1、 外文翻译 原文 Impairment of Assets or Impairment of Financial Information? Material Source: http:/digitalcommons.bryant.edu Author:Emily Giannini ABSTRACT This paper begins with overviews of the Statements of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 144 and No. 142 as they pertain to impairments. Subseq
2、uent to the overviews, a conceptual evaluation considers how the impairment standards are related to various components of the conceptual framework, including reliability, relevance, and various components within and related to these two characteristics. Incorporated into the discussion is SFAS No.
3、157 and current fair value measurements in accounting. Controversies surrounding SFAS No. 144 and No. 142 are discussed and companies that have incurred impairment losses or conduct impairment testing on a regular basis are presented. All components of this paper are directed to an analysis of the c
4、osts and benefits of impairment testing and the possible result of the trade-off. INTRODUCTION As stated in the Financial Accounting Standards Boards (FASB) Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts (SFAC) No. 1 (1978) , a primary objective of financial reporting is to, “ provide information that i
5、s useful to present and potential investors and creditors and other users in making rational investment, credit and similar decisionsin assessing the amounts, timing, and uncertainty of prospective cash receipts” Further, “financial reporting should provid e information about the economic resources
6、of an enterprise, the claims to those resourcesand the effects of transactions, events, and circumstances that change its resources and claims to those resources.” (FASB 1978, Page 5). When long-lived assets are impaired (the fair value of the asset is less than book value), the resources of a compa
7、ny have changed in value. Thus, it is considered important to inform external users, such as creditors and investors, of the change in financial information and to provide them with relevant information. As a result, asset write-downs may provide useful information as to an assets value, decline in
8、value, and the significance of the decline in regards to how it may affect users of the financial information. If write-downs are important because they show assets at fair value, however, what about write-ups? If assets have increased in value might this be just as important to external users as a
9、decrease in value? While the principle of conservatism suggests that a write-up not be recorded, the value of writing assets down but not up may be more costly and detrimental to decision making than it is beneficial. Further, several other controversial issues regarding impairment losses support th
10、e need for better guidance and, perhaps, a complete move to or away from fair value reporting. This paper will address some of these controversial issues, along with the real impact impairment testing and losses have had on companies. In all, the ultimate question to consider is do the benefits of i
11、mpairment testing truly outweigh the costs? The impairment and write-down of long-lived assets and goodwill is an ongoing topic that has been considered, and modified in recent years. In June, 2001, Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, was
12、 released. The statement addressed how intangible assets acquired individually or with a group of assets, should be accounted for initially in financial statements. The statement also changed the approach to how goodwill and some other intangible assets are accounted for following their initial reco
13、gnition. Under previous guidelines, goodwill was amortized, causing the reported book value to decrease in a consistent manner over time. With the release of SFAS No. 142, however, goodwill could no longer be amortized. The mandated change from amortization to impairment testing was primarily due to
14、 the fact that financial statement users indicated that goodwill amortization was not useful in analyzing investments. As intangible assets are an increasingly important economic resource for many enterprises, analysts and users of financial statements have expressed the need for better information
15、about intangibles. Thus, SFAS No. 142 modified previous accounting guidelines to address the need for better and more useful information. Two months after SFAS No. 142, Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144 (2001), Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, was rel
16、eased. This statement superseded FASB Statement No. 121 (1995) but retained the primary focus of SFAS No. 121. As indicated in both SFAS No. 121 and No. 144, an impairment loss is only recognized if the carrying amount of a long-lived asset is not recoverable from its undiscounted future cash flows.
