Search results

Auditors nowadays must be aggressive and involved in risk assessment and analysis. This paper identifies, analyzes, and recommends a solution to a current problem in accounting for foreign‐currency hedges. This is accomplished by an examination of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 133, Accounting for Derivatives Instruments and Hedging Activities, as issued in June 1998. Multi‐currency accounting is recommended as an alternative to functional‐currency accounting. The information generated by the multi‐currency versus the functional currency (as advocated in the SFAS 133) accounting methods for using options as hedging instruments is illustrated. Multi‐currency accounting excels in its transparency. It more clearly provides information on the respective exposure positions of the hedged items and the hedging instruments as well as the notional amounts. Auditors’ risk assessment and analysis can now be effectively performed under this system.

Problems in accounting for the translation of foreign currencies are as old as money itself, as far back as the ancient Greeks. In the USA these problems have been of primary concern in the twentieth century. Interest in accounting for foreign currency translation seems to have varied directly with the instability of exchange. Of particular note is the interest created by the unsettling economic effects of the First World War, Second World War and the Vietnam War. The standard setting bodies of the accounting profession, including the Committee on Accounting Procedures of the 1930s, the Accounting Principles Board which followed, and particularly the current Financial Accounting Standards Board, have devoted significant efforts to the development of accounting principles in this area, culminating in the present FASB Statement No. 52.

The euro’s introduction initially confronts a firm with a currency changeover problem affecting its accounting and reporting systems. The company’s controller can solve this initial problem by means of an electronic data processing project. For the project’s duration, it is crucial to maintain reporting transparency by providing for successive transition of accounting subsystems from the national currency to the euro. Yet, with barely six months remaining until national currencies cease to be legal tender, few firms have prepared their accounting systems for conversion to the euro. Moreover, switching currencies constitutes just a small part of a far larger, complex set of related problems. That is because the common currency’s introduction also influences many business parameters of differing importance to management. Generalized checklists help managers little in dealing with the specific impacts such influences may have on an enterprise. Accordingly, the controller must identify the relative importance and sequence of changes necessary in each of the firm’s functional areas. The euro’s introduction furthermore represents an opportunity for management to modernize the company’s IT structures and to start using both the Internet and data warehouses.

Financial reporting standards on foreign currency translation in many countries such as New Zealand, US, Australia, and Canada and the international standard issued by the International Accounting Standards Committee require the classification of foreign operations for translation purposes into two mutually exclusive types: integrated or independent. This classification determines the translation method. In judging whether a foreign operation is either integrated or independent, the accounting standard requires the evaluation of five qualitative factors. The standard neither describes the judgement process nor identifies the relative importance of the determining factors. It has been asserted that this lack of clarity may yield dissimilar results for firms whose circumstances are similar and consequently may reduce the comparability of financial statements across firms. Using a repeated measures design, this paper examines the judgement of preparers of financial statements (financial controllers) in determining the designation of foreign operations for translation purposes. The results indicate that the relative importance of the determining factors is about equal. No support is found for the assertion that the use of qualitative factors in accounting standards results in dissimilar judgements (lack of consensus) across respondents. Further, the results show that the subjects demonstrated consistency and self‐insight in their judgements. The results also indicate that the judgements of respondents are not biased toward either classification of foreign operation. This suggests that the observed bias may be motivated by economic factors rather than the outcome of using the qualitative cues in the accounting standard. When the respondents were debriefed, several of them identified ‘managerial independence’ as another determining factor that has not been included in the standard.

The controversy between the “accounting” (“translation” or “balance‐sheet”) and the “economic” (“cash‐flow”) approaches to exchange‐risk is examined. The latter approach is advocated and a conceptual frame‐work for the cash‐flow analysis is suggested. Finally it is argued that, in the long run, the cash‐flow effects of exchange rate fluctuations are offset by countervailing movements in inflation and interest rates. Exchange‐risk is therefore a short run phenomenon, stemming from unexpected changes in exchange rates.

This article reports the results of tests used to detect shifts in the systematic risk of multinational corporations concurrent with regulations mandating new financial reporting requirements for foreign currency translations. Results indicate significant beta shifts, suggesting that management undertook specific suboptimal actions to counteract the effects of the regulations and that those actions were responded to by the marketplace in the form of a reassessment of systematic risk. It is further indicated that the market reaction varies according to both the location and magnitude of firms' foreign investments.

This study uses an equity valuation model to investigate the extent to which SFAS No. 52 unrealized foreign currency translation gains and losses are reflected in levels of equity security prices. Equity security price is used as the dependent variable in our selected model. Book value of equity (adjusted for the cumulative translation gain or loss), earnings, and cumulative translation gains and losses are used as independent variables. Our results indicate that, generally, translation gains and losses are valued, but losses have a greater impact than gains and the value seems to change over time in setting the levels of equity share prices of USbased MNCs. On a pooled basis, the results are clearly statistically significant, although the statistical significance of the results appears to vary with the annual time period examined. Our results are consistent with the SFAS No. 52 intention that these gains and losses be treated as unrealized as the net exposure is considered long‐term in nature for foreign currency functional currency subsidiaries. Our results appear consistent with extant literature suggesting that unrealized foreign currency translation gains and losses are directly valued ‐ although not dollar for dollar ‐ in a manner similar to earnings (i.e., unrealized gains are associated with positive equity returns and unrealized losses are associated with negative equity returns).

This paper contends that, contrary to conventional wisdom, it may be rational to manage translation exposure. Accounting procedures for the translation of foreign currency accounts influence the reported income of a multi‐national firm. With non‐zero agency costs, reported income impacts real costs. In such cases, therefore, it may be rational to hedge translation exposure. Empirical evidence of agency costs and the managerial tendency to report higher levels of translated income, based on the early adoption of Financial Accounting Standard No. 52, is presented.

Accounting for foreign currency hedges has become a fiercely complicated procedure. At a time when financial institutions are having to alter disclosure methods, the authors provide a practical guide to dealing with each type of hedging procedure.

This study examines the perceptions of 41 corporate chief accountants from Bahrain on the issues relating to the relative importance of international accounting topics in Bahrain. The study indicates a significant interest of the respondents in internationalizing the accounting curriculum. The topics which received importance rating of over 80% were: foreign investment and decision making, international accounting standards, financial reporting and disclosure, foreign currency transactions and translation, management information system (MIS) for multinational enterprises (MNEs), and consolidations. Results were also compared to a recent study from United States (US) and significant differences were found to exist in respect of several topics. The reasons for the major differences in the perceptions are explained in this paper, some of which may be attributed to cultural as well as environmental differences. The study also found that there is a strong support for adoption of the International Accounting Standards (IASs) because international markets are becoming increasingly important and there exists major differences in accounting principles among the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries themselves. Furthermore, the study also suggests that in view of the similarity in social, economic, and business practices in GCC countries, the highly ranked accounting topics reported in this study should perhaps be incorporated by the accounting departments of universities operating in the GCC region. This will facilitate the process of harmonization of the accounting curriculum in this region.