|
Such tasks as accounting,
risk management and business
planning require that some or all of a business's assets (or liabilities)
be valued. How to actually assign a dollar value to something is a problem
as old as accounting itself. There are two basic approaches:
An asset's book value
is generally its acquisition cost less
depreciation. A depreciation schedule is established at the time
the asset is acquired. For example, if a piece of machinery were acquired
for USD 100,000, it might be
depreciated over 10 years at a rate of USD 10,000 per year. At the end of
seven years, the machine's book value would be USD 30,000. Assets, such as
land or precious metals, which do not wear out over time, are not
depreciated. Their book value is typically just their acquisition cost.
An asset's market
value is the price it would fetch in the market, if it were sold
immediately. Consider the same piece of machinery. Perhaps, after seven
years, new technology has made it obsolete. It runs sporadically, and
maintenance is expensive. At best, the company could raise USD 1,000 by
selling it to a scrap metal dealer. In this case, the machine's market
value is USD 1,000.
A strength of book valuation is the fact that it is
formula-driven. Because accounting
authorities specify detailed rules for calculating book values, there is
usually
little ambiguity in how assets should be assigned book values.
Another strength of book valuation is its wide applicability.
Traditionally, almost any asset could be assigned a book value. In recent
years, this strength has been eroded. Financial innovation has introduced
various derivatives or
other financial instruments for which book valuation can be almost
meaningless and—even worse—easily manipulated.
Another shortcoming of book valuation is the fact that the
formula-driven approach can have little to do with economic reality.
Suppose a firm acquires 1,000 ounces of gold at a price of USD 300 per
ounce. A year later, gold is trading at USD 200 per ounce. If the firm
used market value accounting, it will immediately report a USD 100,000
loss to shareholders. With book value accounting, it continues to value
the gold at USD 300 per ounce. Only if it sells the gold will the firm report a
book value loss to its shareholders.
Market value accounting also has shortcomings. One problem
is the fact that market values represent values realized in recent
transactions, but there is no guarantee that future transactions will
realize similar values. Consider an example:
For years, the holdings of the US Gold Depository at Fort
Knox have remained steady at 147.3 million ounces of gold held at a book
value of USD 42.22 per ounce. That is a total book value of USD 6.22
billion. Suppose today's market price of gold is USD 300 per ounce. Then
that same gold has a market value of USD 44.20 billion, but this is
misleading. The United States government can't immediately sell the gold
for that price. If it tried, the market price of gold would plummet. The
government would receive only a fraction of the calculated market value.
This example is extreme, but the problem is common. An
asset will be trading in small quantities at certain prices. A firm with a
large position in that asset won't know what value it will fetch in the
market until it actually tries to unload the position.
Market valuation works best with assets that are actively
traded in liquid markets. It becomes somewhat subjective if markets have
limited liquidity—some assumptions must be made to assign a market value
to a stock or
bond that trades infrequently. Even worse, many assets do not trade in active
markets. For certain real estate, intellectual property or artwork, market value
is a meaningless concept. The only time those assets can be
assigned a market value is when they actually are sold.
The process of calculating a market value for an asset is
called marking-to-market. For less
actively traded assets, this process can be highly subjective. Models may be
used to project what market values might be, assuming an active market did
exist. Reliance on such models has been disparagingly referred to as
marking-to-model. During the late 1990s
and early 2000s, Enron Corporation
used mark-to-model valuation extensively as a means of manipulating its
financial reporting.
Of course, book value accounting is also subject to
manipulation. A firm can "manufacture" book value earnings by selectively
selling assets whose market values exceed their book values while
continuing to hold assets whose market values are less than their book
values. Such selective realization of gains is called
gains trading. It is frequently done by
corporations that want to boost their reported earnings. The reverse
strategy—selectively realizing losses—can be used to reduce a
corporation's taxes.
Traditionally, accounting has been based on book
valuation. This can be ascribed to the historically general applicability
of that approach. Even today, book valuation is the norm. An exception is
financial institutions. Some can use market values for certain of their
assets and liabilities. For example, a brokerage firm may carry its
computers and office furniture at book value, but its
securities holdings
will be carried at market value. Under the
Basel Accords, banks can
identify a portion of their balance sheet as a trading book. Financial
assets or liabilities in the trading book are carried at market value.
However, most of a bank's financial assets—including its loans and any
financial instruments
hedging those
loans—are carried at book value.
Because accounting is largely based on book valuation, it
may fail to recognize deterioration in a firm's financial condition that
would be reflected in market valuations. It is this problem that largely motivated the
adoption of
asset-liability management techniques by financial firms in the 1980s.
|