Posted on 04/02/2009 2:33:26 PM PDT by Shermy
WASHINGTON - The Financial Accounting Standards Board on Thursday voted unanimously to approve a measure giving companies flexibility in valuing illiquid mortgage assets that may have long-term value and strong cash flow. The new guidance, which is expected to boost bank operating profits when they report first-quarter results later this month, alters so-called mark-to-market rules, which require banks and other corporations to assign a value to an asset, such as mortgage securities, based on the current market price for the security. Banks have complained they can't sell certain assets because of a lack of a market, however they believe the assets are not distressed. The measure allows corporations to use "significant judgment" when valuing these securities-in other words, they can estimate the value based on cash flows on their balance sheets rather than using the value the asset would receive if sold immediately.
Well, the credit freeze is exactly due to what is proposed as relief for holders of unmarketable assets now, that is, assets of suspect value and marketability. Nothing has changed. Opacity is preserved and ‘legitimized’.
This should have been done from the start. Newt Gingrich and Steve Forbes kept saying it on Fox and Rush just said today that this is what made the stock market go up! (not to mention that Obama is out of the country! lol!)
It is amazing to me that the MSM doesn’t understand this and is instead saying it is Barack’s trip to the G20 and England that cause this.
This is part of what had to happen. The market responded.
Let’s just hope the idiots in charge pay attention and keep it up.
Ha...overvaluing assets to dupe investors..again.
Bigger crash next time.
I take some humor at those “conservatives” who write how this freeeeeedom helps the “free market”, which to them means not an honest market with honest values, but virtual valuations made not by the market, but by the very people in the world with the biggest conflict to overprice them.
>>significant judgment” when valuing these securities-in other words, they can estimate the value based on cash flows on their balance sheets rather than using the value the asset would receive if sold immediately.
SWEET.
Now, when that Bush Holdover, Geithner bails out the banks again, they can value their assets at any price they like just in time to be sold to the goobers.
I hadn’t thought about that. But you hit it.
Wall STreet Journal article I read said Geithner’s plan would be less effective without mark to market because their would be less incentive to sell their toxic assets in a pseudo-market, which would have some approximation of something like real value. But why not change the rules! Geithner can now say the government will buy the derivatives at what ever price the seller says they are worth!
Anyway, "mark to market" accounting rules have no effect on the actual price when buying or selling an asset. It's only a bookkeeping requirement.
Here's his problem:
What is this going to do to his public/private partnerships to purchase "toxic assets"? Did the price of these assets just go up? Is there a reason for a bank to divest itself of these assets?
It will be interesting to see what the egghead economists think.
>>”toxic assets”? Did the price of these assets just go up? Is there a reason for a bank to divest itself of these assets
My amateur’s opinion.
The price just went up to whatever the holding bank wants it to be.
Yes, if the bank divests, the USG pays them a nice price.
“not an honest market with honest values, but virtual valuations made not by the market”
Sorry, but strict “mark to market” rules, minus any REALITY of the current ongoing revenue stream being generated by the assets underlying some derivatives is what is dishonest; enforced by rules dishonesty.
That stupid strict rule tells you that even though you have neither a plan or a need to sell today a derivative type of investment you hold, and simply because current market jitters make the volume and assurance of potential buyers scarce, you must value that derivative at a value less than zero, regardless of the fact that the revenue alone from the assets - mortgages - underlying that derivative are far greater than zero by many orders of magnitude.
“mark to market” might be pertinent, for some investments, or for used cars on the Internet, but not for a lot of derivatives.
On many derivatives, a value that is no greater-than general “mark-to-market” rules and yet no less than ongoing underlying revenue would be a fair book value.
Exactly!
The panacea of mark-to-fantasy will fix it and make it all better. Bank profits will be soaring again. Recession OVER! I’m sure the buying public will go on a massive shopping spree now. GM stock goes to $300. /sarc
Mark-to-Fantasy = housing has bottomed. No more foreclosures. Housing will double again in the next few years. Businesses are hiring! Mark-to-Fantasy will kiss it and make it all better! /sarc
Then by ECO 101, they are worth NOTHING! So they should be valued at nothing, zero, nada, zip, goose egg!
Valuing worthless "assets" at billions of dollars is what caused this problem in the first place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.