FAS 133 consultants, FAS 133 independent compliance consulting FAS 133 independent compliance consulting training conferences Return to Risk Limited home page from current FAS 133 Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 133 text page

FAS 133






Statement of
Financial Accounting
Standards No. 133
FAS133 Status Page
FAS133 Summary
Accounting for Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities
June 1998
Financial Accounting Standards Board
of the Financial Accounting Foundation
401 MERRITT 7, P.O. BOX 5116, NORWALK, CONNECTICUT 06856-5116
Copyright © 1998 by Financial Accounting Standards Board. All rights reserved. No
part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of the Financial Accounting Standards
Board.
Page 2
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
June 1998
CONTENTS
Paragraph
Numbers
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1–4
Standards of Financial Accounting and Reporting:
Scope and Definition............................................................................................ 5–16
Derivative Instruments ................................................................................... 6–11
Embedded Derivative Instruments ............................................................... 12–16
Recognition of Derivatives and Measurement of Derivatives and
Hedged Items.................................................................................................... 17–42
Fair Value Hedges........................................................................................ 20–27
General ......................................................................................................... 20
The Hedged Item.................................................................................... 21–26
Impairment ................................................................................................... 27
Cash Flow Hedges........................................................................................ 28–35
General ......................................................................................................... 28
The Hedged Forecasted Transaction ...................................................... 29–35
Foreign Currency Hedges............................................................................. 36–42
Foreign Currency Fair Value Hedges..................................................... 37–39
Foreign Currency Cash Flow Hedges .................................................... 40–41
Hedges of the Foreign Currency Exposure of a Net
Investment in a Foreign Operation............................................................. 42
Accounting by Not-for-Profit Organizations and Other Entities That
Do Not Report Earnings......................................................................................... 43
Disclosures ......................................................................................................... 44–45
Reporting Changes in the Components of Comprehensive Income .................. 46–47
Effective Date and Transition ............................................................................ 48–56
Appendix A: Implementation Guidance ............................................................... 57–103
Section 1: Scope and Definition........................................................................ 57–61
Section 2: Assessment of Hedge Effectiveness............................................... 62–103
Appendix B: Examples Illustrating Application of This Statement.................... 104–205
Section 1: Hedging Relationships ................................................................. 104–175
Section 2: Examples Illustrating Application of the Clearly-and-
Closely-Related Criterion to Derivative Instruments Embedded
in Hybrid Instruments................................................................................... 176–200
Section 3: Examples Illustrating Application of the Transition
Provisions ..................................................................................................... 201–205
Page 3
Appendix C: Background Information and Basis for Conclusions..................... 206–524
Appendix D: Amendments to Existing Pronouncements.................................... 525–538
Appendix E: Diagram for Determining Whether a Contract Is a
Freestanding Derivative Subject to the Scope of This Statement ............................. 539
Appendix F: Glossary.................................................................................................. 540
Page 4
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
FAS 133: Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities
FAS 133 Summary
This Statement establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments,
including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, (collectively referred to as
derivatives) and for hedging activities. It requires that an entity recognize all derivatives as
either assets or liabilities in the statement of financial position and measure those instruments at
fair value. If certain conditions are met, a derivative may be specifically designated as (a) a
hedge of the exposure to changes in the fair value of a recognized asset or liability or an
unrecognized firm commitment, (b) a hedge of the exposure to variable cash flows of a
forecasted transaction, or (c) a hedge of the foreign currency exposure of a net investment in a
foreign operation, an unrecognized firm commitment, an available-for-sale security, or a
foreign-currency-denominated forecasted transaction.
The accounting for changes in the fair value of a derivative (that is, gains and losses)
depends on the intended use of the derivative and the resulting designation.
??For a derivative designated as hedging the exposure to changes in the fair value of a
recognized asset or liability or a firm commitment (referred to as a fair value hedge), the
gain or loss is recognized in earnings in the period of change together with the offsetting
loss or gain on the hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged. The effect of that
accounting is to reflect in earnings the extent to which the hedge is not effective in
achieving offsetting changes in fair value.
??For a derivative designated as hedging the exposure to variable cash flows of a forecasted
transaction (referred to as a cash flow hedge), the effective portion of the derivative’s gain
or loss is initially reported as a component of other comprehensive income (outside
earnings) and subsequently reclassified into earnings when the forecasted transaction affects
earnings. The ineffective portion of the gain or loss is reported in earnings immediately.
??For a derivative designated as hedging the foreign currency exposure of a net investment in
a foreign operation, the gain or loss is reported in other comprehensive income (outside
earnings) as part of the cumulative translation adjustment. The accounting for a fair value
hedge described above applies to a derivative designated as a hedge of the foreign currency
Page 5
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
exposure of an unrecognized firm commitment or an available-for-sale security. Similarly,
the accounting for a cash flow hedge described above applies to a derivative designated as a
hedge of the foreign currency exposure of a foreign-currency-denominated forecasted
transaction.
??For a derivative not designated as a hedging instrument, the gain or loss is recognized in
earnings in the period of change.
Under this Statement, an entity that elects to apply hedge accounting is required to
establish at the inception of the hedge the method it will use for assessing the effectiveness of the
hedging derivative and the measurement approach for determining the ineffective aspect of the
hedge. Those methods must be consistent with the entity’s approach to managing risk.
This Statement applies to all entities. A not-for-profit organization should recognize the
change in fair value of all derivatives as a change in net assets in the period of change. In a fair
value hedge, the changes in the fair value of the hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged
also are recognized. However, because of the format of their statement of financial performance,
not-for-profit organizations are not permitted special hedge accounting for derivatives used to
hedge forecasted transactions. This Statement does not address how a not-for-profit organization
should determine the components of an operating measure if one is presented.
This Statement precludes designating a nonderivative financial instrument as a hedge of
an asset, liability, unrecognized firm commitment, or forecasted transaction except that a
nonderivative instrument denominated in a foreign currency may be designated as a hedge of the
foreign currency exposure of an unrecognized firm commitment denominated in a foreign
currency or a net investment in a foreign operation.
This Statement amends FASB Statement No. 52, Foreign Currency Translation, to
permit special accounting for a hedge of a foreign currency forecasted transaction with a
derivative. It supersedes FASB Statements No. 80, Accounting for Futures Contracts, No. 105,
Disclosure of Information about Financial Instruments with Off-Balance-Sheet Risk and
Financial Instruments with Concentrations of Credit Risk, and No. 119, Disclosure about
Derivative Financial Instruments and Fair Value of Financial Instruments. It amends FASB
Statement No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments, to include in
Statement 107 the disclosure provisions about concentrations of credit risk from Statement 105.
This Statement also nullifies or modifies the consensuses reached in a number of issues
addressed by the Emerging Issues Task Force.
This Statement is effective for all fiscal quarters of fiscal years beginning after June 15,
1999. Initial application of this Statement should be as of the beginning of an entity’s fiscal
quarter; on that date, hedging relationships must be designated anew and documented pursuant to
the provisions of this Statement. Earlier application of all of the provisions of this Statement is
encouraged, but it is permitted only as of the beginning of any fiscal quarter that begins after
issuance of this Statement. This Statement should not be applied retroactively to financial
statements of prior periods.
Page 6
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
INTRODUCTION
1. This Statement addresses the accounting for derivative instruments,1 including certain
derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, and hedging activities.
2. Prior to this Statement, hedging activities related to changes in foreign exchange rates were
addressed in FASB Statement No. 52, Foreign Currency Translation. FASB Statement No. 80,
Accounting for Futures Contracts, addressed the use of futures contracts in other hedging
activities. Those Statements addressed only certain derivative instruments and differed in the
criteria required for hedge accounting. In addition, the Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
addressed the accounting for various hedging activities in a number of issues.
3. In developing the standards in this Statement, the Board concluded that the following four
fundamental decisions should serve as cornerstones underlying those standards:
a. Derivative instruments represent rights or obligations that meet the definitions of assets or
liabilities and should be reported in financial statements.
b. Fair value is the most relevant measure for financial instruments and the only relevant
measure for derivative instruments. Derivative instruments should be measured at fair
value, and adjustments to the carrying amount of hedged items should reflect changes in
their fair value (that is, gains or losses) that are attributable to the risk being hedged and that
arise while the hedge is in effect.
c. Only items that are assets or liabilities should be reported as such in financial statements.
d. Special accounting for items designated as being hedged should be provided only for
qualifying items. One aspect of qualification should be an assessment of the expectation of
effective offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows during the term of the hedge for the
risk being hedged.
Those fundamental decisions are discussed individually in paragraphs 217–231 of Appendix C.
4. This Statement standardizes the accounting for derivative instruments, including certain
derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, by requiring that an entity recognize those
items as assets or liabilities in the statement of financial position and measure them at fair value.
If certain conditions are met, an entity may elect to designate a derivative instrument as follows:
a. A hedge of the exposure to changes in the fair value of a recognized asset or liability, or of
an unrecognized firm commitment, 2 that are attributable to a particular risk (referred to as
a fair value hedge)
b. A hedge of the exposure to variability in the cash flows of a recognized asset or liability, or
of a forecasted transaction, that is attributable to a particular risk (referred to as a cash flow
hedge)
Page 7
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
c. A hedge of the foreign currency exposure of (1) an unrecognized firm commitment (a
foreign currency fair value hedge), (2) an available-for-sale security (a foreign currency fair
value hedge), (3) a forecasted transaction (a foreign currency cash flow hedge), or (4) a net
investment in a foreign operation.
This Statement generally provides for matching the timing of gain or loss recognition on the
hedging instrument with the recognition of (a) the changes in the fair value of the hedged asset
or liability that are attributable to the hedged risk or (b) the earnings effect of the hedged
forecasted transaction. Appendix A provides guidance on identifying derivative instruments
subject to the scope of this Statement and on assessing hedge effectiveness and is an integral part
of the standards provided in this Statement. Appendix B contains examples that illustrate
application of this Statement. Appendix C contains background information and the basis for the
Board’s conclusions. Appendix D lists the accounting pronouncements superseded or amended
by this Statement. Appendix E provides a diagram for determining whether a contract is a
freestanding derivative subject to the scope of this Statement.
STANDARDS OF FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING AND REPORTING
Scope and Definition
5. This Statement applies to all entities. Some entities, such as not-for-profit organizations
and defined benefit pension plans, do not report earnings as a separate caption in a statement of
financial performance. The application of this Statement to those entities is set forth in
paragraph 43.
Derivative Instruments
6. A derivative instrument is a financial instrument or other contract with all three of the
following characteristics:
a. It has (1) one or more underlyings and (2) one or more notional amounts 3 or payment
provisions or both. Those terms determine the amount of the settlement or settlements, and,
in some cases, whether or not a settlement is required. 4
b. It requires no initial net investment or an initial net investment that is smaller than would be
required for other types of contracts that would be expected to have a similar response to
changes in market factors.
c. Its terms require or permit net settlement, it can readily be settled net by a means outside the
contract, or it provides for delivery of an asset that puts the recipient in a position not
substantially different from net settlement.
7. Underlying, notional amount, and payment provision. An underlying is a specified interest
rate, security price, commodity price, foreign exchange rate, index of prices or rates, or other
Page 8
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
variable. An underlying may be a price or rate of an asset or liability but is not the asset or
liability itself. A notional amount is a number of currency units, shares, bushels, pounds, or
other units specified in the contract. The settlement of a derivative instrument with a notional
amount is determined by interaction of that notional amount with the underlying. The
interaction may be simple multiplication, or it may involve a formula with leverage factors or
other constants. A payment provision specifies a fixed or determinable settlement to be made if
the underlying behaves in a specified manner.
8. Initial net investment. Many derivative instruments require no initial net investment.
Some require an initial net investment as compensation for time value (for example, a premium
on an option) or for terms that are more or less favorable than market conditions (for example, a
premium on a forward purchase contract with a price less than the current forward price). Others
require a mutual exchange of currencies or other assets at inception, in which case the net
investment is the difference in the fair values of the assets exchanged. A derivative instrument
does not require an initial net investment in the contract that is equal to the notional amount (or
the notional amount plus a premium or minus a discount) or that is determined by applying the
notional amount to the underlying.
9. Net settlement. A contract fits the description in paragraph 6(c) if its settlement provisions
meet one of the following criteria:
a. Neither party is required to deliver an asset that is associated with the underlying or that has
a principal amount, stated amount, face value, number of shares, or other denomination that
is equal to the notional amount (or the notional amount plus a premium or minus a
discount). For example, most interest rate swaps do not require that either party deliver
interest-bearing assets with a principal amount equal to the notional amount of the contract.
b. One of the parties is required to deliver an asset of the type described in paragraph 9(a), but
there is a market mechanism that facilitates net settlement, for example, an exchange that
offers a ready opportunity to sell the contract or to enter into an offsetting contract.
c. One of the parties is required to deliver an asset of the type described in paragraph 9(a), but
that asset is readily convertible to cash 5 or is itself a derivative instrument. An example of
that type of contract is a forward contract that requires delivery of an exchange-traded
equity security. Even though the number of shares to be delivered is the same as the
notional amount of the contract and the price of the shares is the underlying, an
exchange-traded security is readily convertible to cash. Another example is a swaption—an
option to require delivery of a swap contract, which is a derivative.
Derivative instruments embedded in other contracts are addressed in paragraphs 12–16.
