未來(lái)公允價(jià)值的變化外文翻譯

1、<p><b>　　外文文獻(xiàn)翻譯</b></p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　Fair Value Changes Ahead</p><p>　　The use of fair value in financial reporting is not new; it is requir

2、ed or permitted under many standards, some of which have been in place for decades. Yet, given its role in the asset write-downs and market volatility precipitated by the financial crisis， there has been considerable dis

3、cussion and debate about the use of fair value in financial reporting. As the financial crisis has broadened, the debate has evolved into a global one involving not only FASB and its international counterpart, t</p>

4、;<p>　　The Fair Value Debate</p><p>　　At the center of the fair value debate is SFAS 157, Fair Value Measurements, which went into effect for financial assets and liabilities in 2008. SFAS 157 clarifi

5、es that when fair value is used in financial reporting, the measurement should represent a current market price. SFAS 157 establishes a framework for determining fair value, but it does not specify when to use fair value

6、. SFAS 157 and its current market price objective only apply when other standards require or permit the use of fair va</p><p>　　The reporting model in the United States (and abroad) is a mixed-attribute mode

7、l that uses a combination of measurements, including historical cost, fair value, and other bases, such as lower of cost or fair value. The use of fair value has expanded in recent years. For example, more fair values ar

8、e now required when accounting for a business combination under SFAS 141 (R), Business Combinations. In addition， companies have the option to voluntarily use fair value for certain financial items for</p><p&g

9、t;　　used on an ongoing basis (mark-to-market); it often is used only when a financial asset is impaired. In today's distressed markets, many of the financial assets that trade in those markets (e.g., mortgage-related

10、 securities) are impaired.</p><p>　　The requirement to record impairment losses based on fair values that represent current market prices has raised concerns about when to use fair value in financial reporti

11、ng. The concerns tocus mainly on long-standing issues of relevance and reliability，as well as the volatility caused by reporting changes in fair value in net income, especially in the absence of observable market data to

12、 support the fair values.</p><p>　　Some, including banking institutions subject to regulatory capital requirements, claim that fair value accounting has led to pro-cyclical behavior by forcing impairment wri

13、te-downs to amounts that do not reflect the true economic values of ihe assets. They say that the write-downs have caused a downward spiral that has exacerbated the financial crisis and that fair value accounting should

14、be suspended or modified. For example, in a public SEC roundtable on mark-to-market accounting on October 29</p><p>　　Others, however, including many investors, say that the information conveyed through fair

15、 value accounting is useful for decision making and enhances the</p><p>　　transparency of financial information, which is critical in times of stress. They say that fair value accounting has exposed the dete

16、riorating financial condition of many financial institutions and that suspending fair value accounting would weaken investor confidence and add to instability in the capital markets. For example, in a joint statement opp

17、osing the suspension of mark-to-market accounting issued on October 1, 2008, the Center for Audit Quality, the Council of Institutional Investors, </p><p>　　The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (

18、EESA) required the SEC to conduct a study on the use of mark-to-market (fair value) accounting by financial institutions (section 133). In December 2008, the SEC issued Report and Recommendations Pursuant to Section 133

19、of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008: Study on Mark-to-Market Accounting. Based on its study, the SEC concluded that fair value accounting provides decision-useful information to investors and did not play

20、 a meaning</p><p>　　Fair Value Changes for 2009 Reporting</p><p>　　At this point, the key principles outlined in SFAS 157 are in effect for 2009 reporting. Recently issued fair value guidance cl

21、aritles-but does not change-those principles. These recent clarifications emphasize the need for judgments that could change how some are applying those principles in the current environment, and requires more fair value

22、 disclosures.</p><p>　　Exit price. SFAS 157 emphasizes that fair value should represent the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction for the ass

23、et or liability at the measurement date (i.e.，the exit price).</p><p>　　The clarifying guidance affirms the fair value objective in SFAS 157. This means that fair value is a current market price (the price t

24、hat would be received or paid today under current market conditions), not a future market price (what might be received or paid at some future date under different market conditions). Because fair value is a market-based

25、 measurement, the current market price is determined based on the assumptions that market participants would use when determining fair value.</p><p>　　Input hierarchy. The fair value hierarchy in SFAS 157 pr

26、ioritizes the use of observable market prices, while allowing for the use of other inputs that would be considered by market participants when making decisions.</p><p>　　The clarifying guidance affirms the f

27、air value hierarchy approach in SFAS 157 but emphasizes that market prices should not be the sole basis for a fair value measurement unless they can be observed in an active market for identical items and result from ord

