Statement 133: Not Perfect, but a Step in the Right Direction

Statement 133 represents progress toward achieving the goals of GAAP. To the extent it requires companies to mark their derivatives to market, balance sheets will give investors a clearer, more complete picture of a company's assets and liabilities. But if the fair value accounting prescribed by Statement 133 has provided clarity for investors about corporate derivatives positions, it has also forced some companies—those unable or unwilling to qualify for hedge accounting—to report more volatile earnings, causing the accounting rule to come under heavy criticism. As the author argues, however, such criticism is based on the misperception that the objective of GAAP income statements is to provide a “normalized” measure of financial performance—a single number that can be discounted or capitalized by analysts to arrive at a company's value. In fact, it is mainly the job of the analysts themselves, not accountants, to determine which elements of a company's income statement are recurring and central to the business. What's more, the author argues that the FASB went too far when it allowed hedge accounting for forecasted transactions. Rather than expanding the use of hedge accounting, the FASB should promulgate a comprehensive fair value standard, one that aims to mark all corporate assets and liabilities to market—which would eliminate the need for hedge accounting or any of its associated complexity, and compensate for 133's dearth of disclosures.