10. Notwithstanding the conditions in paragraphs 6–9, the following contracts are not subject
to the requirements of this Statement:
a.“Regular-way” security trades. Regular-way security trades are contracts with no net
settlement provision and no market mechanism to facilitate net settlement (as described in
Page 9
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
paragraphs 9(a) and 9(b)). They provide for delivery of a security within the time generally
established by regulations or conventions in the marketplace or exchange in which the
transaction is being executed.
b. Normal purchases and normal sales. Normal purchases and normal sales are contracts with
no net settlement provision and no market mechanism to facilitate net settlement (as
described in paragraphs 9(a) and 9(b)). They provide for the purchase or sale of something
other than a financial instrument or derivative instrument that will be delivered in quantities
expected to be used or sold by the reporting entity over a reasonable period in the normal
course of business.
c. Certain insurance contracts. Generally, contracts of the type that are within the scope of
FASB Statements No. 60, Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises, No. 97,
Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises for Certain Long-Duration Contracts
and for Realized Gains and Losses from the Sale of Investments, and No. 113, Accounting
and Reporting for Reinsurance of Short-Duration and Long-Duration Contracts, are not
subject to the requirements of this Statement whether or not they are written by insurance
enterprises. That is, a contract is not subject to the requirements of this Statement if it
entitles the holder to be compensated only if, as a result of an identifiable insurable event
(other than a change in price), the holder incurs a liability or there is an adverse change in
the value of a specific asset or liability for which the holder is at risk. The following types
of contracts written by insurance enterprises or held by the insureds are not subject to the
requirements of this Statement for the reasons given:
(1) Traditional life insurance contracts. The payment of death benefits is the result of an
identifiable insurable event (death of the insured) instead of changes in a variable.
(2) Traditional property and casualty contracts. The payment of benefits is the result of an
identifiable insurable event (for example, theft or fire) instead of changes in a variable.
However, insurance enterprises enter into other types of contracts that may be subject to the
provisions of this Statement. In addition, some contracts with insurance or other enterprises
combine derivative instruments, as defined in this Statement, with other insurance products
or nonderivative contracts, for example, indexed annuity contracts, variable life insurance
contracts, and property and casualty contracts that combine traditional coverages with
foreign currency options. Contracts that consist of both derivative portions and
nonderivative portions are addressed in paragraph 12.
d. Certain financial guarantee contracts. Financial guarantee contracts are not subject to this
Statement if they provide for payments to be made only to reimburse the guaranteed party
for a loss incurred because the debtor fails to pay when payment is due, which is an
identifiable insurable event. In contrast, financial guarantee contracts are subject to this
Statement if they provide for payments to be made in response to changes in an underlying
(for example, a decrease in a specified debtor’s creditworthiness).
e. Certain contracts that are not traded on an exchange. Contracts that are not exchange-traded
are not subject to the requirements of this Statement if the underlying on which the
settlement is based is one of the following:
(1) A climatic or geological variable or other physical variable
(2) The price or value of (a) a nonfinancial asset of one of the parties to the contract
Page 10
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
provided that the asset is not readily convertible to cash or (b) a nonfinancial liability of
one of the parties to the contract provided that the liability does not require delivery of
an asset that is readily convertible to cash
(3) Specified volumes of sales or service revenues of one of the parties to the contract.
If a contract has more than one underlying and some, but not all, of them qualify for one of
the exceptions in paragraphs 10(e)(1), 10(e)(2), and 10(e)(3), the application of this
Statement to that contract depends on its predominant characteristics. That is, the contract
is subject to the requirements of this Statement if all of its underlyings, considered in
combination, behave in a manner that is highly correlated with the behavior of any of the
component variables that do not qualify for an exception.
f. Derivatives that serve as impediments to sales accounting. A derivative instrument
(whether freestanding or embedded in another contract) whose existence serves as an
impediment to recognizing a related contract as a sale by one party or a purchase by the
counterparty is not subject to this Statement. For example, the existence of a guarantee of
the residual value of a leased asset by the lessor may be an impediment to treating a contract
as a sales-type lease, in which case the contract would be treated by the lessor as an
operating lease. Another example is the existence of a call option enabling a transferor to
repurchase transferred assets that is an impediment to sales accounting under FASB
Statement No. 125, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and
Extinguishments of Liabilities.
11. Notwithstanding the conditions of paragraphs 6–10, the reporting entity shall not consider
the following contracts to be derivative instruments for purposes of this Statement:
a. Contracts issued or held by that reporting entity that are both (1) indexed to its own stock
and (2) classified in stockholders’ equity in its statement of financial position
b. Contracts issued by the entity in connection with stock-based compensation arrangements
addressed in FASB Statement No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation
c. Contracts issued by the entity as contingent consideration from a business combination. The
accounting for contingent consideration issued in a business combination is addressed in
APB Opinion No. 16, Business Combinations. In applying this paragraph, the issuer is
considered to be the entity that is accounting for the combination using the purchase
method.
In contrast, the above exceptions do not apply to the counterparty in those contracts. In addition,
a contract that an entity either can or must settle by issuing its own equity instruments but that is
indexed in part or in full to something other than its own stock can be a derivative instrument for
the issuer under paragraphs 6–10, in which case it would be accounted for as a liability or an
asset in accordance with the requirements of this Statement.
Embedded Derivative Instruments
12. Contracts that do not in their entirety meet the definition of a derivative instrument (refer to
paragraphs 6–9), such as bonds, insurance policies, and leases, may contain “embedded”
Page 11
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
derivative instruments—implicit or explicit terms that affect some or all of the cash flows or the
value of other exchanges required by the contract in a manner similar to a derivative instrument.
The effect of embedding a derivative instrument in another type of contract (“the host contract”)
is that some or all of the cash flows or other exchanges that otherwise would be required by the
contract, whether unconditional or contingent upon the occurrence of a specified event, will be
modified based on one or more underlyings. An embedded derivative instrument shall be
separated from the host contract and accounted for as a derivative instrument pursuant to this
Statement if and only if all of the following criteria are met:
a. The economic characteristics and risks of the embedded derivative instrument are not clearly
and closely related to the economic characteristics and risks of the host contract. Additional
guidance on applying this criterion to various contracts containing embedded derivative
instruments is included in Appendix A of this Statement.
b. The contract (“the hybrid instrument”) that embodies both the embedded derivative
instrument and the host contract is not remeasured at fair value under otherwise applicable
generally accepted accounting principles with changes in fair value reported in earnings as
they occur.
c. A separate instrument with the same terms as the embedded derivative instrument would,
pursuant to paragraphs 6–11, be a derivative instrument subject to the requirements of this
Statement. (The initial net investment for the hybrid instrument shall not be considered to
be the initial net investment for the embedded derivative.)
13. For purposes of applying the provisions of paragraph 12, an embedded derivative
instrument in which the underlying is an interest rate or interest rate index 6 that alters net
interest payments that otherwise would be paid or received on an interest-bearing host contract is
considered to be clearly and closely related to the host contract unless either of the following
conditions exist:
a. The hybrid instrument can contractually be settled in such a way that the investor (holder)
would not recover substantially all of its initial recorded investment.
b. The embedded derivative could at least double the investor’s initial rate of return on the host
contract and could also result in a rate of return that is at least twice what otherwise would
be the market return for a contract that has the same terms as the host contract and that
involves a debtor with a similar credit quality.
Even though the above conditions focus on the investor’s rate of return and the investor’s
recovery of its investment, the existence of either of those conditions would result in the
embedded derivative instrument not being considered clearly and closely related to the host
contract by both parties to the hybrid instrument. Because the existence of those conditions is
assessed at the date that the hybrid instrument is acquired (or incurred) by the reporting entity,
the acquirer of a hybrid instrument in the secondary market could potentially reach a different
conclusion than could the issuer of the hybrid instrument due to applying the conditions in this
paragraph at different points in time.
Page 12
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
14. However, interest-only strips and principal-only strips are not subject to the requirements
of this Statement provided they (a) initially resulted from separating the rights to receive
contractual cash flows of a financial instrument that, in and of itself, did not contain an
embedded derivative that otherwise would have been accounted for separately as a derivative
pursuant to the provisions of paragraphs 12 and 13 and (b) do not incorporate any terms not
present in the original financial instrument described above.
15. An embedded foreign currency derivative instrument shall not be separated from the host
contract and considered a derivative instrument under paragraph 12 if the host contract is not a
financial instrument and it requires payment(s) denominated in (a) the currency of the primary
economic environment in which any substantial party to that contract operates (that is, its
functional currency) or (b) the currency in which the price of the related good or service that is
acquired or delivered is routinely denominated in international commerce (for example, the U.S.
dollar for crude oil transactions). Unsettled foreign currency transactions, including financial
instruments, that are monetary items and have their principal payments, interest payments, or
both denominated in a foreign currency are subject to the requirement in Statement 52 to
recognize any foreign currency transaction gain or loss in earnings and shall not be considered to
contain embedded foreign currency derivative instruments under this Statement. The same
proscription applies to available-for-sale or trading securities that have cash flows denominated
in a foreign currency.
16. In subsequent provisions of this Statement, both (a) a derivative instrument included within
the scope of this Statement by paragraphs 6–11 and (b) an embedded derivative instrument that
has been separated from a host contract as required by paragraph 12 are collectively referred to
as derivative instruments. If an embedded derivative instrument is separated from its host
contract, the host contract shall be accounted for based on generally accepted accounting
principles applicable to instruments of that type that do not contain embedded derivative
instruments. If an entity cannot reliably identify and measure the embedded derivative
instrument that paragraph 12 requires be separated from the host contract, the entire contract
shall be measured at fair value with gain or loss recognized in earnings, but it may not be
designated as a hedging instrument pursuant to this Statement.
Recognition of Derivatives and Measurement of Derivatives and Hedged Items
17. An entity shall recognize all of its derivative instruments in its statement of financial
position as either assets or liabilities depending on the rights or obligations under the contracts.
All derivative instruments shall be measured at fair value. The guidance in FASB Statement No.
107, Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments, as amended, shall apply in
determining the fair value of a financial instrument (derivative or hedged item). If expected
future cash flows are used to estimate fair value, those expected cash flows shall be the best
estimate based on reasonable and supportable assumptions and projections. All available
evidence shall be considered in developing estimates of expected future cash flows. The weight
given to the evidence shall be commensurate with the extent to which the evidence can be
Page 13
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
verified objectively. If a range is estimated for either the amount or the timing of possible cash
flows, the likelihood of possible outcomes shall be considered in determining the best estimate
of future cash flows.
18. The accounting for changes in the fair value (that is, gains or losses) of a derivative
depends on whether it has been designated and qualifies as part of a hedging relationship and, if
so, on the reason for holding it. Either all or a proportion of a derivative may be designated as
the hedging instrument. The proportion must be expressed as a percentage of the entire
derivative so that the profile of risk exposures in the hedging portion of the derivative is the
same as that in the entire derivative. (Thus, an entity is prohibited from separating a compound
derivative into components representing different risks and designating any such component as
the hedging instrument, except as permitted at the date of initial application by the transition
provisions in paragraph 49.) Subsequent references in this Statement to a derivative as a hedging
instrument include the use of only a proportion of a derivative as a hedging instrument. Two or
more derivatives, or proportions thereof, may also be viewed in combination and jointly
designated as the hedging instrument. Gains and losses on derivative instruments are accounted
for as follows:
a. No hedging designation. The gain or loss on a derivative instrument not designated as a
hedging instrument shall be recognized currently in earnings.
b. Fair value hedge. The gain or loss on a derivative instrument designated and qualifying as a
fair value hedging instrument as well as the offsetting loss or gain on the hedged item
attributable to the hedged risk shall be recognized currently in earnings in the same
accounting period, as provided in paragraphs 22 and 23.
c. Cash flow hedge. The effective portion of the gain or loss on a derivative instrument
designated and qualifying as a cash flow hedging instrument shall be reported as a
component of other comprehensive income (outside earnings) and reclassified into
earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged forecasted transaction
affects earnings, as provided in paragraphs 30 and 31. The remaining gain or loss on the
derivative instrument, if any, shall be recognized currently in earnings, as provided in
paragraph 30.
d. Foreign currency hedge. The gain or loss on a derivative instrument or nonderivative
financial instrument designated and qualifying as a foreign currency hedging instrument
shall be accounted for as follows:
(1) The gain or loss on the hedging derivative or nonderivative instrument in a hedge of a
foreign-currency-denominated firm commitment and the offsetting loss or gain on the
hedged firm commitment shall be recognized currently in earnings in the same
accounting period, as provided in paragraph 37.
(2) The gain or loss on the hedging derivative instrument in a hedge of an available-for-sale
security and the offsetting loss or gain on the hedged available-for-sale security shall be
recognized currently in earnings in the same accounting period, as provided in
paragraph 38.
(3) The effective portion of the gain or loss on the hedging derivative instrument in a hedge
Page 14
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
of a forecasted foreign-currency-denominated transaction shall be reported as a
component of other comprehensive income (outside earnings) and reclassified into
earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged forecasted transaction
affects earnings, as provided in paragraph 41. The remaining gain or loss on the
hedging instrument shall be recognized currently in earnings.
(4) The gain or loss on the hedging derivative or nonderivative instrument in a hedge of a
net investment in a foreign operation shall be reported in other comprehensive income
(outside earnings) as part of the cumulative translation adjustment to the extent it is
effective as a hedge, as provided in paragraph 42.
19. In this Statement, the change in the fair value of an entire financial asset or liability for a
period refers to the difference between its fair value at the beginning of the period (or acquisition
date) and the end of the period adjusted to exclude (a) changes in fair value due to the passage of
time and (b) changes in fair value related to any payments received or made, such as in partially
recovering the asset or partially settling the liability.
Fair Value Hedges
General
20. An entity may designate a derivative instrument as hedging the exposure to changes in the
fair value of an asset or a liability or an identified portion thereof (“hedged item”) that is
attributable to a particular risk. Designated hedging instruments and hedged items qualify for
fair value hedge accounting if all of the following criteria and those in paragraph 21 are met:
a. At inception of the hedge, there is formal documentation of the hedging relationship and the
entity’s risk management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedge, including
identification of the hedging instrument, the hedged item, the nature of the risk being
hedged, and how the hedging instrument’s effectiveness in offsetting the exposure to
changes in the hedged item’s fair value attributable to the hedged risk will be assessed.