28、erly transactions in that market (Level I inputs). In all other cases, the valuations will involve more work and analysis requiring informed judgments, but the fair value objective in SFAS 157 remains the same.</p>

29、<p>　　Active market. SFAS 157 refers to an active market as one in which transactions occur with sufficient frequency and volume to provide ongoing and current pricing information. The clarifying guidance emphasiz

30、es that determining whether the market for an item is (or continues to be) active requires judgment, considering the volume and level of activity for the item in comparison to normal levels.</p><p>　　Orderly

31、 transaction. SFAS 157 refers to an orderly transaction as one that involves a willing buyer and a willing seller and allows for sufficient exposure to the market; that is, the seller has had sufficient time to market th

32、e asset and undertake marketing activities that are usual and customary for transactions involving similar items.</p><p>　　The clarifying guidance emphasizes that determining whether a transaction is orderly

33、 or disorderly (i.e., a distressed sale or forced transaction where the seller is compelled to transact) requires judgment and the consideration of factors specific to</p><p>　　the transaction, not the marke

34、t. For example, a disorderly transaction might be indicated if the seller is in or near bankruptcy or receivership, if the seller was forced</p><p>　　to sell to meet regulatory requirements, or if the seller

35、 was forced to sell within a period that did not allow for usual and customary marketing activities under current market conditions. The transaction focus applies even when markets are dislocated. It is not appropriate t

36、o automatically conclude that all market activity represents disorderly transactions. Conversely, it is not appropriate to automatically conclude that all market activity represents orderly transactions representative of

37、 fa</p><p>　　Adjustments. SFAS 157 indicates that market prices that are not Level 1 inputs must be evaluated for adjustment. The clarifying guidance emphasizes that market prices that are not Level I inputs

38、 are not determinative, especially when there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity for an item. Those market prices include market prices that can be observed in active markets for similar

39、items, that can be observed in markets that are not active for identical or similar it</p><p>　　When there are different indications of fair value, determining the point within the range that is most represe

40、ntative of fair value-the price at which market participants would transact under current market conditions-requires judgment, especially a consideration of the extent to which the inputs used in the valuation techniques

41、 are relevant in the circumstances.</p><p>　　Most Progress Needed</p><p>　　The Obama administration has proposed financial regulatory reforms that call on standards setters to make substantial p

42、rogress on improvements to financial reporting in key areas highlighted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Financial Regulatory Reform: A New Foundation，” calls for improvements in the areas of fair value accountin

43、g, accounting for financial instruments, and loan loss provisioning (see also “Report of the Financial Stability Forum on Addressing Pro-cyclicality in the</p><p>　　Financial System，’，April 2009). It also ca

44、lls for progress on the development of a</p><p>　　single set of high-quality global standards.</p><p>　　The Financial Crisis Advisory Group (FCAG), a group formed by FASB and the IASB to advise

45、on the standards-setting implications of the financial crisis and potential changes to the global regulatory environment, highlighted the need for similar improvements in its July 28, 2009, report to FASB and the IASB.&l

46、t;/p><p>　　Fair Value Challenges</p><p>　　Notwithstanding the many clarifications provided by standards setters, determining fair value in the current environment will continue to be challenging. T

47、he markets for many financial assets that previously were active are no longer and lack the infrastructure needed to facilitate market pricing. This means that the valuations (under U.S. GAAP and IFRS) will involve more

48、work and analysis requiring informed judgments.</p><p>　　Given calls from the public and investors to increase transparency, there have also been many fair value (and other) “disclosure solutions,” and more

49、are yet to come.</p><p>　　At the same time, U.S. issuers face the prospect of a move to IFRS. In the meantime, changes to reduce or eliminate differences between SFAS 157 and the proposed IFRS guidance on fa

50、ir value measurement are likely, as FASB and the IASB move forward on convergence initiatives. It is too soon to tell whether changes will be made to SFAS 157, the proposed IFRS, or both. But given the role of fair value

51、 in U.S. GAAP and IFRS today, and the need for improvements going forward, a converged solution tha</p><p>　　Source: MacDonald, Linda A. Fair Value Changes Ahead. CPA Journal. Vo 180 Issue I.</p><

52、p>　　Jan 2010： 24-27</p><p><b>　　譯文:</b></p><p><b>　　未來(lái)公允價(jià)值的變化</b></p><p>　　公允價(jià)值在財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告中的使用并不是新想法，它在許多標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中是要求或存許 可被使用的，其中-作已經(jīng)實(shí)施了長(zhǎng)達(dá)數(shù)十年之久。然而，由于金融危機(jī)使它的 角色陷入資產(chǎn)減值和

