Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Public Lands Management
Is the American Consumer Becoming More Prudent?
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Are the "Generals" Remembering History or Fighting the Last War?
Friday, April 3, 2009
Changes in Mark-to-Market
The FASB today approved two staff positions intended to provide additional
guidance regarding mark-to-market accounting rules. The results of both
positions will be to reduce writedowns of financial assets.
The first provides interpretation of the definition of fair value when no market exists
for an asset. The position defines criteria which allow assets to be
marked-to-model when the market is inactive instead of valuing assets at
fire-sale prices.
The second allows differentiation between asset impairments
due to credit loss and impairments due to other market factors. Credit
losses would still require a write-down which would hit earnings.
Market-related losses would, however, bypass the income statement and be
recorded in other comprehensive income.
Lawmakers pressured Robert Herz, FASB Chairman to act quickly when testifying before Congress mid-March. With only a fifteen day comment period, these changes
were adopted in time to be reflected in financial institutions’ first quarter
results.
Supporters argue that the writedowns under mark-to-market rules are
procyclical, causing earnings decreases and damaging capital ratios.
Investors argue that under the change, financial statements lack
transparency. While the “toxic assets” remain the same, their value may be
reported differently.
This move calls into question the independence of the FASB. Only three months ago the SEC decided mark-to-market standards had not contributed to the economic crisis and should not be suspended. The FASB has sacrificed clarity to the investor to pander to lawmakers and financial institutions. Former SEC Chairman,
Christopher Cox put it this way, "Accounting standards aren't just another
financial rudder to be pulled when the economic ship drifts in the wrong
direction. Instead they are the rivets in the hull, and you risk the integrity
of the entire economy by removing them."
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Industrial Policy: Some Current Examples
The auto industry provides an example. Supposedly, General Motors and Chrysler are on short leashes to reorganize in a way acceptable to the government. The President has stated that he wants to see the American auto industry become a leader in building the next generation of clean transportation. Using government funds to push GM in that direction is an example of industrial policy. Do government officials have a better idea than people who have worked in the industry for years as to what technology will ultimately prove reliable, affordable and clean?
The auto industry, along with AIG, provide illustrations of unintended consequences. General Motors and AIG have competitors, and some of these competitors are not receiving funds from the government. In particular, Ford has not asked for government money. Yet, the government is giving funds to General Motors that may enable them to reorganize in a swifter fashion than would take place under Chapter 11, and may tip the competitive balance toward GM and against Ford. Competitors of AIG have said that AIG has used some of the money received to offer better rates on some product lines, tipping the competitive balance of power in favor of AIG.
It may be that GM and AIG are "too big to fail" and for the sake of the nation as a whole, the bailouts are necessary. I am not convinced, but it may be the case. Yet, the government actions and financial support have the potential of benefitting the firms who were losing the competitive battle in the marketplace and harming firms that were operating more efficiently and competitively. Government support alters the competitive balance.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Top Majors at Harvard University
Since I speak some German and enjoy travelling to Germany, it is unfortunate that Germanic Languages and Literature is in the bottom ten majors at Harvard.