There must be a reasonable basis for how the entity plans to assess the hedging instrument’s
effectiveness.
(1) For a fair value hedge of a firm commitment, the entity’s formal documentation at the
inception of the hedge must include a reasonable method for recognizing in earnings the
asset or liability representing the gain or loss on the hedged firm commitment.
(2) An entity’s defined risk management strategy for a particular hedging relationship may
exclude certain components of a specific hedging derivative’s change in fair value, such
as time value, from the assessment of hedge effectiveness, as discussed in paragraph 63
in Section 2 of Appendix A.
b. Both at inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis, the hedging relationship is expected
to be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes in fair value attributable to the hedged
risk during the period that the hedge is designated. An assessment of effectiveness is
required whenever financial statements or earnings are reported, and at least every three
Page 15
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
months. If the hedging instrument (such as an at-the-money option contract) provides only
one-sided offset of the hedged risk, the increases (or decreases) in the fair value of the
hedging instrument must be expected to be highly effective in offsetting the decreases (or
increases) in the fair value of the hedged item. All assessments of effectiveness shall be
consistent with the risk management strategy documented for that particular hedging
relationship (in accordance with paragraph 20(a) above).
c. If a written option is designated as hedging a recognized asset or liability, the combination
of the hedged item and the written option provides at least as much potential for gains as a
result of a favorable change in the fair value of the combined instruments 7 as exposure to
losses from an unfavorable change in their combined fair value. That test is met if all
possible percentage favorable changes in the underlying (from zero percent to 100 percent)
would provide at least as much gain as the loss that would be incurred from an unfavorable
change in the underlying of the same percentage.
(1) A combination of options (for example, an interest rate collar) entered into
contemporaneously shall be considered a written option if either at inception or over the
life of the contracts a net premium is received in cash or as a favorable rate or other
term. (Thus, a collar can be designated as a hedging instrument in a fair value hedge
without regard to the test in paragraph 20(c) unless a net premium is received.)
Furthermore, a derivative instrument that results from combining a written option and
any other nonoption derivative shall be considered a written option.
A nonderivative instrument, such as a Treasury note, shall not be designated as a hedging
instrument, except as provided in paragraphs 37 and 42 of this Statement.
The Hedged Item
21. An asset or a liability is eligible for designation as a hedged item in a fair value hedge if all
of the following criteria are met:
a. The hedged item is specifically identified as either all or a specific portion of a recognized
asset or liability or of an unrecognized firm commitment. 8 The hedged item is a single
asset or liability (or a specific portion thereof) or is a portfolio of similar assets or a portfolio
of similar liabilities (or a specific portion thereof).
(1) If similar assets or similar liabilities are aggregated and hedged as a portfolio, the
individual assets or individual liabilities must share the risk exposure for which they are
designated as being hedged. The change in fair value attributable to the hedged risk for
each individual item in a hedged portfolio must be expected to respond in a generally
proportionate manner to the overall change in fair value of the aggregate portfolio
attributable to the hedged risk. That is, if the change in fair value of a hedged portfolio
attributable to the hedged risk was 10 percent during a reporting period, the change in
the fair values attributable to the hedged risk for each item constituting the portfolio
should be expected to be within a fairly narrow range, such as 9 percent to 11 percent.
In contrast, an expectation that the change in fair value attributable to the hedged risk
for individual items in the portfolio would range from 7 percent to 13 percent would be
Page 16
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
inconsistent with this provision. In aggregating loans in a portfolio to be hedged, an
entity may choose to consider some of the following characteristics, as appropriate:
loan type, loan size, nature and location of collateral, interest rate type (fixed or
variable) and the coupon interest rate (if fixed), scheduled maturity, prepayment history
of the loans (if seasoned), and expected prepayment performance in varying interest rate
scenarios. 9
(2) If the hedged item is a specific portion of an asset or liability (or of a portfolio of
similar assets or a portfolio of similar liabilities), the hedged item is one of the
following:
(a) A percentage of the entire asset or liability (or of the entire portfolio)
(b) One or more selected contractual cash flows (such as the portion of the asset or
liability representing the present value of the interest payments in the first two
years of a four-year debt instrument)
(c) A put option, a call option, an interest rate cap, or an interest rate floor embedded
in an existing asset or liability that is not an embedded derivative accounted for
separately pursuant to paragraph 12 of this Statement
(d) The residual value in a lessor’s net investment in a direct financing or sales-type
lease.
If the entire asset or liability is an instrument with variable cash flows, the hedged item
cannot be deemed to be an implicit fixed-to-variable swap (or similar instrument)
perceived to be embedded in a host contract with fixed cash flows.
b. The hedged item presents an exposure to changes in fair value attributable to the hedged risk
that could affect reported earnings. The reference to affecting reported earnings does not
apply to an entity that does not report earnings as a separate caption in a statement of
financial performance, such as a not-for-profit organization, as discussed in paragraph 43.
c. The hedged item is not (1) an asset or liability that is remeasured with the changes in fair
value attributable to the hedged risk reported currently in earnings (for example, if foreign
exchange risk is hedged, a foreign-currency-denominated asset for which a foreign currency
transaction gain or loss is recognized in earnings), (2) an investment accounted for by the
equity method in accordance with the requirements of APB Opinion No. 18, The Equity
Method of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock, (3) a minority interest in one or
more consolidated subsidiaries, (4) an equity investment in a consolidated subsidiary, (5) a
firm commitment either to enter into a business combination or to acquire or dispose of a
subsidiary, a minority interest, or an equity method investee, or (6) an equity instrument
issued by the entity and classified in stockholders’ equity in the statement of financial
position.
d. If the hedged item is all or a portion of a debt security (or a portfolio of similar debt
securities) that is classified as held-to-maturity in accordance with FASB Statement No.
115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, the designated risk
being hedged is the risk of changes in its fair value attributable to changes in the obligor’s
creditworthiness or if the hedged item is an option component of a held-to-maturity security
that permits its prepayment, the designated risk being hedged is the risk of changes in the
entire fair value of that option component. (The designated hedged risk for a
Page 17
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
held-to-maturity security may not be the risk of changes in its fair value attributable to
changes in market interest rates or foreign exchange rates. If the hedged item is other than
an option component that permits its prepayment, the designated hedged risk also may not
be the risk of changes in its overall fair value.)
e. If the hedged item is a nonfinancial asset or liability (other than a recognized loan servicing
right or a nonfinancial firm commitment with financial components), the designated risk
being hedged is the risk of changes in the fair value of the entire hedged asset or liability
(reflecting its actual location if a physical asset). That is, the price risk of a similar asset in a
different location or of a major ingredient may not be the hedged risk. Thus, in hedging the
exposure to changes in the fair value of gasoline, an entity may not designate the risk of
changes in the price of crude oil as the risk being hedged for purposes of determining
effectiveness of the fair value hedge of gasoline
f. If the hedged item is a financial asset or liability, a recognized loan servicing right, or a
nonfinancial firm commitment with financial components, the designated risk being hedged
is (1) the risk of changes in the overall fair value of the entire hedged item, (2) the risk of
changes in its fair value attributable to changes in market interest rates, (3) the risk of
changes in its fair value attributable to changes in the related foreign currency exchange
rates (refer to paragraphs 37 and 38), or (4) the risk of changes in its fair value attributable
to changes in the obligor’s creditworthiness. If the risk designated as being hedged is not
the risk in paragraph 21(f)(1) above, two or more of the other risks (market interest rate risk,
foreign currency exchange risk, and credit risk) may simultaneously be designated as being
hedged. An entity may not simply designate prepayment risk as the risk being hedged for a
financial asset. However, it can designate the option component of a prepayable instrument
as the hedged item in a fair value hedge of the entity’s exposure to changes in the fair value
of that “prepayment” option, perhaps thereby achieving the objective of its desire to hedge
prepayment risk. The effect of an embedded derivative of the same risk class must be
considered in designating a hedge of an individual risk. For example, the effect of an
embedded prepayment option must be considered in designating a hedge of market interest
rate risk.
22. Gains and losses on a qualifying fair value hedge shall be accounted for as follows:
a. The gain or loss on the hedging instrument shall be recognized currently in earnings.
b. The gain or loss (that is, the change in fair value) on the hedged item attributable to the
hedged risk shall adjust the carrying amount of the hedged item and be recognized currently
in earnings.
If the fair value hedge is fully effective, the gain or loss on the hedging instrument, adjusted for
the component, if any, of that gain or loss that is excluded from the assessment of effectiveness
under the entity’s defined risk management strategy for that particular hedging relationship (as
discussed in paragraph 63 in Section 2 of Appendix A), would exactly offset the loss or gain on
the hedged item attributable to the hedged risk. Any difference that does arise would be the
effect of hedge ineffectiveness, which consequently is recognized currently in earnings. The
measurement of hedge ineffectiveness for a particular hedging relationship shall be consistent
Page 18
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
with the entity’s risk management strategy and the method of assessing hedge effectiveness that
was documented at the inception of the hedging relationship, as discussed in paragraph 20(a).
Nevertheless, the amount of hedge ineffectiveness recognized in earnings is based on the extent
to which exact offset is not achieved. Although a hedging relationship must comply with an
entity’s established policy range of what is considered “highly effective” pursuant to paragraph
20(b) in order for that relationship to qualify for hedge accounting, that compliance does not
assure zero ineffectiveness. Section 2 of Appendix A illustrates assessing hedge effectiveness
and measuring hedge ineffectiveness. Any hedge ineffectiveness directly affects earnings
because there will be no offsetting adjustment of a hedged item’s carrying amount for the
ineffective aspect of the gain or loss on the related hedging instrument.
23. If a hedged item is otherwise measured at fair value with changes in fair value reported in
other comprehensive income (such as an available-for-sale security), the adjustment of the
hedged item’s carrying amount discussed in paragraph 22 shall be recognized in earnings rather
than in other comprehensive income in order to offset the gain or loss on the hedging instrument.
24. The adjustment of the carrying amount of a hedged asset or liability required by
paragraph 22 shall be accounted for in the same manner as other components of the carrying
amount of that asset or liability. For example, an adjustment of the carrying amount of a hedged
asset held for sale (such as inventory) would remain part of the carrying amount of that asset
until the asset is sold, at which point the entire carrying amount of the hedged asset would be
recognized as the cost of the item sold in determining earnings. An adjustment of the carrying
amount of a hedged interest-bearing financial instrument shall be amortized to earnings;
amortization shall begin no later than when the hedged item ceases to be adjusted for changes in
its fair value attributable to the risk being hedged.
25. An entity shall discontinue prospectively the accounting specified in paragraphs 22 and 23
for an existing hedge if any one of the following occurs:
a. Any criterion in paragraphs 20 and 21 is no longer met.
b. The derivative expires or is sold, terminated, or exercised.
c. The entity removes the designation of the fair value hedge.
In those circumstances, the entity may elect to designate prospectively a new hedging
relationship with a different hedging instrument or, in the circumstances described in paragraphs
25(a) and 25(c) above, a different hedged item or a hedged transaction if the hedging relationship
meets the criteria specified in paragraphs 20 and 21 for a fair value hedge or paragraphs 28 and
29 for a cash flow hedge.
26. In general, if a periodic assessment indicates noncompliance with the effectiveness
criterion in paragraph 20(b), an entity shall not recognize the adjustment of the carrying amount
of the hedged item described in paragraphs 22 and 23 after the last date on which compliance
with the effectiveness criterion was established. However, if the event or change in
circumstances that caused the hedging relationship to fail the effectiveness criterion can be
Page 19
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
identified, the entity shall recognize in earnings the changes in the hedged item’s fair value
attributable to the risk being hedged that occurred prior to that event or change in circumstances.
If a fair value hedge of a firm commitment is discontinued because the hedged item no longer
meets the definition of a firm commitment, the entity shall derecognize any asset or liability
previously recognized pursuant to paragraph 22 (as a result of an adjustment to the carrying
amount for the firm commitment) and recognize a corresponding loss or gain currently in
earnings.
Impairment
27. An asset or liability that has been designated as being hedged and accounted for pursuant to
paragraphs 22–24 remains subject to the applicable requirements in generally accepted
accounting principles for assessing impairment for that type of asset or for recognizing an
increased obligation for that type of liability. Those impairment requirements shall be applied
after hedge accounting has been applied for the period and the carrying amount of the hedged
asset or liability has been adjusted pursuant to paragraph 22 of this Statement. Because the
hedging instrument is recognized separately as an asset or liability, its fair value or expected
cash flows shall not be considered in applying those impairment requirements to the hedged
asset or liability.
Cash Flow Hedges
General
28. An entity may designate a derivative instrument as hedging the exposure to variability in
expected future cash flows that is attributable to a particular risk. That exposure may be
associated with an existing recognized asset or liability (such as all or certain future interest
payments on variable-rate debt) or a forecasted transaction (such as a forecasted purchase or
sale). 10 Designated hedging instruments and hedged items or transactions qualify for cash flow
hedge accounting if all of the following criteria and those in paragraph 29 are met:
a. At inception of the hedge, there is formal documentation of the hedging relationship and the
entity’s risk management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedge, including
identification of the hedging instrument, the hedged transaction, the nature of the risk being
hedged, and how the hedging instrument’s effectiveness in hedging the exposure to the
hedged transaction’s variability in cash flows attributable to the hedged risk will be
assessed. There must be a reasonable basis for how the entity plans to assess the hedging
instrument’s effectiveness.
(1) An entity’s defined risk management strategy for a particular hedging relationship may
exclude certain components of a specific hedging derivative’s change in fair value from
the assessment of hedge effectiveness, as discussed in paragraph 63 in Section 2 of
Appendix A.
(2) Documentation shall include all relevant details, including the date on or period within
which the forecasted transaction is expected to occur, the specific nature of asset or
Page 20
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
liability involved (if any), and the expected currency amount or quantity of the
forecasted transaction.
