Subscribe: RSS Feed | Twitter | Facebook | Email
Home | Contact Us

Posts Tagged ‘off balance sheet vehicles’

UPDATE: FASB 166 and 167

Posted by Larry Doyle on December 4th, 2009 11:27 AM |

Is Wall Street getting a reprieve from the capital constraints that would be effected by the implementation of FASB 166 and 167? I first broached this topic a month ago in writing, “12th Street Capital Reviews FASB 166 and 167 and Tells Us Why Wall Street Will Need More Capital”:

In brief, FASB 166 and 167 will require hundreds of billions in assets to be moved from off-balance sheet vehicles onto the balance sheets of the financial institutions. As those assets, which are embedded in an array of securitization transactions, come on balance sheet, the banks and non-banks alike will have to raise more capital to support the growth in their balance sheets. Best guesstimate is that the institutions will need to raise capital in the tens of billions.

12th Street Capital provides us updated developments on this very important topic with the following release: (more…)

12th Street Capital Reviews FASB 166 and 167 and Tells Us Why Wall Street Will Need More Capital

Posted by Larry Doyle on November 4th, 2009 12:00 PM |

Money makes the world go round. Right now the world is not going around all that well because there is neither sufficient capital nor sufficient demand for capital from a global standpoint. That said, profits and bonuses are back on Wall Street so they must have sufficient capital, right? Not so fast.

While our wizards in Washington and on Wall Street are projecting an image of ‘come on in, the water’s fine,’ a crowd based in Norwalk, Connecticut has plans that hold major implications for our markets and economy. What crowd is this? The Financial Accounting Standards Board, otherwise known as FASB.

Recall that last spring Congress, supported by a heavy influence from Wall Street, rammed through a relaxation of the FASB’s accounting rule requiring fair value mark-to-market accounting. Regardless of what you think of that  legislation, I think there is no doubt that the change allowed banks to mismark a wide array of assets and forestall losses.  The need for the accounting rule change could be and will be debated ad nauseum. I believe the powers that be at FASB felt emasculated in the process.

Fast forward and let’s review the next major piece of accounting legislation emanating from FASB. That being FASB 166 and 167.  I will admit I am no accountant, but I understand enough about the markets and accounting to know that the implementation of these rules, scheduled to go into effect in January of 2010 (in November 2009 for certain institutions depending on their fiscal calendar), will likely have a major impact on a wide array of financial institutions. (more…)






Recent Posts


ECONOMIC ALL-STARS


Archives