53、市場(chǎng)波動(dòng)中，目前已經(jīng)育相當(dāng)多的關(guān)于公允價(jià)值在財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)ft 中使用的討論和爭(zhēng)論。隨著金融危機(jī)的擴(kuò)人，對(duì)公允價(jià)值的爭(zhēng)論Q經(jīng)發(fā)展成為? ? 個(gè)全球性的問(wèn)題，其中不僅涉及FASB (美W財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)）以及W際同 行W際會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)（IASB)，而且也包括仝球資本市場(chǎng)中的證券參與片。對(duì) 金融危機(jī)的反應(yīng)主要集中在公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)上，并旦導(dǎo)致了影響財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告向前發(fā)展 的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的變化。</p><p><b>　　對(duì)公允

54、價(jià)值的爭(zhēng)論</b></p><p>　　公允價(jià)值爭(zhēng)論的核心是2008年為影響金融資產(chǎn)和負(fù)債而生效的SFAS(財(cái)務(wù) 會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則公冉）第157 公允價(jià)值計(jì)量。SFAS第157兮明確表示，當(dāng)公允價(jià) 值用于財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告時(shí)，其計(jì)量應(yīng)該代表現(xiàn)行的市場(chǎng)價(jià)格。它建立了確定公允價(jià)值的 框架，但是它沒(méi)有指出何時(shí)使用公允價(jià)值。SFAS第157兮和現(xiàn)行市場(chǎng)價(jià)格的目 標(biāo)只適用于其他標(biāo)準(zhǔn)需要或允許使用公允價(jià)值的情況。</p>

55、;<p>　　在美國(guó)（和國(guó)外）的報(bào)告模型是一種混合屬性模型，其中包括歷史成本、 公允價(jià)值和其他計(jì)價(jià)*礎(chǔ)，如低成木或公允價(jià)值。近兒年來(lái)公允價(jià)值的應(yīng)用已經(jīng) 在不斷擴(kuò)人。例如，現(xiàn)在更多的公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)要求為SFAS 141 (R)企業(yè)合并項(xiàng) 目下的企業(yè)合并作解釋。此外，公司有選擇權(quán)自愿使用公允價(jià)值作為特定的金融 項(xiàng)目，訴則公允價(jià)值就會(huì)被SFAS第159兮中特定的情況所要求，作為金融資產(chǎn) 和金融負(fù)債的公允價(jià)值選杼《雖然如此，公允價(jià)值

56、還是在財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告中使用的域頻 繁的。但是，公允價(jià)值并非總是以持續(xù)的方式被使用（以市值計(jì)價(jià)）；只有當(dāng)一 個(gè)金融資產(chǎn)被削弱時(shí)，它才吋常被使用。在現(xiàn)在的低價(jià)市場(chǎng)，許多金融資產(chǎn)在這 呰市場(chǎng)貿(mào)秘（如與抵押貸款相關(guān)的證券）中被削弱了。</p><p>　　記錄于公允價(jià)值扣除減值損失的要求，表現(xiàn)出當(dāng)前市場(chǎng)上的價(jià)格己經(jīng)開(kāi) 始關(guān)注何時(shí)該在財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告中使用公允價(jià)值。關(guān)ft的焦點(diǎn)主要集中在相叉性和可靠 性的長(zhǎng)久問(wèn)題上，連Inf不穩(wěn)定性造成

57、的在汴收益中報(bào)告公允價(jià)值方面的改變，尤</p><p>　　其是缺乏觀察得出的市場(chǎng)數(shù)據(jù)所支持的公允價(jià)值丨二。</p><p>　　?些金融機(jī)構(gòu)，包括受監(jiān)管的資金需求*，宣稱公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)已經(jīng)導(dǎo)致迫使 減值金額不反映真實(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值資產(chǎn)的循環(huán)行為。他們說(shuō)減值己經(jīng)引起-?個(gè)己經(jīng)惡 化的金融危機(jī)的惡性循環(huán)，而II.公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)應(yīng)該被中止或修正。例如2008年 10月29 FI，在以市值計(jì)價(jià)的美W證券交