17、 The impairment loss and write-down is then measured as the difference between an assets carrying amount and fair value. Although the statements have a different primary focus, both act as guidelines in determining the frequency and circumstances of impairment testing, the level to test for impairme
18、nt, the steps involved in the test, and the measures in determining and disclosing a write-down. The statements were created to improve financial reporting and to make the impairment of long-lived assets a better fit with the conceptual framework. Thus, SFAC No. 2, Qualitative Characteristics of Acc
19、ounting Information, can be used to evaluate SFAS No. 142 and No. 144. The first part of this paper will provide an overview of SFAS No. 144 and 142 as they apply to the impairment of long-lived assets, goodwill, and other intangible assets. Following the overview, a conceptual evaluation will consi
20、der impairments as they relate to the conceptual framework of accounting and fair value measurement. In the final section, a practical application of write-downs will be presented with real businesses that have tested for or recorded impairment charges due to a variety of circumstances. OVERVIEW OF
21、STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NO. 144 Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 144 classifies long-lived assets into three categories: (1) assets to be held and used, (2) assets to be disposed of other than by sale, and (3) assets to be disposed of by sale. As the first p
22、art of this section will focus on the impairment process for long-lived assets, the most applicable category is long-lived assets to be held and used. First, indicators to test for impairment will be discussed. The next part will consider the level at which testing is performed. Following these part
23、s are discussions on measurement, allocation, and disclosure of an impairment loss. Through consideration and examination of these components, along with an overview of SFAS No. 142, the impairment process can be better understood and applied to the conceptual framework of accounting. Indicators for
24、 Impairment Testing For long-lived assets to be held and used, impairment is defined as the condition that exists when the carrying amount of a long-lived asset or asset group exceeds its fair value (FASB 2001b, Paragraph 7). While an impairment test is necessary when it is probable for any reason t
25、hat the carrying amount may exceed fair value, certain circumstances or indicators suggest that carrying amount may not be recoverable. Listed in SFAS No. 144, Paragraph 8 (FASB 2001b) are the following indicators that an asset or asset group may be impaired: a. A significant decrease in the market
