IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibf/acttax/v15y2023i1p83-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Current Expected Credit Loss Accounting Reflect A Best Estimate? Time Series Evidence From Credit Loss Reporting

Author

Listed:
  • Arianna Spina Pinello
  • Ernest Lee Puschaver

Abstract

The current expected credit losses (CECL) accounting model became effective January 1, 2020. This paper examines the relationship between actual loan losses, allowances for credit losses (ACLs), and provisions for credit losses (PCLs) reported by three of the largest U.S. banks for the three years pre-CECL-adoption and the three years post-CECL-adoption. Data was obtained from the banks’ filings with the Securities & Exchange Commission on Forms 10-K and 10-Q, including disclosure commentaries by management, as well as earnings releases and transcripts from earnings conference calls with analysts. Our results indicate that CECL has generated faster and greater responses to the macroeconomic environment. However, there has also arisen greater complexity and apparent instances of management control over the estimatingprocess through model input assumptions and the weighting of various forecast scenarios, such that at times, the ACL levels being established appear inconsistent with the related management disclosures about economic outlook. Further, by utilizing analytics with different scenarios and assigning variable weightingof importance, a resulting ACL may not represent management’s “best estimate†but instead may reflect “contingency†considerations for relatively improbable adverse economic developments.

Suggested Citation

  • Arianna Spina Pinello & Ernest Lee Puschaver, 2023. "Does Current Expected Credit Loss Accounting Reflect A Best Estimate? Time Series Evidence From Credit Loss Reporting," Accounting & Taxation, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 15(1), pages 83-103.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibf:acttax:v:15:y:2023:i:1:p:83-103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.theibfr2.com/RePEc/ibf/acttax/at-v15n1-2023/AT-V15N1-2023-5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Jacobs, 2019. "An Analysis of the Impact of Modeling Assumptions in the Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL) Framework on the Provisioning for Credit Loss," Journal of Risk & Control, Risk Market Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 65-112.
    2. Germán López‐Espinosa & Gaizka Ormazabal & Yuki Sakasai, 2021. "Switching from Incurred to Expected Loan Loss Provisioning: Early Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 757-804, June.
    3. Arianna Pinello & Lee Puschaver & Ara Volkan, 2020. "The Relationship Between Critical Accounting Estimates And Critical Audit Matters," Accounting & Taxation, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 12(1), pages 23-33.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ghosh, Saibal, 2022. "Elections and provisioning behavior: Assessing the Indian evidence," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 46(1).
    2. Li, Valerie & Luo, Yan, 2023. "Costs and benefits of auditors' disclosure of critical audit matters: Initial evidence from the United States," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    3. Bischof, Jannis & Haselmann, Rainer & Kohl, Frederik & Schlueter, Oliver, 2022. "Limitations of implementing an expected credit loss model," LawFin Working Paper Series 48, Goethe University, Center for Advanced Studies on the Foundations of Law and Finance (LawFin).
    4. Tristan Brouwer & Job Huttenhuis & Ralph ter Hoeven, 2021. "Empirical results for expected credit losses of G-SIBs during COVID-19. The proof of the pudding is in the eating," Maandblad Voor Accountancy en Bedrijfseconomie Articles, Maandblad Voor Accountancy en Bedrijfseconomie, vol. 95(11-12), pages 381-396, December.
    5. Salazar, Yadira & Merello, Paloma & Zorio-Grima, Ana, 2023. "IFRS 9, banking risk and COVID-19: Evidence from Europe," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    6. Cascino, Stefano & Daske, Holger & Defond, Mark & Florou, Annita & Gassen, Joachim & Hung, Mingyi, 2023. "Reflections on the 20-year anniversary of worldwide IFRS adoption," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120205, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Lucas Mahieux & Haresh Sapra & Gaoqing Zhang, 2023. "CECL: Timely Loan Loss Provisioning and Bank Regulation," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 3-46, March.
    8. Sehwa Kim & Seil Kim & Anya V. Kleymenova & Rongchen Li, 2023. "Current Expected Credit Losses (CECL) Standard and Banks' Information Production," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2023-063, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    9. Douw Gerbrand Breed & Jacques Hurter & Mercy Marimo & Matheba Raletjene & Helgard Raubenheimer & Vibhu Tomar & Tanja Verster, 2023. "A Forward-Looking IFRS 9 Methodology, Focussing on the Incorporation of Macroeconomic and Macroprudential Information into Expected Credit Loss Calculation," Risks, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Ren, Meixu & Ke, Konglin & Yu, Xin & Zhao, Jinxuan, 2023. "Local governments' economic growth target pressure and bank loan loss provision: Evidence from China," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-14.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    CECL; Credit Losses; PCL; ACL; Provision for Credit Losses; Allowance for Credit Losses;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibf:acttax:v:15:y:2023:i:1:p:83-103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Mercedes Jalbert (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.