58、鉍委w會(huì)的公眾圓桌會(huì)議上，William M. Isaac, LECG安全組主席和前FDIC (聯(lián)邦存款保險(xiǎn)公司）上席陳述到：當(dāng)存 在由于經(jīng)濟(jì)和市場(chǎng)混亂導(dǎo)致的資產(chǎn)價(jià)值暫時(shí)的資本損失時(shí)，調(diào)整各必須給機(jī)構(gòu)遭 受暫時(shí)的資木減損幸存的機(jī)會(huì)=我們庖該認(rèn)識(shí)到永久性損密，但是資產(chǎn)不應(yīng)該 被設(shè)置為不切實(shí)際的物品拍賣價(jià)格。調(diào)整芥必須根據(jù)他們的真實(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值在適當(dāng) 的時(shí)間段評(píng)估資產(chǎn)…當(dāng)市場(chǎng)沒(méi)有適當(dāng)?shù)倪\(yùn)作吋，就會(huì)產(chǎn)生嚴(yán)誤導(dǎo)會(huì)計(jì)和披露R 遠(yuǎn)低于他們的真實(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值

59、的資產(chǎn)價(jià)值，這就是MTM(動(dòng)量指標(biāo)）會(huì)計(jì)的使用… 我相信極為重要的是，銀行管理控制是反循環(huán)的，而不是助長(zhǎng)周期性循環(huán)的…在 他們能更好地承擔(dān)盈余負(fù)擔(dān)時(shí)，這聽(tīng)起米Jf?不像是由于穩(wěn)同的公共政策導(dǎo)致銀行 在創(chuàng)造準(zhǔn)備金好時(shí)期的停滯。</p><p>　　然而，包括其他許多的投資者說(shuō)，在緊張時(shí)刻最關(guān)鍵的是透過(guò)公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì) 被傳達(dá)的數(shù)據(jù)有利T?決策和增加財(cái)務(wù)信總透明度。他們說(shuō)公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)暴露出許 多金融機(jī)構(gòu)惡化的財(cái)務(wù)狀況，而

60、n.暫停公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)會(huì)使資本市場(chǎng)中的投資存信 心變?nèi)跬瑫r(shí)增加不安定的因素。例如，在2008年10月1 II ?份反對(duì)暫停按市值 計(jì)價(jià)的會(huì)計(jì)聯(lián)合聲明中，審計(jì)質(zhì)量中心、法人投資各委員會(huì)中心和CFA (注冊(cè) 金融分析師）機(jī)構(gòu)陳述到：當(dāng)它人部分是不可或缺的時(shí)候，在這動(dòng)蕩的經(jīng)濟(jì)時(shí) 代暫停公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)將會(huì)剝奪投資茗的要財(cái)務(wù)信息?公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)與穩(wěn)健披露 會(huì)提供相比于在其他荇代選擇方法之下的報(bào)告數(shù)量更正確、及時(shí)和相關(guān)的數(shù)據(jù)給 投資者。投資苒有權(quán)知道投資

61、的現(xiàn)值，即使投資達(dá)不到過(guò)去或未來(lái)的期望。</p><p>　　年EESA的緊急經(jīng)濟(jì)穩(wěn)定條例要求美國(guó)證券交舄委員會(huì)開(kāi)展?項(xiàng)金融 機(jī)構(gòu)（第133節(jié))使用以市值計(jì)價(jià)（公允價(jià)值）會(huì)計(jì)的研究。在2008年12月， 根據(jù)2008緊急經(jīng)濟(jì)穩(wěn)定條例的第133甘SEC發(fā)布報(bào)告和建議:按市值計(jì)價(jià)的會(huì) 計(jì)研究。苺于它的研究，美W證券交易委w會(huì)總結(jié)到公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)提供決策有用 的數(shù)據(jù)給投資名而J1沒(méi)行在近的銀行倒閉中擔(dān)任?個(gè)重要的角色。美

62、W證券交 易委員會(huì)建議公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)應(yīng)該被改良«不中止。在這個(gè)報(bào)告中，美_丨證券交易 委負(fù)會(huì)強(qiáng)調(diào)地方有標(biāo)準(zhǔn)相適矽的投資者是至關(guān):ip:要的，指出為了要促進(jìn)宵遠(yuǎn)見(jiàn)的 投資決策，財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告的目的將是提供相關(guān)、透明和沒(méi)有偏見(jiàn)的財(cái)務(wù)信息給投資者 和資本市場(chǎng)。</p><p>　　年公允價(jià)值變化的報(bào)告</p><p>　　此時(shí)，SFAS第157兮中略述的烺:丨:要的原則實(shí)呩上是在為在2009年

