IAS39 amended to allow for macro hedging
Controversial International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) proposals for the marking-to-market of derivatives, known as IAS39, are to be amended to allow for ‘macro hedging’.
Last August the IASB proposed that macro-hedging be allowed as long as the company split the macro portfolio into time periods based on expected re-pricing dates, and that they designate assets or liabilities against them as hedged items. They proposed that all the assets from which the hedged amount is drawn must be items whose fair value changes in response to the risk being hedged and that could have qualified for fair-value hedging under IAS 39 if hedged individually.
“This amendment is a further step in our project to ease the implementation of IAS 39 for the thousands of companies required to implement international standards in 2005,” said David Tweedie, IASB chairman. “The IASB has made it clear that any amendments must be within the basic principles of hedge accounting contained in IAS 39, but that we will work within those principles to simplify the application of the standard. This amendment does not mark the end of the board’s work on the subject of financial instruments.”
The IASB added that it also intends to set up an international working party to examine the fundamentals of IAS39 with a view to ultimately replacing it, “in due course”.
“The financial instruments working party will assist in improving, simplifying and ultimately replacing IAS 39, and examine broader questions regarding the application and extent of fair-value accounting – a topic on which the IASB has not reached any conclusion,” said the IASB.Any replacement could take several years, it said.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
EU banks hedge net interest income to pass new IRRBB test
Would-be outliers look to cut sensitivity of cashflows to rate moves, but at what cost?
Banks cry foul over shock decision from Basel Committee
Asset and liability management professionals question severity of criteria in revised IRRBB tests
Fresh EU push for single securities supervisor to compete with US
But MEP expresses ‘concern’ EU nations will stall revival of capital markets union
Discord deepens over fund-linked trades in FRTB
More banks use punitive approach to capital treatment under new trading book regime, irking regulators
AI, quantum computing and tokenisation set to transform finance – Menon
But significant barriers remain preventing the technologies from unlocking their full potential
Could the SEC revive the private fund adviser rule?
Industry experts deem a second life for the reviled rule unlikely
Vendors lack silver bullet for FRTB’s fund-linked issue
EU and UK legislators tried to ease capital charge by leaning on vendors, but problems persist
Does Basel’s internal loss multiplier add up?
As US agencies mull capital reforms, one regulator questions past losses as an indicator of future op risk