Fitch’s corporate derivatives usestudy finds lack of transparency
Fitch Ratings’ recent study of hedgeaccounting and disclosure amongcorporates has revealed a somewhatsurprising lack of public disclosure of derivativesuse. The study focused mainlyon US corporates that have been reportingunder FAS 133 – the accounting rulethat should have improved the transparencyof derivatives use. And becauseof this lack of transparency, Fitch is concernedabout potential reporting and restatementrisk caused by difficultiesassociated with hedge accounting.
“The surprising thing to us was thateven though these companies had beenreporting under FAS 133 there really isn’tenough public disclosure to serve as abasis for decent credit analysis,” saysBridget Gandy, managing director at Fitchin London and co-author of the report.“To see that there really isn’t that muchuseful reporting from corporates usingFAS 133 is quite surprising.”
Fitch compared what
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
‘European SEC’ no silver bullet for growth
EU policymakers hope a single, centralised supervisor will help rev up Europe’s economy but critics are mustering
Permanent FRTB reforms seen as vital for IMA adoption
Temporary relief granted in June has done little to encourage internal model use in Europe
How to ensure the next Credit Suisse or SVB fails ‘well’
Regulators are planning changes to resolution rules after criticism that living wills were ignored in previous bank collapses
Asian firms waiting on exemptions from UST clearing mandate
Hoping for relief on extraterritoriality, 51% of Apac firms have yet to start compliance programmes
Already under FRTB, some banks hope for modelling reprieve
Risk Live: BMO and UBS opted for SA, but believe regulators could still opt to follow softer US rules
Regulators better prepared for next Credit Suisse, says SRB head
FSB strengthening guidance on international co-operation, but EU needs more mutual support
From Pillar to Pillar… to post: where now for op risk in Europe?
Experts think enhanced Pillar 2 charge informed by Dora would be more useful than a blunt Pillar 1
PRA struggles to follow Fed’s FRTB modelling moves
Market risk experts say minor differences in US rules add up to more incentives for IMA adoption