
A review of Risk.net’s coverage of the US implementation saga
Leaked EU plans offer extra temporary relief for FRTB models
Risk factors would need only two observations to be modellable. Do changes foreshadow US Basel III?
Iosco chief talks cyber, AI and clearing
Buenaventura discusses Iosco’s role in aiding market resilience and cross-border co-operation
US regulators bid to save FRTB IMA, but it’s no small task
Even if industry wish-list is granted, a 2028 start date might be too soon for model adoption
Hopes rise for cross-product netting under SA-CCR
Banks want rule change in Basel III endgame to lower capital costs of clearing UST repos
Long way round: EU banks lament credit spread saga
EBA ditches some of banks’ preferred qualitative reasonings – and shortcuts – for CSRBB exclusion
Iosco chief sees no need for CCPs to hold more capital
CCPs have shown resilience in volatile times without extra skin-in-the-game, says Buenaventura
Banks urge EBA to delay risk benchmarking amid Iran conflict
Risk managers say hypothetical portfolio exercise clashes with severe market turbulence