(a) The phrase expected currency amount refers to hedges of foreign currency
exchange risk and requires specification of the exact amount of foreign currency
being hedged.
(b) The phrase expected . . . quantity refers to hedges of other risks and requires
specification of the physical quantity (that is, the number of items or units of
measure) encompassed by the hedged forecasted transaction. If a forecasted sale or
purchase is being hedged for price risk, the hedged transaction cannot be specified
solely in terms of expected currency amounts, nor can it be specified as a
percentage of sales or purchases during a period. The current price of a forecasted
transaction also should be identified to satisfy the criterion in paragraph 28(b) for
offsetting cash flows.
The hedged forecasted transaction shall be described with sufficient specificity so that
when a transaction occurs, it is clear whether that transaction is or is not the hedged
transaction. Thus, the forecasted transaction could be identified as the sale of either the
first 15,000 units of a specific product sold during a specified 3-month period or the
first 5,000 units of a specific product sold in each of 3 specific months, but it could not
be identified as the sale of the last 15,000 units of that product sold during a 3-month
period (because the last 15,000 units cannot be identified when they occur, but only
when the period has ended).
b. Both at inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis, the hedging relationship is expected
to be highly effective in achieving offsetting cash flows attributable to the hedged risk
during the term of the hedge, except as indicated in paragraph 28(d) below. An assessment
of effectiveness is required whenever financial statements or earnings are reported, and at
least every three months. If the hedging instrument, such as an at-the-money option
contract, provides only one-sided offset against the hedged risk, the cash inflows (outflows)
from the hedging instrument must be expected to be highly effective in offsetting the
corresponding change in the cash outflows or inflows of the hedged transaction. All
assessments of effectiveness shall be consistent with the originally documented risk
management strategy for that particular hedging relationship.
c. If a written option is designated as hedging the variability in cash flows for a recognized
asset or liability, the combination of the hedged item and the written option provides at least
as much potential for favorable cash flows as exposure to unfavorable cash flows. That test
is met if all possible percentage favorable changes in the underlying (from zero percent to
100 percent) would provide at least as much favorable cash flows as the unfavorable cash
flows that would be incurred from an unfavorable change in the underlying of the same
percentage. (Refer to paragraph 20(c)(1).)
d. If a hedging instrument is used to modify the interest receipts or payments associated with a
recognized financial asset or liability from one variable rate to another variable rate, the
hedging instrument must be a link between an existing designated asset (or group of similar
assets) with variable cash flows and an existing designated liability (or group of similar
liabilities) with variable cash flows and be highly effective at achieving offsetting cash
Page 21
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
flows. A link exists if the basis (that is, the rate index on which the interest rate is based) of
one leg of an interest rate swap is the same as the basis of the interest receipts for the
designated asset and the basis of the other leg of the swap is the same as the basis of the
interest payments for the designated liability. In this situation, the criterion in the first
sentence in paragraph 29(a) is applied separately to the designated asset and the designated
liability.
A nonderivative instrument, such as a Treasury note, shall not be designated as a hedging
instrument for a cash flow hedge.
The Hedged Forecasted Transaction
29. A forecasted transaction is eligible for designation as a hedged transaction in a cash flow
hedge if all of the following additional criteria are met:
a. The forecasted transaction is specifically identified as a single transaction or a group of
individual transactions. If the hedged transaction is a group of individual transactions, those
individual transactions must share the same risk exposure for which they are designated as
being hedged. Thus, a forecasted purchase and a forecasted sale cannot both be included in
the same group of individual transactions that constitute the hedged transaction.
b. The occurrence of the forecasted transaction is probable.
c. The forecasted transaction is a transaction with a party external to the reporting entity
(except as permitted by paragraph 40) and presents an exposure to variations in cash flows
for the hedged risk that could affect reported earnings.
d. The forecasted transaction is not the acquisition of an asset or incurrence of a liability that
will subsequently be remeasured with changes in fair value attributable to the hedged risk
reported currently in earnings (for example, if foreign exchange risk is hedged, the
forecasted acquisition of a foreign-currency-denominated asset for which a foreign currency
transaction gain or loss will be recognized in earnings). However, forecasted sales on credit
and the forecasted accrual of royalties on probable future sales by third-party licensees are
not considered the forecasted acquisition of a receivable. If the forecasted transaction
relates to a recognized asset or liability, the asset or liability is not remeasured with changes
in fair value attributable to the hedged risk reported currently in earnings.
e. If the variable cash flows of the forecasted transaction relate to a debt security that is
classified as held-to-maturity under Statement 115, the risk being hedged is the risk of
changes in its cash flows attributable to default or changes in the obligor’s creditworthiness.
For those variable cash flows, the risk being hedged cannot be the risk of changes in its cash
flows attributable to changes in market interest rates.
f. The forecasted transaction does not involve a business combination subject to the provisions
of Opinion 16 and is not a transaction (such as a forecasted purchase, sale, or dividend)
involving (1) a parent company’s interests in consolidated subsidiaries, (2) a minority
interest in a consolidated subsidiary, (3) an equity-method investment, or (4) an entity’s own
equity instruments.
g. If the hedged transaction is the forecasted purchase or sale of a nonfinancial asset, the
Page 22
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
designated risk being hedged is (1) the risk of changes in the functional-currency-equivalent
cash flows attributable to changes in the related foreign currency exchange rates or (2) the
risk of changes in the cash flows relating to all changes in the purchase price or sales price
of the asset (reflecting its actual location if a physical asset), not the risk of changes in the
cash flows relating to the purchase or sale of a similar asset in a different location or of a
major ingredient. Thus, for example, in hedging the exposure to changes in the cash flows
relating to the purchase of its bronze bar inventory, an entity may not designate the risk of
changes in the cash flows relating to purchasing the copper component in bronze as the risk
being hedged for purposes of assessing offset as required by paragraph 28(b).
h. If the hedged transaction is the forecasted purchase or sale of a financial asset or liability or
the variable cash inflow or outflow of an existing financial asset or liability, the designated
risk being hedged is (1) the risk of changes in the cash flows of the entire asset or liability,
such as those relating to all changes in the purchase price or sales price (regardless of
whether that price and the related cash flows are stated in the entity’s functional currency or
a foreign currency), (2) the risk of changes in its cash flows attributable to changes in
market interest rates, (3) the risk of changes in the functional-currency-equivalent cash
flows attributable to changes in the related foreign currency exchange rates (refer to
paragraph 40), or (4) the risk of changes in its cash flows attributable to default or changes
in the obligor’s creditworthiness. Two or more of the above risks may be designated
simultaneously as being hedged. An entity may not designate prepayment risk as the risk
being hedged (refer to paragraph 21(f)).
30. The effective portion of the gain or loss on a derivative designated as a cash flow hedge is
reported in other comprehensive income, and the ineffective portion is reported in earnings.
More specifically, a qualifying cash flow hedge shall be accounted for as follows:
a. If an entity’s defined risk management strategy for a particular hedging relationship
excludes a specific component of the gain or loss, or related cash flows, on the hedging
derivative from the assessment of hedge effectiveness (as discussed in paragraph 63 in
Section 2 of Appendix A), that excluded component of the gain or loss shall be recognized
currently in earnings. For example, if the effectiveness of a hedge with an option contract is
assessed based on changes in the option’s intrinsic value, the changes in the option’s time
value would be recognized in earnings. Time value is equal to the fair value of the option
less its intrinsic value.
b. Accumulated other comprehensive income associated with the hedged transaction shall be
adjusted to a balance that reflects the lesser of the following (in absolute amounts):
(1) The cumulative gain or loss on the derivative from inception of the hedge less (a) the
excluded component discussed in paragraph 30(a) above and (b) the derivative’s gains
or losses previously reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income into
earnings pursuant to paragraph 31
(2) The portion of the cumulative gain or loss on the derivative necessary to offset the
cumulative change in expected future cash flows on the hedged transaction from
inception of the hedge less the derivative’s gains or losses previously reclassified from
Page 23
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
accumulated other comprehensive income into earnings pursuant to paragraph 31.
That adjustment of accumulated other comprehensive income shall incorporate recognition
in other comprehensive income of part or all of the gain or loss on the hedging derivative, as
necessary.
c. A gain or loss shall be recognized in earnings, as necessary, for any remaining gain or loss
on the hedging derivative or to adjust other comprehensive income to the balance specified
in paragraph 30(b) above.
Section 2 of Appendix A illustrates assessing hedge effectiveness and measuring hedge
ineffectiveness. Examples 6 and 9 of Section 1 of Appendix B illustrate the application of this
paragraph.
31. Amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income shall be reclassified into earnings in
the same period or periods during which the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings (for
example, when a forecasted sale actually occurs). If the hedged transaction results in the
acquisition of an asset or the incurrence of a liability, the gains and losses in accumulated other
comprehensive income shall be reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during
which the asset acquired or liability incurred affects earnings (such as in the periods that
depreciation expense, interest expense, or cost of sales is recognized). However, if an entity
expects at any time that continued reporting of a loss in accumulated other comprehensive
income would lead to recognizing a net loss on the combination of the hedging instrument and
the hedged transaction (and related asset acquired or liability incurred) in one or more future
periods, a loss shall be reclassified immediately into earnings for the amount that is not expected
to be recovered. For example, a loss shall be reported in earnings for a derivative that is
designated as hedging the forecasted purchase of inventory to the extent that the cost basis of the
inventory plus the related amount reported in accumulated other comprehensive income exceeds
the amount expected to be recovered through sales of that inventory. (Impairment guidance is
provided in paragraphs 34 and 35.)
32. An entity shall discontinue prospectively the accounting specified in paragraphs 30 and 31
for an existing hedge if any one of the following occurs:
a. Any criterion in paragraphs 28 and 29 is no longer met.
b. The derivative expires or is sold, terminated, or exercised.
c. The entity removes the designation of the cash flow hedge.
In those circumstances, the net gain or loss shall remain in accumulated other comprehensive
income and be reclassified into earnings as specified in paragraph 31. Furthermore, the entity
may elect to designate prospectively a new hedging relationship with a different hedging
instrument or, in the circumstances described in paragraphs 32(a) and 32(c), a different hedged
transaction or a hedged item if the hedging relationship meets the criteria specified in paragraphs
28 and 29 for a cash flow hedge or paragraphs 20 and 21 for a fair value hedge.
Page 24
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
33. If a cash flow hedge is discontinued because it is probable that the original forecasted
transaction will not occur, the net gain or loss in accumulated other comprehensive income shall
be immediately reclassified into earnings.
34. Existing requirements in generally accepted accounting principles for assessing asset
impairment or recognizing an increased obligation apply to an asset or liability that gives rise to
variable cash flows (such as a variable-rate financial instrument), for which the variable cash
flows (the forecasted transactions) have been designated as being hedged and accounted for
pursuant to paragraphs 30 and 31. Those impairment requirements shall be applied each period
after hedge accounting has been applied for the period, pursuant to paragraphs 30 and 31 of this
Statement. The fair value or expected cash flows of a hedging instrument shall not be considered
in applying those requirements. The gain or loss on the hedging instrument in accumulated other
comprehensive income shall, however, be accounted for as discussed in paragraph 31.
35. If, under existing requirements in generally accepted accounting principles, an impairment
loss is recognized on an asset or an additional obligation is recognized on a liability to which a
hedged forecasted transaction relates, any offsetting net gain related to that transaction in
accumulated other comprehensive income shall be reclassified immediately into earnings.
Similarly, if a recovery is recognized on the asset or liability to which the forecasted transaction
relates, any offsetting net loss that has been accumulated in other comprehensive income shall be
reclassified immediately into earnings.
Foreign Currency Hedges
36. Consistent with the functional currency concept in Statement 52, an entity may designate
the following types of hedges of foreign currency exposure, as specified in paragraphs 37-42:
a. A fair value hedge of an unrecognized firm commitment or an available-for-sale security
b. A cash flow hedge of a forecasted foreign-currency-denominated transaction or a forecasted
intercompany foreign-currency-denominated transaction
c. A hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation.
The criterion in paragraph 21(c)(1) requires that a recognized asset or liability that may give rise
to a foreign currency transaction gain or loss under Statement 52 (such as a
foreign-currency-denominated receivable or payable) not be the hedged item in a foreign
currency fair value or cash flow hedge because it is remeasured with the changes in the carrying
amount attributable to what would be the hedged risk (an exchange rate change) reported
currently in earnings. Similarly, the criterion in paragraph 29(d) requires that the forecasted
acquisition of an asset or the incurrence of a liability that may give rise to a foreign currency
transaction gain or loss under Statement 52 not be the hedged item in a foreign currency cash
flow hedge because, subsequent to acquisition or incurrence, the asset or liability will be
remeasured with changes in the carrying amount attributable to what would be the hedged risk
reported currently in earnings. A foreign currency derivative instrument that has been entered
into with another member of a consolidated group can be a hedging instrument in the
Page 25
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
consolidated financial statements only if that other member has entered into an offsetting
contract with an unrelated third party to hedge the exposure it acquired from issuing the
derivative instrument to the affiliate that initiated the hedge.
Foreign Currency Fair Value Hedges
37. Unrecognized firm commitment. A derivative instrument or a nonderivative financial
instrument 11 that may give rise to a foreign currency transaction gain or loss under Statement 52
can be designated as hedging changes in the fair value of an unrecognized firm commitment, or a
specific portion thereof, attributable to foreign currency exchange rates. The designated hedging
relationship qualifies for the accounting specified in paragraphs 22–27 if all the fair value hedge
criteria in paragraphs 20 and 21 are met.