63、作報(bào)告。 域近發(fā)布了沒(méi)有改變那作原則的對(duì)公允價(jià)值導(dǎo)向的闡明。這作闡明強(qiáng)調(diào)對(duì)可能改 變這些原則在現(xiàn)右環(huán)境卜'的成用和需要更多公允價(jià)值揭示的披露判斷。</p><p>　　出口價(jià)格。SFAS第157兮強(qiáng)調(diào)公允價(jià)值應(yīng)該表現(xiàn)在計(jì)量門期中將會(huì)出售資產(chǎn) 的價(jià)格或*支付轉(zhuǎn)移責(zé)任中舍序的交易事項(xiàng)屮的資產(chǎn)或負(fù)債（即出口價(jià)格)。</p><p>　　明確的指導(dǎo)背定了公允價(jià)值在SFAS第157兮的目的。

64、這意味著公允價(jià)值是 -個(gè)現(xiàn)行市價(jià)（在目前的市場(chǎng)情況下當(dāng)天將會(huì)收到或者支付的價(jià)格）而不是未來(lái) 市場(chǎng)價(jià)格（在不m的市場(chǎng)情況下未來(lái)某個(gè)n期可能會(huì)收到或支付的價(jià)格W為 公允價(jià)值是‘個(gè)以市場(chǎng)為難礎(chǔ)的計(jì)量，目前的市場(chǎng)價(jià)格被決定基于如下假定，即 市場(chǎng)參與者會(huì)在確定公允價(jià)值的情況下使用。</p><p>　　輸入等級(jí)。當(dāng)市場(chǎng)參與者作出決定時(shí)，SFAS第157 ?中的公允價(jià)值等級(jí)優(yōu) 先考慮使用可見(jiàn)的市場(chǎng)價(jià)格，M吋允許使用其他輸入d

65、</p><p>　　明確的指導(dǎo)背定了公允價(jià)值在SFAS第157號(hào)中的層次方法，但是強(qiáng)調(diào)市價(jià) 不應(yīng)該是公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的唯?恭礎(chǔ)，除非他們可觀察到?個(gè)活躍的市場(chǎng)中相M的 項(xiàng)目和源于那個(gè)市場(chǎng)的有序交易事項(xiàng)的結(jié)糶(?級(jí)輸入在所有與他情形中， 估價(jià)將會(huì)包括更多需要判斷的下作和分析，但是在SFAS第157兮中公允價(jià)值的 目的保持不變。</p><p>　　活躍的市場(chǎng)。SFAS第157 1 小涉及在活躍

66、市場(chǎng)下的交鉍伴隨卷充分的頻率和 成交量提供繼續(xù)、1期的價(jià)格信息。明確的指導(dǎo)強(qiáng)調(diào)相比較于正常水平，決定是 否給-?個(gè)項(xiàng)目的市場(chǎng)是（或者繼續(xù)是）需要積極的判斷、考慮數(shù)量和程度的活 動(dòng)項(xiàng)目的。</p><p>　　有序的交易事項(xiàng)。SFAS第157號(hào)涉及?個(gè)有序的交易事項(xiàng)，包括?個(gè)自愿 的買主和?個(gè)自愿的賣主，而凡允許對(duì)市場(chǎng)充分的披露;即賣方已經(jīng)有足夠的時(shí) 間出隹資產(chǎn)和進(jìn)行背銷活動(dòng)，?按照慣例從事相似的物品交易。<

67、/p><p>　　明確的指導(dǎo)強(qiáng)調(diào)決定-?個(gè)交易事項(xiàng)是竹有序或芥無(wú)序（即賣主被迫交易的? 項(xiàng)無(wú)奈的銷仿或被迫的交易事項(xiàng)）需要判斷和考慮的W素，而不是特定的交易市 場(chǎng)。例如，?個(gè)無(wú)序的交笏事項(xiàng)可能表明如果賣方接近破產(chǎn)或者破產(chǎn)還債，或者? 如來(lái)次方被迫出隹以滿足法規(guī)的要求，或如來(lái)賣方在半前的市場(chǎng)背銷活動(dòng)的條件 下被迫以低價(jià)出售這一時(shí)期內(nèi)慣常的和不被允許的慣例。交笏的焦點(diǎn)M樣適用于 市場(chǎng)錯(cuò)位的情況，它并不適合自動(dòng)地得出所有市

