Fair Value Accounting

Fair Value AccountingCreating Financial Stability in anOn level two, prices are observed on similar, rather
Unfair MarketElizabeththan identical, assets and liabilities traded actively.
           Values on level two assets can also be derived from
Following the international financial crisis beginning in latemarket information widely used in determining present
2008, an outcry rang out, largely from the financialvalues on securities, such as interest rates, spreads,
services industry, to rescind or revise the practice ofand yield curves. (CIGNA) Finally, level three assets are
fair value accounting. Declining market values coupledvalued with the least reliable information accepted in
with low trading volumes were creating a cycle ofthe hierarchy of FAS 157. Assets and liabilities not
declining consumer confidence that only intensified theactively traded are valued largely through estimations
severe market conditions. Today, the Financialand assumptions of the exit price of the hypothetical
Accounting Standards Board is attempting to respondtransaction. (Cheng) Although the reliability of
effectively and efficiently to these valid concerns, whileinformation used in valuing assets varies throughout the
establishing regulations that will be beneficial long-term.three levels, the objective of determining the fair
The following is a brief analysis of Statement ofmarket value of an orderly transaction at the date of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 157 (FAS 157) andmeasurement is shared by all.
its effect on financial reporting.Due to fair value accounting’s subjective nature,
Prior to the issuance of FAS 157, instructions onthere are both supporters and opponents of FAS 157.
reporting different items at fair value were scatteredMany financial institutions are already rallying for a
throughout numerous other accountingchange in fair value accounting requirements. As the
pronouncements. Not only did this create confusion forfinancial crisis has proven, valuing certain assets at fair
financial statements providers and auditors alike, butmarket values can be an inaccurate measure of the
also sometimes created inconsistencies in applyingexpected futures benefits of that asset. (Gazzaway)
GAAP. By issuing FAS 157, confusion was dispersed,For example, many financial services firms were
while consistency and comparability were bothforced to significantly write down mortgage-backed
enhanced. (FASB)securities when their markets dried up and short-term
FAS 157 defines fair value as “the price that wouldvalues declined dramatically. However, due to the
be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer liabilitylong-term nature of these assets, many firms will
in an orderly transaction between market participantsrealize benefits greater than the current market values
at the measurement date.” (FASB) The priceindicate when held long-term.
accepted in the hypothetical transaction described inWhen such assets are marked down so drastically,
the definition is the price that would be received by thethose institutions are forced to retain capital to meet
company when selling the asset or transferring therequirements. To do so, they much cut back on their
liability being values. The requirement that assets andlending. (Gazzaway) This example was realized in the
liabilities be measured based on market perspectives,recent financial crisis, and the cycle only exacerbated
and not the individual entity, aims to eliminate bias inthe situation. As is evident, opponents of fair value
valuing a firm’s assets and liabilities. Also, recordingaccounting have a valid and relevant argument.
values as they would be at the measurement date,Of course, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
regardless of market conditions, is in effort to ensurewould not have issued FAS 157 had it only served to
an accurate depiction of the company’s well-beingworsen the financial crisis. In fact, FAS 157 has
as of the report date. (Cheng) All of theseprovided the tremendous advantage of greater
requirements enhance the reliability and relevance oftransparency in financial reporting. This has allowed
the data being presented on the financial statementsinvestors to easily compare companies in similar
when fair values are being employed.economic situation, and there properly allocate their
Information used to derive an asset’s or liability’scapital to top-performing entities. (Gazzaway) The
fair value is ranked on a hierarchy of three levels ofincreased investment in turn allows financial services
reliability. Level one represents the most reliablefirms to increase their lending to individuals and
information employed in valuation. On the first level,businesses, creating an upward trend in expansion,
inputs are observed market prices on identical assetswhich is the exact opposite situation as was described
or liabilities in active markets at the date ofby the opposition. Clearly, there are valid arguments
measurement, or the report date. With transactionsboth for and against fair value accounting. The
occurring as frequent as at least once a week, quotedquestion remains, then, what lies in the future for
prices provide the greatest reliability in determining fairfinancial accounting.
value. (Cheng)