38. Available-for-sale security. A nonderivative financial instrument shall not be designated as
the hedging instrument in a fair value hedge of the foreign currency exposure of an
available-for-sale security. A derivative instrument can be designated as hedging the changes in
the fair value of an available-for-sale debt security (or a specific portion thereof) attributable to
changes in foreign currency exchange rates. The designated hedging relationship qualifies for the
accounting specified in paragraphs 22–27 if all the fair value hedge criteria in paragraphs 20 and
21 are met. An available-for-sale equity security can be hedged for changes in the fair value
attributable to changes in foreign currency exchange rates and qualify for the accounting
specified in paragraphs 22–27 only if the fair value hedge criteria in paragraphs 20 and 21 are
met and the following two conditions are satisfied:
a. The security is not traded on an exchange (or other established marketplace) on which trades
are denominated in the investor’s functional currency.
b. Dividends or other cash flows to holders of the security are all denominated in the same
foreign currency as the currency expected to be received upon sale of the security.
The change in fair value of the hedged available-for-sale equity security attributable to foreign
exchange risk is reported in earnings pursuant to paragraph 23 and not in other comprehensive
income.
39. Gains and losses on a qualifying foreign currency fair value hedge shall be accounted for as
specified in paragraphs 22–27. The gain or loss on a nonderivative hedging instrument
attributable to foreign currency risk is the foreign currency transaction gain or loss as determined
under Statement 52. 12 That foreign currency transaction gain or loss shall be recognized
currently in earnings along with the change in the carrying amount of the hedged firm
commitment.
Page 26
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Foreign Currency Cash Flow Hedges
40. A nonderivative financial instrument shall not be designated as a hedging instrument in a
foreign currency cash flow hedge. A derivative instrument designated as hedging the foreign
currency exposure to variability in the functional-currency-equivalent cash flows associated with
either a forecasted foreign-currency-denominated transaction (for example, a forecasted export
sale to an unaffiliated entity with the price to be denominated in a foreign currency) or a
forecasted intercompany foreign-currency-denominated transaction (for example, a forecasted
sale to a foreign subsidiary or a forecasted royalty from a foreign subsidiary) qualifies for hedge
accounting if all of the following criteria are met:
a. The operating unit that has the foreign currency exposure is a party to the hedging
instrument (which can be an instrument between a parent company and its subsidiary—refer
to paragraph 36).
b. The hedged transaction is denominated in a currency other than that unit’s functional
currency.
c. All of the criteria in paragraphs 28 and 29 are met, except for the criterion in paragraph
29(c) that requires that the forecasted transaction be with a party external to the reporting
entity.
d. If the hedged transaction is a group of individual forecasted foreign-currency-denominated
transactions, a forecasted inflow of a foreign currency and a forecasted outflow of the
foreign currency cannot both be included in the same group.
41. A qualifying foreign currency cash flow hedge shall be accounted for as specified in
paragraphs 30–35.
Hedges of the Foreign Currency Exposure of a Net Investment in a Foreign Operation
42. A derivative instrument or a nonderivative financial instrument that may give rise to a
foreign currency transaction gain or loss under Statement 52 can be designated as hedging the
foreign currency exposure of a net investment in a foreign operation. The gain or loss on a
hedging derivative instrument (or the foreign currency transaction gain or loss on the
nonderivative hedging instrument) that is designated as, and is effective as, an economic hedge
of the net investment in a foreign operation shall be reported in the same manner as a translation
adjustment to the extent it is effective as a hedge. The hedged net investment shall be accounted
for consistent with Statement 52; the provisions of this Statement for recognizing the gain or loss
on assets designated as being hedged in a fair value hedge do not apply to the hedge of a net
investment in a foreign operation.
Accounting by Not-for-Profit Organizations and Other Entities That Do Not Report
Earnings
43. An entity that does not report earnings as a separate caption in a statement of financial
Page 27
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
performance (for example, a not-for-profit organization or a defined benefit pension plan) shall
recognize the gain or loss on a hedging instrument and a nonhedging derivative instrument as a
change in net assets in the period of change unless the hedging instrument is designated as a
hedge of the foreign currency exposure of a net investment in a foreign operation. In that case,
the provisions of paragraph 42 of this Statement shall be applied. Entities that do not report
earnings shall recognize the changes in the carrying amount of the hedged item pursuant to
paragraph 22 in a fair value hedge as a change in net assets in the period of change. Those
entities are not permitted to use cash flow hedge accounting because they do not report earnings
separately. Consistent with the provisions of FASB Statement No. 117, Financial Statements of
Not-for-Profit Organizations, this Statement does not prescribe how a not-for-profit organization
should determine the components of an operating measure, if one is presented.
Disclosures
44. An entity that holds or issues derivative instruments (or nonderivative instruments that are
designated and qualify as hedging instruments pursuant to paragraphs 37 and 42) shall disclose
its objectives for holding or issuing those instruments, the context needed to understand those
objectives, and its strategies for achieving those objectives. The description shall distinguish
between derivative instruments (and nonderivative instruments) designated as fair value hedging
instruments, derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedging instruments, derivative
instruments (and nonderivative instruments) designated as hedging instruments for hedges of the
foreign currency exposure of a net investment in a foreign operation, and all other derivatives.
The description also shall indicate the entity’s risk management policy for each of those types of
hedges, including a description of the items or transactions for which risks are hedged. For
derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments, the description shall indicate the
purpose of the derivative activity. Qualitative disclosures about an entity’s objectives and
strategies for using derivative instruments may be more meaningful if such objectives and
strategies are described in the context of an entity’s overall risk management profile. If
appropriate, an entity is encouraged, but not required, to provide such additional qualitative
disclosures.
45. An entity’s disclosures for every reporting period for which a complete set of financial
statements is presented also shall include the following:
Fair value hedges
a. For derivative instruments, as well as nonderivative instruments that may give rise to
foreign currency transaction gains or losses under Statement 52, that have been designated
and have qualified as fair value hedging instruments and for the related hedged items:
(1) The net gain or loss recognized in earnings during the reporting period representing (a)
the amount of the hedges’ ineffectiveness and (b) the component of the derivative
instruments’ gain or loss, if any, excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness,
and a description of where the net gain or loss is reported in the statement of income or
other statement of financial performance
Page 28
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
(2) The amount of net gain or loss recognized in earnings when a hedged firm commitment
no longer qualifies as a fair value hedge.
Cash flow hedges
b. For derivative instruments that have been designated and have qualified as cash flow
hedging instruments and for the related hedged transactions:
(1) The net gain or loss recognized in earnings during the reporting period representing (a)
the amount of the hedges’ ineffectiveness and (b) the component of the derivative
instruments’ gain or loss, if any, excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness,
and a description of where the net gain or loss is reported in the statement of income or
other statement of financial performance
(2) A description of the transactions or other events that will result in the reclassification
into earnings of gains and losses that are reported in accumulated other comprehensive
income, and the estimated net amount of the existing gains or losses at the reporting
date that is expected to be reclassified into earnings within the next 12 months
(3) The maximum length of time over which the entity is hedging its exposure to the
variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions excluding those forecasted
transactions related to the payment of variable interest on existing financial instruments
(4) The amount of gains and losses reclassified into earnings as a result of the
discontinuance of cash flow hedges because it is probable that the original forecasted
transactions will not occur.
Hedges of the net investment in a foreign operation
c. For derivative instruments, as well as nonderivative instruments that may give rise to
foreign currency transaction gains or losses under Statement 52, that have been designated
and have qualified as hedging instruments for hedges of the foreign currency exposure of a
net investment in a foreign operation, the net amount of gains or losses included in the
cumulative translation adjustment during the reporting period.
The quantitative disclosures about derivative instruments may be more useful, and less likely to
be perceived to be out of context or otherwise misunderstood, if similar information is disclosed
about other financial instruments or nonfinancial assets and liabilities to which the derivative
instruments are related by activity. Accordingly, in those situations, an entity is encouraged, but
not required, to present a more complete picture of its activities by disclosing that information.
Reporting Changes in the Components of Comprehensive Income
46. An entity shall display as a separate classification within other comprehensive income the
net gain or loss on derivative instruments designated and qualifying as cash flow hedging
instruments that are reported in comprehensive income pursuant to paragraphs 30 and 41.
47. As part of the disclosures of accumulated other comprehensive income, pursuant to
paragraph 26 of FASB Statement No. 130, Reporting Comprehensive Income, an entity shall
Page 29
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
separately disclose the beginning and ending accumulated derivative gain or loss, the related net
change associated with current period hedging transactions, and the net amount of any
reclassification into earnings.
Effective Date and Transition
48. This Statement shall be effective for all fiscal quarters of all fiscal years beginning after
June 15, 1999. Initial application of this Statement shall be as of the beginning of an entity’s
fiscal quarter; on that date, hedging relationships shall be designated anew and documented
pursuant to the provisions of this Statement. Earlier application of all of the provisions of this
Statement is encouraged but is permitted only as of the beginning of any fiscal quarter that
begins after issuance of this Statement. Earlier application of selected provisions of this
Statement is not permitted. This Statement shall not be applied retroactively to financial
statements of prior periods.
49. At the date of initial application, an entity shall recognize all freestanding derivative
instruments (that is, derivative instruments other than embedded derivative instruments) in the
statement of financial position as either assets or liabilities and measure them at fair value,
pursuant to paragraph 17. 13 The difference between a derivative’s previous carrying amount
and its fair value shall be reported as a transition adjustment, as discussed in paragraph 52. The
entity also shall recognize offsetting gains and losses on hedged assets, liabilities, and firm
commitments by adjusting their carrying amounts at that date, as discussed in paragraph 52(b).
Any gains or losses on derivative instruments that are reported independently as deferred gains
or losses (that is, liabilities or assets) in the statement of financial position at the date of initial
application shall be derecognized from that statement; that derecognition also shall be reported
as transition adjustments as indicated in paragraph 52. Any gains or losses on derivative
instruments reported in other comprehensive income at the date of initial application because the
derivative instruments were hedging the fair value exposure of available-for-sale securities also
shall be reported as transition adjustments; the offsetting losses and gains on the securities shall
be accounted for pursuant to paragraph 52(b). Any gain or loss on a derivative instrument
reported in accumulated other comprehensive income at the date of initial application because
the derivative instrument was hedging the variable cash flow exposure of a forecasted
(anticipated) transaction related to an available-for-sale security shall remain in accumulated
other comprehensive income and shall not be reported as a transition adjustment. The
accounting for any gains and losses on derivative instruments that arose prior to the initial
application of the Statement and that were previously added to the carrying amount of
recognized hedged assets or liabilities is not affected by this Statement. Those gains and losses
shall not be included in the transition adjustment.
50. At the date of initial application, an entity also shall recognize as an asset or liability in the
statement of financial position any embedded derivative instrument that is required pursuant to
paragraphs 12–16 to be separated from its host contract if the hybrid instrument in which it is
embedded was issued, acquired, or substantively modified by the entity after December 31,
Page 30
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
1997. For all of its hybrid instruments that exist at the date of initial application and were issued
or acquired before January 1, 1998 and not substantively modified thereafter, an entity may
choose either (a) not to apply this Statement to any of those hybrid instruments or (b) to
recognize as assets or liabilities all the derivative instruments embedded in those hybrid
instruments that would be required pursuant to paragraphs 12–16 to be separated from their host
contracts. That choice is not permitted to be applied to only some of an entity’s individual
hybrid instruments and must be applied on an all-or-none basis.
51. If an embedded derivative instrument is to be separated from its host contract in
conjunction with the initial application of this Statement, the entity shall consider the following
in determining the related transition adjustment:
a. The carrying amount of the host contract at the date of initial application shall be based on
its fair value on the date that the hybrid instrument was issued or acquired by the entity and
shall reflect appropriate adjustments for subsequent activity, such as subsequent cash
receipts or payments and the amortization of any premium or discount on the host contract
arising from the separation of the embedded derivative.
b. The carrying amount of the embedded derivative instrument at the date of initial application
shall be its fair value.
c. The transition adjustment shall be the difference at the date of initial application between (1)
the previous carrying amount of the hybrid instrument and (2) the sum of the new net
carrying amount of the host contract and the fair value of the embedded derivative
instrument. The entity shall not retroactively designate a hedging relationship that could
have been made had the embedded derivative instrument initially been accounted for
separate from the host contract.
52. The transition adjustments resulting from adopting this Statement shall be reported in net
income or other comprehensive income, as appropriate, as the effect of a change in accounting
principle and presented in a manner similar to the cumulative effect of a change in accounting
principle as described in paragraph 20 of APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting Changes. Whether a
transition adjustment related to a specific derivative instrument is reported in net income,
reported in other comprehensive income, or allocated between both is based on the hedging
relationships, if any, that had existed for that derivative instrument and that were the basis for
accounting under generally accepted accounting principles before the date of initial application
of this Statement.
a. If the transition adjustment relates to a derivative instrument that had been designated in a
hedging relationship that addressed the variable cash flow exposure of a forecasted
(anticipated) transaction, the transition adjustment shall be reported as a
cumulative-effect-type adjustment of accumulated other comprehensive income.
b. If the transition adjustment relates to a derivative instrument that had been designated in a
hedging relationship that addressed the fair value exposure of an asset, a liability, or a firm
commitment, the transition adjustment for the derivative shall be reported as a
cumulative-effect-type adjustment of net income. Concurrently, any gain or loss on the
Page 31
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
hedged item (that is, difference between the hedged item’s fair value and its carrying
amount) shall be recognized as an adjustment of the hedged item’s carrying amount at the
date of initial application, but only to the extent of an offsetting transition adjustment for the
derivative. That adjustment of the hedged item’s carrying amount shall also be reported as a
cumulative-effect-type adjustment of net income. The transition adjustment related to the
gain or loss reported in accumulated other comprehensive income on a derivative instrument
that hedged an available-for-sale security, together with the loss or gain on the related
security (to the extent of an offsetting transition adjustment for the derivative instrument),
shall be reclassified to earnings as a cumulative-effect-type adjustment of both net income
and accumulated other comprehensive income.
c. If a derivative instrument had been designated in multiple hedging relationships that
addressed both the fair value exposure of an asset or a liability and the variable cash flow
exposure of a forecasted (anticipated) transaction, the transition adjustment for the
derivative shall be allocated between the cumulative-effect-type adjustment of net income
and the cumulative-effect-type adjustment of accumulated other comprehensive income and
shall be reported as discussed in paragraphs 52(a) and 52(b) above. Concurrently, any gain
or loss on the hedged item shall be accounted for at the date of initial application as
discussed in paragraph 52(b) above.
d. Other transition adjustments not encompassed by paragraphs 52(a), 52(b), and 52(c) above
shall be reported as part of the cumulative-effect-type adjustment of net income.