26、price of a long-lived asset (asset group), b. A significant adverse change in the extent or manner in which a long-lived asset (asset group) is being used or in its physical condition, c. A significant adverse change in legal factors or in the business climate that could affect the value of a long-l
27、ived asset (asset group), including an adverse action or assessment by a regulator, d. An accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount originally expected for the acquisition or construction of a long-lived asset (asset group), e. A current-period operating or cash flow loss combined
28、with a history of operating or cash flow losses or a projection or forecast that demonstrates continuing losses associated with the use of a long-lived asset (asset group), or f. A current expectation that, more likely than not, a long-lived asset (asset group) will be sold or otherwise disposed of
29、significantly before the end of its previously estimated useful life. Any of the above circumstances suggest that the asset (asset group) may not be at the value it was once identified at, and the company may have an impairment loss. Moreover, these indicators require that an asset or asset group be
30、 tested for recoverability. According to Reinstein and Lander (2004, 401), these provisions suggest that there is a significant chance (greater than 50% probability) a company will dispose of the asset before the end of its previously estimated remaining useful life. Level of Testing Prior to testin
31、g an asset or asset group for impairment, the lowest level at which cash flows can be measured must be determined. As discussed in Paragraph 10 of SFAS No. 144 (FASB 2001b), assets are first grouped by identifiable cash flows that are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets and liabili
32、ties. Impairment testing is then completed at this level. In estimating future cash flows, the useful life must be determined for the asset or asset group. According to Paragraph 18 of SFAS No. 144 (FASB 2001b), this remaining useful life of an asset group is based on the remaining useful life of th
33、e primary asset of the group. The primary asset is defined as the tangible asset being depreciated or intangible asset being amortized that is the most significant component asset from which the asset group derives its cash-flow-generating capacity. If the primary asset is not the asset of the group
34、 with the longest remaining. 译文 是资产减值还是会计信息失真 资料来源： http:/digitalcommons.bryant.edu 作者： Emily Giannini 1 摘要 本文首先 以综述方式 从财务会计准则 （ SFAS） 的第 144 条和 142 条对于减值的规定入手进行 陈述 ， 以概述 方式阐述 后一个概 念性的评价准则的减值 ， 考虑减值准则如何与各个组件构建成一个概念框架 ， 包括可靠性 、 相关性及与这两个特性有关的其他组件 。 然后讨论的是 SFAS 第 157 条和当前会计方面的公允价值模式 ， 同时也对 SFAS 第 144 条
35、和 142 条进行了讨论 ， 并 列举了一些公司减值损失的案例和进行定期减值测试的方法 。 本文的所有论述都围绕减值测试的成本与效益 和最终平衡表上可能出现的结果 。 2 论文简介 按照美国财务会计准则委员会 （ FASB） 声明中的财务会计概念 （ SFAC）， 第1 号 （ 1978）， 财务报告一个主要目标是 ， “提供有用的信息给现有 和潜在的投资者、债权人和其他使用者以便其在投资、信贷和和一些类似的决断时作出理性的选择 评估数额、时间和不确定性未来现金收入 ”， 更复杂的包括 “ 财务报告应当提供有关企业的 经济资源 信息和其来源 交易的情况 、 事件和 债务债权人改变的情况 。 ”