68、場(chǎng)活動(dòng)表現(xiàn)出無(wú)序交易事項(xiàng)的結(jié) 論。相反地，它足不適當(dāng)?shù)淖詣?dòng)得出所有市場(chǎng)活動(dòng)代表公允價(jià)值的有序交易事項(xiàng) 的結(jié)論。</p><p>　　調(diào)整事項(xiàng)。SFAS第丨57 y?指出市場(chǎng)價(jià)格不是必須評(píng)估調(diào)整事項(xiàng)的?級(jí)輸入。 明確的指導(dǎo)強(qiáng)調(diào)市場(chǎng)價(jià)格不是-?級(jí)輸入，丼不是決定性的，尤其當(dāng)?個(gè)己經(jīng)有活 動(dòng)的成交量和水平方面項(xiàng)目的迸要性在急劇下降的時(shí)候。那些市場(chǎng)價(jià)格包括相似 項(xiàng)目能在活躍的市場(chǎng)中被觀察的市價(jià)以及由于無(wú)序交笏事項(xiàng)（二級(jí)輸

69、入）而在市 場(chǎng)中被觀察的不活躍的相NI或相似的項(xiàng)目。當(dāng)那作被用來(lái)決定公允價(jià)值，他們必 須評(píng)估調(diào)整事項(xiàng)并使用其他可利用的投入與估價(jià)技術(shù)的結(jié)采?起考慮。</p><p>　　當(dāng)公允價(jià)值有不M預(yù)示時(shí)，確定范圍內(nèi)垴具代表性的公允價(jià)值是市場(chǎng)參與 者根據(jù)目前的市場(chǎng)條件所需要作出的判斷，尤其是在這種情況下被用于估價(jià)技術(shù) 的投入程度的考慮。</p><p><b>　　需要很大的進(jìn)展</b

70、></p><p>　　奧巴馬政府提出了金融監(jiān)管的改革，呼吁美W財(cái)政部強(qiáng)調(diào)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定科在關(guān)鍵 地K高度改善財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告的可觀進(jìn)度,“金融監(jiān)管的改革：?個(gè)新基金會(huì)，”要求公 允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)領(lǐng)域的改良，解釋金融:r:具和貸款的損失供成（見(jiàn)2009年4月“金 融穩(wěn)定論壇關(guān)于解決周期性波動(dòng)在金融體系中的報(bào)告”)。同時(shí)它也要求夼is 吶?的高質(zhì)量的全球標(biāo)準(zhǔn)發(fā)展的進(jìn)步。</p><p>　　金融危機(jī)咨詢組

71、（FCAG), ?-個(gè)由FASB和IASB組成的提供金融危機(jī)標(biāo) 準(zhǔn)制定的含義和潛在的改變?nèi)蚍ㄒ?guī)環(huán)境的團(tuán)體，在2009年7月28 11特別強(qiáng)調(diào) 丫對(duì)FASB和IASB的報(bào)告作類似改善的需要。</p><p><b>　　公允價(jià)值的挑戰(zhàn)</b></p><p>　　盡管準(zhǔn)則制定者有作出許多說(shuō)明，公允價(jià)值的確定在當(dāng)前環(huán)境下將繼續(xù)面臨 挑戰(zhàn)。許多捋經(jīng)活躍的金融資產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)不再活

72、躍并且缺乏促進(jìn)市場(chǎng)定價(jià)所需要的蓀 礎(chǔ)設(shè)施。這意味著估價(jià)（在美W GAAP和IFRS下）將會(huì)包括需要充分判斷的 更多的工作和分析。</p><p>　　鑒于公眾和投資者對(duì)提高透明度的呼吁，G經(jīng)有許多公允價(jià)值（或與他）“披 露的解決方案”，而且更多是將要出臺(tái)的。</p><p>　　同時(shí)，美W發(fā)行者面臨著向IFRS (W際財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告準(zhǔn)則）轉(zhuǎn)變的前景。與此 同時(shí)，作為FASB和IASB進(jìn)?步融合的

73、措施，改變以減少或消除SFAS第157 號(hào)和IFRS指導(dǎo)建議的公允價(jià)值計(jì)量差異是有可能的。是否會(huì)作出SFAS第157 兮的變動(dòng)、IFRS的建議或兩*兼而有之，現(xiàn)在卜結(jié)論還為時(shí)尚¥。但是考慮到 當(dāng)前公允價(jià)值在美WGAAP和IFRS的州色和對(duì)今后的改良的需耍，?個(gè)產(chǎn)生出 相同的美W GAAP和IFRS公允價(jià)值標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的融合解決方案應(yīng)該是兩個(gè)類似但不 同的公允價(jià)值的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。</p><p>　　出處:MacDona