53. Any transition adjustment reported as a cumulative-effect-type adjustment of accumulated
other comprehensive income shall be subsequently reclassified into earnings in a manner
consistent with paragraph 31. For those amounts, an entity shall disclose separately in the year
of initial application the amount of gains and losses reported in accumulated other
comprehensive income and associated with the transition adjustment that are being reclassified
into earnings during the 12 months following the date of initial application.
54. At the date of initial application, an entity may transfer any held-to-maturity security into
the available-for-sale category or the trading category. An entity will then be able in the future
to designate a security transferred into the available-for-sale category as the hedged item, or its
variable interest payments as the cash flow hedged transactions, in a hedge of the exposure to
changes in market interest rates, changes in foreign currency exchange rates, or changes in its
overall fair value. (Paragraph 21(d) precludes a held-to-maturity security from being designated
as the hedged item in a fair value hedge of market interest rate risk or the risk of changes in its
overall fair value. Paragraph 29(e) similarly precludes the variable cash flows of a
held-to-maturity security from being designated as the hedged transaction in a cash flow hedge
of market interest rate risk.) The unrealized holding gain or loss on a held-to-maturity security
transferred to another category at the date of initial application shall be reported in net income or
accumulated other comprehensive income consistent with the requirements of paragraphs 15(b)
and 15(c) of Statement 115 and reported with the other transition adjustments discussed in
paragraph 52 of this Statement. Such transfers from the held-to-maturity category at the date of
initial adoption shall not call into question an entity’s intent to hold other debt securities to
Page 32
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
maturity in the future.14
55. At the date of initial application, an entity may transfer any available-for-sale security into
the trading category. After any related transition adjustments from initially applying this
Statement have been recognized, the unrealized holding gain or loss remaining in accumulated
other comprehensive income for any transferred security at the date of initial application shall be
reclassified into earnings (but not reported as part of the cumulative-effect-type adjustment for
the transition adjustments), consistent with paragraph 15(b) of Statement 115. If a derivative
instrument had been hedging the variable cash flow exposure of a forecasted transaction related
to an available-for-sale security that is transferred into the trading category at the date of initial
application and the entity had reported a gain or loss on that derivative instrument in other
comprehensive income (consistent with paragraph 115 of Statement 115), the entity also shall
reclassify those derivative gains and losses into earnings (but not report them as part of the
cumulative-effect-type adjustment for the transition adjustments).
56. At the date of initial application, mortgage bankers and other servicers of financial assets
may choose to restratify their servicing rights pursuant to paragraph 37(g) of Statement 125 in a
manner that would enable individual strata to comply with the requirements of this Statement
regarding what constitutes “a portfolio of similar assets.” As noted in footnote 9 of this
Statement, mortgage bankers and other servicers of financial assets that designate a hedged
portfolio by aggregating servicing rights within one or more risk strata used under paragraph
37(g) of Statement 125 would not necessarily comply with the requirement in paragraph 21(a) of
this Statement for portfolios of similar assets, since the risk stratum under paragraph 37(g) of
Statement 125 can be based on any predominant risk characteristic, including date of origination
or geographic location. The restratification of servicing rights is a change in the application of
an accounting principle, and the effect of that change as of the initial application of this
Statement shall be reported as part of the cumulative-effect-type adjustment for the transition
adjustments.
The provisions of this Statement need
not be applied to immaterial items.
This Statement was adopted by the unanimous vote of the seven members of the Financial
Accounting Standards Board:
Edmund L. Jenkins, Chairman
Joseph V. Anania
Anthony T. Cope
John M. Foster
Gaylen N. Larson
James J. Leisenring
Gerhard G. Mueller
Page 33
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Appendix A: IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE
Section 1: Scope and Definition
Application of Paragraphs 6–11
57. The following discussion further explains the three characteristics of a derivative
instrument discussed in paragraphs 6–9.
a. Underlying. An underlying is a variable that, along with either a notional amount or a
payment provision, determines the settlement of a derivative. An underlying usually is one
or a combination of the following:
(1) A security price or security price index
(2) A commodity price or commodity price index
(3) An interest rate or interest rate index
(4) A credit rating or credit index
(5) An exchange rate or exchange rate index
(6) An insurance index or catastrophe loss index
(7) A climatic or geological condition (such as temperature, earthquake severity, or
rainfall), another physical variable, or a related index.
However, an underlying may be any variable whose changes are observable or otherwise
objectively verifiable. Paragraph 10(e) specifically excludes a contract with settlement
based on certain variables unless the contract is exchange-traded. A contract based on any
variable that is not specifically excluded is subject to the requirements of this Statement if it
has the other two characteristics identified in paragraph 6 (which also are discussed in
paragraphs 57(b) and paragraphs 57(c) below).
b. Initial net investment. A derivative requires no initial net investment or a smaller initial net
investment than other types of contracts that have a similar response to changes in market
factors. For example, entering into a commodity futures contract generally requires no net
investment, while purchasing the same commodity requires an initial net investment equal to
its market price. However, both contracts reflect changes in the price of the commodity in
the same way (that is, similar gains or losses will be incurred). A swap or forward contract
also generally does not require an initial net investment unless the terms favor one party
over the other. An option generally requires that one party make an initial net investment (a
premium) because that party has the rights under the contract and the other party has the
obligations. The phrase initial net investment is stated from the perspective of only one
party to the contract, but it determines the application of the Statement for both parties. 15
c. Net settlement. A contract that meets any one of the following criteria has the characteristic
described as net settlement:
(1) Its terms implicitly or explicitly require or permit net settlement. For example, a
penalty for nonperformance in a purchase order is a net settlement provision if the
amount of the penalty is based on changes in the price of the items that are the subject
Page 34
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
of the contract. Net settlement may be made in cash or by delivery of any other asset,
whether or not it is readily convertible to cash. A fixed penalty for nonperformance is
not a net settlement provision.
(2) There is an established market mechanism that facilitates net settlement outside the
contract. The term market mechanism is to be interpreted broadly. Any institutional
arrangement or other agreement that enables either party to be relieved of all rights and
obligations under the contract and to liquidate its net position without incurring a
significant transaction cost is considered net settlement.
(3) It requires delivery of an asset that is readily convertible to cash. The definition of
readily convertible to cash in FASB Concepts Statement No. 5, Recognition and
Measurement in Financial Statements of Business Enterprises, includes, for example, a
security or commodity traded in an active market and a unit of foreign currency that is
readily convertible into the functional currency of the reporting entity. A security that
is publicly traded but for which the market is not very active is readily convertible to
cash if the number of shares or other units of the security to be exchanged is small
relative to the daily transaction volume. That same security would not be readily
convertible if the number of shares to be exchanged is large relative to the daily
transaction volume. The ability to use a security that is not publicly traded or an
agricultural or mineral product without an active market as collateral in a borrowing
does not, in and of itself, mean that the security or the commodity is readily convertible
to cash.
58. The following discussion further explains some of the exceptions discussed in
paragraph 10.
a. “Regular-way” security trades. The exception in paragraph 10(a) applies only to a contract
that requires delivery of securities that are readily convertible to cash. 16 To qualify, a
contract must require delivery of such a security within the period of time after the trade
date that is customary in the market in which the trade takes place. For example, a contract
to purchase or sell a publicly traded equity security in the United States customarily requires
settlement within three business days. If a contract for purchase of that type of security
requires settlement in three business days, the regular-way exception applies, but if the
contract requires settlement in five days, the regular-way exception does not apply. This
Statement does not change whether an entity recognizes regular-way security trades on the
trade date or the settlement date. However, trades that do not qualify for the regular-way
exception are subject to the requirements of this Statement regardless of the method an
entity uses to report its security trades.
b. Normal purchases and normal sales. The exception in paragraph 10(b) applies only to a
contract that requires future delivery of assets (other than financial instruments or derivative
instruments) that are readily convertible to cash 17 and only if there is no market mechanism
to facilitate net settlement outside the contract. To qualify for the exception, a contract’s
terms also must be consistent with the terms of an entity’s normal purchases or normal sales,
that is, the quantity purchased or sold must be reasonable in relation to the entity’s business
Page 35
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
needs. Determining whether or not the terms are consistent will require judgment. In
making those judgments, an entity should consider all relevant factors, such as (1) the
quantities provided under the contract and the entity's need for the related assets, (2) the
locations to which delivery of the items will be made, (3) the period of time between
entering into the contract and delivery, and (4) the entity's prior practices with regard to such
contracts. Evidence such as past trends, expected future demand, other contracts for
delivery of similar items, an entity's and industry's customs for acquiring and storing the
related commodities, and an entity's operating locations should help in identifying contracts
that qualify as normal purchases or normal sales.
c. Certain contracts that are not traded on an exchange. A contract that is not traded on an
exchange is not subject to the requirements of this Statement if the underlying is:
(1) A climatic or geological variable or other physical variable. Climatic, geological, and
other physical variables include things like the number of inches of rainfall or snow in a
particular area and the severity of an earthquake as measured by the Richter scale.
(2) The price or value of (a) a nonfinancial asset of one of the parties to the contract unless
that asset is readily convertible to cash or (b) a nonfinancial liability of one of the
parties to the contract unless that liability requires delivery of an asset that is readily
convertible to cash.
(3) Specified volumes of sales or service revenues by one of the parties. That exception is
intended to apply to contracts with settlements based on the volume of items sold or
services rendered, for example, royalty agreements. It is not intended to apply to
contracts based on changes in sales or revenues due to changes in market prices.
If a contract's underlying is the combination of two or more variables, and one or more
would not qualify for one of the exceptions above, the application of this Statement to that
contract depends on the predominant characteristics of the combined variable. The contract
is subject to the requirements of this Statement if the changes in its combined underlying are
highly correlated with changes in one of the component variables that would not qualify for
an exception.
59. The following discussion illustrates the application of paragraphs 6–11 in several
situations.
a. Forward purchases or sales of to-be-announced securities or securities when-issued,
as-issued, or if-issued. A contract for the purchase and sale of a security when, as, or if
issued or to be announced is excluded from the requirements of this Statement as a
regular-way security trade if (1) there is no other way to purchase or sell that security and
(2) settlement will occur within the shortest period possible for that security.
b. Credit-indexed contracts (often referred to as credit derivatives). Many different types of
contracts are indexed to the creditworthiness of a specified entity or group of entities, but
not all of them are derivative instruments. Credit-indexed contracts that have certain
characteristics described in paragraph 10(d) are guarantees and are not subject to the
requirements of this Statement. Credit-indexed contracts that do not have the characteristics
necessary to qualify for the exception in paragraph 10(d) are subject to the requirements of
Page 36
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
this Statement. One example of the latter is a credit-indexed contract that requires a
payment due to changes in the creditworthiness of a specified entity even if neither party
incurs a loss due to the change (other than a loss caused by the payment under the
credit-indexed contract).
c. Take-or-pay contracts. Under a take-or-pay contract, an entity agrees to pay a specified
price for a specified quantity of a product whether or not it takes delivery. Whether a
take-or-pay contract is subject to this Statement depends on its terms. For example, if the
product to be delivered is not readily convertible to cash and there is no net settlement
option, the contract fails to meet the criterion in paragraph 6(c) and is not subject to the
requirements of this Statement. However, a contract that meets all of the following
conditions is subject to the requirements of this Statement: (1) the product to be delivered is
readily convertible to cash, (2) the contract does not qualify for the normal purchases and
normal sales exception in paragraph 10(b), and (3) little or no initial net investment in the
contract is required.
d. Short sales (sales of borrowed securities). 18 Short sales typically involve the following
activities:
(1) Selling a security (by the short seller to the purchaser)
(2) Borrowing a security (by the short seller from the lender)
(3) Delivering the borrowed security (by the short seller to the purchaser)
(4) Purchasing a security (by the short seller from the market)
(5) Delivering the purchased security (by the short seller to the lender).
Those five activities involve three separate contracts. A contract that distinguishes a short
sale involves activities (2) and (5), borrowing a security and replacing it by delivering an
identical security. Such a contract has two of the three characteristics of a derivative
instrument. The settlement is based on an underlying (the price of the security) and a
notional amount (the face amount of the security or the number of shares), and the
settlement is made by delivery of a security that is readily convertible to cash. However, the
other characteristic, little or no initial net investment, is not present. The borrowed security
is the lender's initial net investment in the contract. Consequently, the contract relating to
activities (2) and (5) is not a derivative instrument. The other two contracts (one for
activities (1) and (3) and the other for activity (4)) are routine and do not generally involve
derivative instruments. However, if a forward purchase or sale is involved, and the contract
does not qualify for the exception in paragraph 10(a), it is subject to the requirements of this
Statement.
e. Repurchase agreements and "wash sales" (accounted for as sales as described in paragraphs
68 and 69 of Statement 125). A transfer of financial assets accounted for as a sale under
Statement 125 in which the transferor is both obligated and entitled to repurchase the
transferred asset at a fixed or determinable price contains two separate features, one of
which may be a derivative. The initial exchange of financial assets for cash is a
sale-purchase transaction—generally not a transaction that involves a derivative instrument.