36、（ FASB 1978 年 ,第 5 页 ） 。 当长期资产的公允价值被削弱了 （ 小于资产账面价值 ）， 公司的资产在价值上发生了变化 。因此 ， 它是被认为通知外部用户债权人和投资者 的重要信号 ，财务信息 的变化会 提供 给使用者 相关 的 信息 。 因此 ， 资产减值可以提供有用的信息 ， 对资产的价值降低 和对使用者有 影响的资产减值迹象 。 如果 资产减值很重要 ， 那是 因为 资产减值可以明确 资产 的 公允价值 ， 然而 ， 账面价值提高又是如何 呢 ？ 如果资产价值增加那对一个外部使用者来说会不会和资产减值同样重要呢 ？ 根据保守性的原则 ， 资产账面价值的提高不需要改变账面
37、价值 ， 但对于决策者而言 ， 只记减不记增的不利因素和高成本是要大于 这种方法的益处的 。此外 ， 在资产减值损失需要更好的理论指导和是否脱离公允价值报告的问题上还存在争议 。 本文将解决其中的一些有争议的问题 ， 关于减值测试和减值损失对企业真正的影响 。 总之 ， 根本的问题就是要考虑 减值测试 的好处是否大于真 正成本 ？ 长期资产 、商誉 的减值和账面价值在近几年一直在修订 ， 是较为热门的课题 。 在 2001 年 6 月 ,财务会计准则第 142 条商誉和其他无形资产出台 。 该准则强调了单个或一组无形资产在财务报表中应以原始价值记录 。 准则还改进了认可商誉和其他无形资产最初价
38、值的方法和途径 。 在以前的规定中 ， 商誉是可以摊销 的 ， 导致 其账面价值随着时间减少 。 SFAS 第 142 条准则颁布实施收规定商誉 不再能被摊销。 从摊销到资产减值测试的变革主要是因为财务报表使用者指出商誉减值在做投资决策时其影响无足轻重 。 随着 无形资产 成为 越来越重要的经济资源 ， 许多企 业 、 分析师和财务报表的使用者表示需要更多 无形资产的活动的 信息。 为了满足是使用者的需求 ， 提供更好、更有用的信息 ， SFAS 第 142 条 修改 了 以前的会计准则。 SFAS 第 142条 财务会计准则 颁布施行两个月后 ， SFAS 第 144 条 （ 2001），
39、长期资产的减值或处置出台 了。 这条准则 取代 了 FASB 第 121 条 （ 1995）， 但是保留了的主要观点 。 SFAS 第 121 条 和 第 144 条都规定只有在长期资产账面价值小于未来现金流量时才能确定减值亏损 ， 然后资产是减值损失还是账面价值调低通过资产的账面价值和公允价值得比较而定。 虽然报表有不同的主要的焦点 ， 无论是作为指导方针的频率 、 环境决定的认知损害测试 、资产减值 水平测试 还是 减值准备的步骤 ， 都 决定和透露着跌价准备。这种 决策 为了提高财务报告 的质量 ， 使 长期资产的减值 更符合其 概念框架。因此 ， SFAC 第 2 条 ， 会计信息质量
40、特征 ， 可以被用来评估 SFAS 第 142 条和 第 144 条 。 本文第一部分将提供财务会计准则第 144 条和第 142 条概述 ， 他们适用于长期资产 ， 商誉 ， 无形资产和其他资产减值。以下概述 ， 概念评估将考虑障碍 ，因为它们涉及到会计 ， 公允价值计量的概念框架 。 在最后一节 ， 根据会计准则的概念框架和公 允价值模式来定义资产减值的概念 。 3 介绍美国会计准则第 144 条 财务会计准则公报 （ SFAS 第 ） 第 144 号分为三大类长期资产：（ 1）将持有和使用的资产，（ 2）资产处置是比其他销售，（ 3）资产被通过出售处置 。 作为本节的第一部分将侧重于对长
41、期资产减值过程中 ， 最适用的类别是长期资产是持有和使用。首先，指标进行减值测试将讨论。接下来的部分将考虑在哪个水平进行测试。以下这些部分对测量 ， 分配的讨论 ， 减值损失的披露 。 审议和通过这些组件的检查 ， 以及对财务会计准则第 142 号的概述 ， 减值过程可以得到更好的理解并应用到会计的概念 框架 。 4 资产 减值 测试指标 对于长期资产持有和使用 ， 是指减值的条件时存在一个长期资产或资产组的账面价值超过其公允价值 （ 财务会计准则委员会 2001 年 b， 第 7 段 ）。 虽然是必要的减值测试时 ， 可能由于某种原因账面值可能超过公允价值 ， 某些情况或指标显示账面值可能无
42、法收回。在财务会计准则公告第 144 号，第 8 段 （ 财务会计准则委员会 2001 年 b） 上市是一项资产或资产组可能发生减值的下列指标： A 一个在一个长期资产 （ 资产组 ） 的市场价格明显下降。 B 重大不利变化的程度或方式一长期资产（资产组）正在使用或在客观条件。 C 重大不 利变化的法律因素，或在商业环境，可能影响一个长期资产（资产组） ，包括一个不利行动或由监管机构，评估价值 。 D 一个显着的成本累积金额超过原先预期的收购或长期资产（资产组）的建设 E 当期经营亏损或现金流量结合的作业或现金流损失或历史或预测的投影演示与一个长期资产（资产组）使用相关的继续亏损 。 F 目前
43、的期望 ， 更可能的情况是 ， 一个长期资产 （ 资产组 ） 将被出售或以其他方式处置前 ， 其显着先前估计使用寿命 。 上述情况表明 ， 任何资产（资产组）可能不会在它曾经是确定的价值 ， 该公司可能已经减值损失 。 此外 ， 这些指标要求 ， 资产或资产 组为可恢复性测试 。据 Reinstein 和 Lander（ 2004， 401） 的研究 ， 这些规定表明 ， 有一个重要的机会（大于 50的概率）的公司将资产处置之前 ， 其原先预计的剩余使用寿命 。 5 水平测试 在此之前测试减值资产或资产组 ， 最低水平的现金流量可以测量必须确定。如第 10 段讨论了财务会计准则第 144 号 （ 财务会计准则委员会 2001 年 b），资产首先分组识别现金流 ， 在很大程度上对其他资产和负债的现金流量无关 ，然后 减值测试 ,在这个水平上 完成 。 在估计未来现金流量 ， 使用寿命必须确定有关资产或资产组。根据 SFAS 第 144 条 第18 段 （ 财务会计准则委员会 2001 年 b）， 剩余的资产组的使用寿命是根据剩余的本集团主要资产的使用寿命而定 。主要资产被定义为有形资产或无形资产折旧正在被摊销 ， 这才 是最重要的部分资产从该资产组源于其现金流产生能力。如果主要资产 不是该组剩余使用寿命最长的资产， 估计未来现金流量的销售团队应当承担集团主要资产最后剩下的寿命。