However, the accompanying forward contract that gives the transferor the right and
obligation to repurchase the transferred asset involves an underlying and a notional amount
(the price of the security and its denomination), and it does not require an initial net
Page 37
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
investment in the contract. Consequently, if the forward contract requires delivery of a
security that is readily convertible to cash or otherwise meets the net settlement criterion in
paragraph 9, it is subject to the requirements of this Statement.
Application of the Clearly-and-Closely-Related Criterion in Paragraphs 12–16
60. In discussing whether a hybrid instrument contains an embedded derivative instrument
(also simply referred to as an embedded derivative) that warrants separate accounting, paragraph
12 focuses on whether the economic characteristics and risks of the embedded derivative are
clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics and risks of the host contract. If the
host contract encompasses a residual interest in an entity, then its economic characteristics and
risks should be considered that of an equity instrument and an embedded derivative would need
to possess principally equity characteristics (related to the same entity) to be considered clearly
and closely related to the host contract. However, most commonly, a financial instrument host
contract will not embody a claim to the residual interest in an entity and, thus, the economic
characteristics and risks of the host contract should be considered that of a debt instrument. For
example, even though the overall hybrid instrument that provides for repayment of principal may
include a return based on the market price (the underlying as defined in this Statement) of XYZ
Corporation common stock, the host contract does not involve any existing or potential residual
interest rights (that is, rights of ownership) and thus would not be an equity instrument. The host
contract would instead be considered a debt instrument, and the embedded derivative that
incorporates the equity-based return would not be clearly and closely related to the host contract.
If the embedded derivative is considered not to be clearly and closely related to the host contract,
the embedded derivative must be separated from the host contract and accounted for as a
derivative instrument by both parties to the hybrid instrument, except as provided by paragraph
11(a).
61. The following guidance is relevant in deciding whether the economic characteristics and
risks of the embedded derivative are clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics
and risks of the host contract.
a. Interest rate indexes. An embedded derivative in which the underlying is an interest rate or
interest rate index and a host contract that is considered a debt instrument are considered to
be clearly and closely related unless, as discussed in paragraph 13, the embedded derivative
contains a provision that (1) permits any possibility whatsoever that the investor’s (or
creditor’s) undiscounted net cash inflows over the life of the instrument would not recover
substantially all of its initial recorded investment in the hybrid instrument under its
contractual terms or (2) could under any possibility whatsoever at least double the investor’s
initial rate of return on the host contract and also result in a rate of return that is at least
twice what otherwise would be the market return for a contract that has the same terms as
the host contract and that involves a debtor with a similar credit quality. The requirement to
separate the embedded derivative from the host contract applies to both parties to the hybrid
instrument even though the above tests focus on the investor’s net cash inflows.
Plain-vanilla servicing rights, which involve an obligation to perform servicing and the right
Page 38
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
to receive fees for performing that servicing, do not contain an embedded derivative that
would be separated from those servicing rights and accounted for as a derivative.
b. Inflation-indexed interest payments. The interest rate and the rate of inflation in the
economic environment for the currency in which a debt instrument is denominated are
considered to be clearly and closely related. Thus, nonleveraged inflation-indexed contracts
(debt instruments, capitalized lease obligations, pension obligations, and so forth) would not
have the inflation-related embedded derivative separated from the host contract.
c. Credit-sensitive payments. The creditworthiness of the debtor and the interest rate on a debt
instrument are considered to be clearly and closely related. Thus, for debt instruments that
have the interest rate reset in the event of (1) default (such as violation of a
credit-risk-related covenant), (2) a change in the debtor’s published credit rating, or (3) a
change in the debtor’s creditworthiness indicated by a change in its spread over Treasury
bonds, the related embedded derivative would not be separated from the host contract.
d. Calls and puts on debt instruments. Call options (or put options) that can accelerate the
repayment of principal on a debt instrument are considered to be clearly and closely related
to a debt instrument that requires principal repayments unless both (1) the debt involves a
substantial premium or discount (which is common with zero-coupon bonds) and (2) the put
or call option is only contingently exercisable. Thus, if a substantial premium or discount is
not involved, embedded calls and puts (including contingent call or put options that are not
exercisable unless an event of default occurs) would not be separated from the host contract.
However, for contingently exercisable calls and puts to be considered clearly and closely
related, they can be indexed only to interest rates or credit risk, not some extraneous event
or factor. In contrast, call options (or put options) that do not accelerate the repayment of
principal on a debt instrument but instead require a cash settlement that is equal to the price
of the option at the date of exercise would not be considered to be clearly and closely related
to the debt instrument in which it is embedded and would be separated from the host
contract. In certain unusual situations, a put or call option may have been subsequently
added to a debt instrument in a manner that causes the investor (creditor) to be exposed to
performance risk (default risk) by different parties for the embedded option and the host
debt instrument, respectively. In those unusual situations, the embedded option and the host
debt instrument are not clearly and closely related.
e. Calls and puts on equity instruments. A put option that enables the holder to require the
issuer of an equity instrument to reacquire that equity instrument for cash or other assets is
not clearly and closely related to that equity instrument. Thus, such a put option embedded
in the equity instrument to which it relates should be separated from the host contract by the
holder of the equity instrument. That put option also should be separated from the host
contract by the issuer of the equity instrument except in those cases in which the put option
is not considered to be a derivative instrument pursuant to paragraph 11(a) because it is
classified in stockholders’ equity. A purchased call option that enables the issuer of an
equity instrument (such as common stock) to reacquire that equity instrument would not be
considered to be a derivative instrument by the issuer of the equity instrument pursuant to
paragraph 11(a). Thus, if the call option were embedded in the related equity instrument, it
would not be separated from the host contract by the issuer. However, for the holder of the
Page 39
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
related equity instrument, the embedded written call option would not be considered to be
clearly and closely related to the equity instrument and should be separated from the host
contract.
f. Floors, caps, and collars. Floors or caps (or collars, which are combinations of caps and
floors) on interest rates and the interest rate on a debt instrument are considered to be clearly
and closely related, provided the cap is at or above the current market price (or rate) and the
floor is at or below the current market price (or rate) at issuance of the instrument. Thus, the
derivative embedded in a variable-rate debt instrument that has a floor on the interest rate
(that is, the floor option) would not be separated from the host contract and accounted for
separately even though, in a falling interest rate environment, the debt instrument may have
a return to the investor that is a significant amount above the market return of a debt
instrument without the floor provision (refer to paragraph 13(b)).
g. Term-extending options. An embedded derivative provision that either (1) unilaterally
enables one party to extend significantly the remaining term to maturity or (2) automatically
extends significantly the remaining term triggered by specific events or conditions is not
clearly and closely related to the interest rate on a debt instrument unless the interest rate is
concurrently reset to the approximate current market rate for the extended term and the debt
instrument initially involved no significant discount. Thus, if there is no reset of interest
rates, the embedded derivative must be separated from the host contract and accounted for
as a derivative instrument. That is, a term-extending option cannot be used to circumvent
the restriction in paragraph 61(a) regarding the investor’s not recovering substantially all of
its initial recorded investment.
h. Equity-indexed interest payments. The changes in fair value of an equity interest and the
interest yield on a debt instrument are not clearly and closely related. Thus, an
equity-related derivative embedded in an equity-indexed debt instrument (whether based on
the price of a specific common stock or on an index that is based on a basket of equity
instruments) must be separated from the host contract and accounted for as a derivative
instrument.
i. Commodity-indexed interest or principal payments. The changes in fair value of a
commodity (or other asset) and the interest yield on a debt instrument are not clearly and
closely related. Thus, a commodity-related derivative embedded in a commodity-indexed
debt instrument must be separated from the noncommodity host contract and accounted for
as a derivative instrument.
j. Indexed rentals:
(1) Inflation-indexed rentals. Rentals for the use of leased assets and adjustments for
inflation on similar property are considered to be clearly and closely related. Thus,
unless a significant leverage factor is involved, the inflation-related derivative
embedded in an inflation-indexed lease contract would not be separated from the host
contract.
(2) Contingent rentals based on related sales. Lease contracts that include contingent
rentals based on certain sales of the lessee would not have the contingent-rental-related
embedded derivative separated from the host contract because, under paragraph
10(e)(3), a non-exchange-traded contract whose underlying is specified volumes of
Page 40
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
sales by one of the parties to the contract would not be subject to the requirements of
this Statement.
(3) Contingent rentals based on a variable interest rate. The obligation to make future
payments for the use of leased assets and the adjustment of those payments to reflect
changes in a variable-interest-rate index are considered to be clearly and closely related.
Thus, lease contracts that include contingent rentals based on changes in the prime rate
would not have the contingent-rental-related embedded derivative separated from the
host contract.
k. Convertible debt. The changes in fair value of an equity interest and the interest rates on a
debt instrument are not clearly and closely related. Thus, for a debt security that is
convertible into a specified number of shares of the debtor’s common stock or another
entity’s common stock, the embedded derivative (that is, the conversion option) must be
separated from the debt host contract and accounted for as a derivative instrument provided
that the conversion option would, as a freestanding instrument, be a derivative instrument
subject to the requirements of this Statement. (For example, if the common stock was not
readily convertible to cash, a conversion option that requires purchase of the common stock
would not be accounted for as a derivative.) That accounting applies only to the holder
(investor) if the debt is convertible to the debtor’s common stock because, under paragraph
11(a), a separate option with the same terms would not be considered to be a derivative for
the issuer.
l. Convertible preferred stock. Because the changes in fair value of an equity interest and
interest rates on a debt instrument are not clearly and closely related, the terms of the
preferred stock (other than the conversion option) must be analyzed to determine whether
the preferred stock (and thus the potential host contract) is more akin to an equity instrument
or a debt instrument. A typical cumulative fixed-rate preferred stock that has a mandatory
redemption feature is more akin to debt, whereas cumulative participating perpetual
preferred stock is more akin to an equity instrument.
Section 2: Assessment of Hedge Effectiveness
Hedge Effectiveness Requirements of This Statement
62. This Statement requires that an entity define at the time it designates a hedging relationship
the method it will use to assess the hedge’s effectiveness in achieving offsetting changes in fair
value or offsetting cash flows attributable to the risk being hedged. It also requires that an entity
use that defined method consistently throughout the hedge period (a) to assess at inception of the
hedge and on an ongoing basis whether it expects the hedging relationship to be highly effective
in achieving offset and (b) to measure the ineffective part of the hedge. If the entity identifies an
improved method and wants to apply that method prospectively, it must discontinue the existing
hedging relationship and designate the relationship anew using the improved method. This
Statement does not specify a single method for either assessing whether a hedge is expected to
be highly effective or measuring hedge ineffectiveness. The appropriateness of a given method
Page 41
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
of assessing hedge effectiveness can depend on the nature of the risk being hedged and the type
of hedging instrument used. Ordinarily, however, an entity should assess effectiveness for
similar hedges in a similar manner; use of different methods for similar hedges should be
justified.
63. In defining how hedge effectiveness will be assessed, an entity must specify whether it will
include in that assessment all of the gain or loss on a hedging instrument. This Statement
permits (but does not require) an entity to exclude all or a part of the hedging instrument’s time
value from the assessment of hedge effectiveness, as follows:
a. If the effectiveness of a hedge with an option contract is assessed based on changes in the
option’s intrinsic value, the change in the time value of the contract would be excluded from
the assessment of hedge effectiveness.
b. If the effectiveness of a hedge with an option contract is assessed based on changes in the
option’s minimum value, that is, its intrinsic value plus the effect of discounting, the change
in the volatility value of the contract would be excluded from the assessment of hedge
effectiveness.
c. If the effectiveness of a hedge with a forward or futures contract is assessed based on
changes in fair value attributable to changes in spot prices, the change in the fair value of the
contract related to the changes in the difference between the spot price and the forward or
futures price would be excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness.
In each circumstance above, changes in the excluded component would be included currently in
earnings, together with any ineffectiveness that results under the defined method of assessing
ineffectiveness. As noted in paragraph 62, the effectiveness of similar hedges generally should
be assessed similarly; that includes whether a component of the gain or loss on a derivative is
excluded in assessing effectiveness. No other components of a gain or loss on the designated
hedging instrument may be excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness.
64. In assessing the effectiveness of a cash flow hedge, an entity generally will need to
consider the time value of money if significant in the circumstances. Considering the effect of
the time value of money is especially important if the hedging instrument involves periodic cash
settlements. An example of a situation in which an entity likely would reflect the time value of
money is a tailing strategy with futures contracts. When using a tailing strategy, an entity adjusts
the size or contract amount of futures contracts used in a hedge so that earnings (or expense)
from reinvestment (or funding) of daily settlement gains (or losses) on the futures do not distort
the results of the hedge. To assess offset of expected cash flows when a tailing strategy has been
used, an entity could reflect the time value of money, perhaps by comparing the present value of
the hedged forecasted cash flow with the results of the hedging instrument.
65. Whether a hedging relationship qualifies as highly effective sometimes will be easy to
assess, and there will be no ineffectiveness to recognize in earnings during the term of the hedge.
If the critical terms of the hedging instrument and of the entire hedged asset or liability (as
opposed to selected cash flows) or hedged forecasted transaction are the same, the entity could
Page 42
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
conclude that changes in fair value or cash flows attributable to the risk being hedged are
expected to completely offset at inception and on an ongoing basis. For example, an entity may
assume that a hedge of a forecasted purchase of a commodity with a forward contract will be
highly effective and that there will be no ineffectiveness to be recognized in earnings if:
a. The forward contract is for purchase of the same quantity of the same commodity at the
same time and location as the hedged forecasted purchase.
b. The fair value of the forward contract at inception is zero.
c. Either the change in the discount or premium on the forward contract is excluded from the
assessment of effectiveness and included directly in earnings pursuant to paragraph 63 or the
change in expected cash flows on the forecasted transaction is based on the forward price for
the commodity.
66. Assessing hedge effectiveness and measuring the ineffective part of the hedge, however,
can be more complex. For example, hedge ineffectiveness would result from the following
circumstances, among others:
a. A difference between the basis of the hedging instrument and the hedged item or hedged
transaction (such as a Deutsche mark–based hedging instrument and Dutch guilder–based
hedged item), to the extent that those bases do not move in tandem
b. Differences in critical terms of the hedging instrument and hedged item or hedged
transaction, such as differences in notional amounts, maturities, quantity, location, or
delivery dates.
Ineffectiveness also would result if part of the change in the fair value of a derivative is
attributable to a change in the counterparty’s creditworthiness.
67. A hedge that meets the effectiveness test specified in paragraphs 20(b) and 28(b) (that is,
both at inception and on an ongoing basis, the entity expects the hedge to be highly effective at
achieving offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows) also must meet the other hedge
accounting criteria to qualify for hedge accounting. If the hedge initially qualifies for hedge
accounting, the entity would continue to assess whether the hedge meets the effectiveness test
and also would measure any ineffectiveness during the hedge period. If the hedge fails the
effectiveness test at any time (that is, if the entity does not expect the hedge to be highly
effective at achieving offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows), the hedge ceases to qualify
for hedge accounting. The discussions of measuring hedge ineffectiveness in the examples in the
remainder of this section of Appendix A assume that the hedge satisfied all of the criteria for
hedge accounting at inception.
Assuming No Ineffectiveness in a Hedge with an Interest Rate Swap
68. An assumption of no ineffectiveness is especially important in a hedging relationship
involving an interest-bearing financial instrument and an interest rate swap because it
significantly simplifies the computations necessary to make the accounting entries. An entity
may assume no ineffectiveness in a hedging relationship of interest rate risk involving an
Page 43
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
interest-bearing asset or liability and an interest rate swap if all of the applicable conditions in
the following list are met:
Conditions applicable to both fair value hedges and cash flow hedges
a. The notional amount of the swap matches the principal amount of the interest-bearing asset
or liability.
b. The fair value of the swap at its inception is zero.
c. The formula for computing net settlements under the interest rate swap is the same for each
net settlement. (That is, the fixed rate is the same throughout the term, and the variable rate
is based on the same index and includes the same constant adjustment or no adjustment.)
d. The interest-bearing asset or liability is not prepayable.
e. Any other terms in the interest-bearing financial instruments or interest rate swaps are
typical of those instruments and do not invalidate the assumption of no ineffectiveness.
Conditions applicable to fair value hedges only
f. The expiration date of the swap matches the maturity date of the interest-bearing asset or
liability.
g. There is no floor or ceiling on the variable interest rate of the swap.
h. The interval between repricings of the variable interest rate in the swap is frequent enough
to justify an assumption that the variable payment or receipt is at a market rate (generally
three to six months or less).
Conditions applicable to cash flow hedges only
i. All interest receipts or payments on the variable-rate asset or liability during the term of the
swap are designated as hedged, and no interest payments beyond the term of the swap are
designated as hedged.
j. There is no floor or cap on the variable interest rate of the swap unless the variable-rate asset
or liability has a floor or cap. In that case, the swap must have a floor or cap on the variable
interest rate that is comparable to the floor or cap on the variable-rate asset or liability. (For
this purpose, comparable does not necessarily mean equal. For example, if a swap's variable
rate is LIBOR and an asset's variable rate is LIBOR plus 2 percent, a 10 percent cap on the
swap would be comparable to a 12 percent cap on the asset.)
k. The repricing dates match those of the variable-rate asset or liability.
l. The index on which the variable rate is based matches the index on which the asset or
liability’s variable rate is based.
69. The fixed rate on a hedged item need not exactly match the fixed rate on a swap designated
as a fair value hedge. Nor does the variable rate on an interest-bearing asset or liability need to
be the same as the variable rate on a swap designated as a cash flow hedge. A swap’s fair value
comes from its net settlements. The fixed and variable rates on a swap can be changed without
affecting the net settlement if both are changed by the same amount. That is, a swap with a
Page 44
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
payment based on LIBOR and a receipt based on a fixed rate of 5 percent has the same net
settlements and fair value as a swap with a payment based on LIBOR plus 1 percent and a
receipt based on a fixed rate of 6 percent.
70. Comparable credit risk at inception is not a condition for assuming no ineffectiveness even
though actually achieving perfect offset would require that the same discount rate be used to
determine the fair value of the swap and of the hedged item or hedged transaction. To justify
using the same discount rate, the credit risk related to both parties to the swap as well as to the
debtor on the hedged interest-bearing asset (in a fair value hedge) or the variable-rate asset on
which the interest payments are hedged (in a cash flow hedge) would have to be the same.
However, because that complication is caused by the interaction of interest rate risk and credit
risk, which are not easily separable, comparable creditworthiness is not considered a necessary
condition to assume no ineffectiveness in a hedge of interest rate risk.
After-Tax Hedging of Foreign Currency Risk
71. Statement 52 permitted hedging of foreign currency risk on an after-tax basis. The portion
of the gain or loss on the hedging instrument that exceeded the loss or gain on the hedged item
was required to be included as an offset to the related tax effects in the period in which those tax
effects are recognized. This Statement continues those provisions.
Illustrations of Assessing Effectiveness and Measuring Ineffectiveness
72. The following examples illustrate some ways in which an entity may assess hedge
effectiveness and measures hedge ineffectiveness for specific strategies. The examples are not
intended to imply that other reasonable methods are precluded. However, not all possible
methods are reasonable or consistent with this Statement. This section also discusses some
methods of assessing hedge effectiveness and determining hedge ineffectiveness that are not
consistent with this Statement and thus may not be used.
Example 1: Fair Value Hedge of Natural Gas Inventory with Futures Contracts
73. Company A has 20,000 MMBTU’s of natural gas stored at its location in West Texas. To
hedge the fair value exposure of the natural gas, the company sells the equivalent of 20,000
MMBTU’s of natural gas futures contracts on a national mercantile exchange. The futures
prices are based on delivery of natural gas at the Henry Hub gas collection point in Louisiana.
Assessing the hedge’s expected effectiveness
74. The price of Company A’s natural gas inventory in West Texas and the price of the natural
gas that is the underlying for the futures it sold will differ as a result of regional factors (such as
location, pipeline transmission costs, and supply and demand). 19 Company A therefore may not
automatically assume that the hedge will be highly effective at achieving offsetting changes in
fair value, and it cannot assess effectiveness by looking solely to the change in the price of
natural gas delivered to the Henry Hub.
Page 45
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
75. Both at inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis, Company A might assess the
hedge’s expected effectiveness based on the extent of correlation in recent years for periods
similar to the spot prices term of the futures contracts between the spot prices of natural gas in
West Texas and at the Henry Hub. 20 If those prices have been and are expected to continue to
be highly correlated, Company A might reasonably expect the changes in the fair value of the
futures contracts attributable to changes in the spot price of natural gas at the Henry Hub to be
highly effective in offsetting the changes in the fair value of its natural gas inventory. In
assessing effectiveness during the term of the hedge, Company A must take into account actual
changes in spot prices in West Texas and at the Henry Hub.
76. Company A may not assume that the change in the spot price of natural gas located at
Henry Hub, Louisiana, is the same as the change in fair value of its West Texas inventory. The
physical hedged item is natural gas in West Texas, not natural gas at the Henry Hub. In
identifying the price risk that is being hedged, the company also may not assume that its natural
gas in West Texas has a Louisiana natural gas “component.” Use of a price for natural gas
located somewhere other than West Texas to assess the effectiveness of a fair value hedge of
natural gas in West Texas would be inconsistent with this Statement and could result in an
assumption that a hedge was highly effective when it was not. If the price of natural gas in West
Texas is not readily available, Company A might use a price for natural gas located elsewhere as
a base for estimating the price of natural gas in West Texas. However, that base price must be
adjusted to reflect the effects of factors, such as location, transmission costs, and supply and
demand, that would cause the price of natural gas in West Texas to differ from the base price.
Measuring hedge ineffectiveness
77. Consistent with the company’s method of assessing whether the hedge is expected to be
highly effective, the hedge would be ineffective to the extent that (a) the actual change in the fair
value of the futures contracts attributable to changes in the spot price of natural gas at the Henry
Hub did not offset (b) the actual change in the spot price of natural gas in West Texas per
MMBTU multiplied by 20,000. That method excludes the change in the fair value of the futures
contracts attributable to changes in the difference between the spot price and the forward price of
natural gas at the Henry Hub in determining ineffectiveness. The excluded amount would be
reported directly in earnings.
Example 2: Fair Value Hedge of Tire Inventory with a Forward Contract
78. Company B manufactures tires. The production of those tires incorporates a variety of
physical components, of which rubber and steel are the most significant, as well as labor and
overhead. The company hedges its exposure to changes in the fair value of its inventory of 8,000
steel-belted radial tires by entering into a forward contract to sell rubber at a fixed price.
Assessing the hedge’s expected effectiveness
79. Company B decides to base its assessment of hedge effectiveness on changes in the fair
Page 46
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
value of the forward contract attributable to changes in the spot price of rubber. To determine
whether the forward contract is expected to be highly effective at offsetting the change in fair
value of the tire inventory, Company B could estimate and compare such changes in the fair
value of the forward contract and changes in the fair value of the tires (computed as the market
price per tire multiplied by 8,000 tires) for different rubber and tire prices. Company B also
should consider the extent to which past changes in the spot prices of rubber and tires have been
correlated. Because tires are a nonfinancial asset and rubber is only an ingredient in
manufacturing them, Company B may not assess hedge effectiveness by looking to the change in
the fair value of only the rubber component of the steel-belted radial tires (paragraph 21(e)).
Both at inception of the hedge and during its term, the company must base its assessment of
hedge effectiveness on changes in the market price of steel-belted radial tires and changes in the
fair value of the forward contract attributable to changes in the spot price of rubber.
Measuring hedge ineffectiveness
80. It is unlikely that this transaction would be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes
in fair value. However, if Company B concludes that the hedge will be highly effective and the
hedge otherwise qualifies for hedge accounting, the ineffective part of the hedge would be
measured consistent with the company’s method of assessing whether the hedge is expected to
be highly effective. Based on that method, the hedge would be ineffective to the extent that the
actual changes in (a) the fair value of the forward contract attributable to the change in the spot
price of rubber and (b) the market price of steel-belted radials multiplied by the number of tires
in inventory did not offset. Because Company B bases its assessment of effectiveness on
changes in spot prices, the change in the fair value of the forward contract attributable to changes
in the difference between the spot and forward price of rubber would be excluded from the
measure of effectiveness and reported directly in earnings.
Example 3: Fair Value Hedge of Growing Wheat with Futures Contracts
81. Company C has a tract of land on which it is growing wheat. Historically, Company C has
harvested at least 40,000 bushels of wheat from that tract of land. Two months before its
expected harvest, the company sells 2-month futures contracts for 40,000 bushels of wheat,
which it wants to designate as a fair value hedge of its growing wheat, rather than as a cash flow
hedge of the projected sale of the wheat after harvest.
Assessing the hedge’s expected effectiveness and measuring ineffectiveness
82. Even though the futures contracts are for the same type of wheat that Company C expects
to harvest in two months, the futures contracts and hedged wheat have different bases because
the futures contracts are based on fully grown, harvested wheat, while the hedged item is
unharvested wheat with two months left in its growing cycle. The company therefore may not
automatically assume that the hedge will be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes in
fair value.
83. To determine whether the futures contracts are expected to be highly effective in providing
Page 47
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
offsetting changes in fair value for the growing wheat, Company C would need to estimate and
compare the fair value of its growing wheat and of the futures contracts for different levels of
wheat prices. Company C may not base its estimate of the value of its growing wheat solely on
the current price of wheat because that price is for grown, harvested wheat. The company might,
however, use the current price of harvested wheat together with other relevant factors, such as
additional production and harvesting costs and the physical condition of the growing wheat, to
estimate the current fair value of its growing wheat crop.
84. It is unlikely that wheat futures would be highly effective in offsetting the changes in value
of growing wheat. However, if Company C concludes that the hedge qualifies as highly
effective, it would use the same method for measuring actual hedge effectiveness that it uses
initially and on an ongoing basis to assess whether the hedge is expected to be highly effective.
The hedge would be ineffective to the extent that the actual changes in fair value of the futures
contract and of the growing wheat crop did not offset.
Example 4: Fair Value Hedge of Equity Securities with Option Contracts
85. Company D holds 10,000 shares of XYZ stock. It purchases put option contracts on
20,000 shares of XYZ stock with a strike price equal to the current price of the stock to hedge its
exposure to changes in the fair value of its investment position attributable to changes in the
price of XYZ stock. Company D manages the position using a “delta-neutral” strategy. That is,
it monitors the option’s “delta”—the ratio of changes in the option’s price to changes in the price
of XYZ stock. As the delta ratio changes, Company D buys or sells put options so that the next
change in the fair value of all of the options held can be expected to counterbalance the next
change in the value of its investment in XYZ stock. For put options, the delta ratio moves closer
to one as the share price of the stock falls and moves closer to zero as the share price rises. The
delta ratio also changes as the exercise period decreases, as interest rates change, and as expected
volatility changes. Company D designates the put options as a fair value hedge of its investment
in XYZ stock.
Assessing the hedge’s expected effectiveness and measuring ineffectiveness
86. Because Company D plans to change the number of options that it holds to the extent
necessary to maintain a delta-neutral position, it may not automatically assume that the hedge
will be highly effective at achieving offsetting changes in fair value. Also, because the
“delta-neutral” hedging strategy is based on expected changes in the option’s fair value, the
company may not assess effectiveness based on changes in the option’s intrinsic value. Instead,
Company D would estimate (a) the gain or loss on the option position that would result from
various decreases or increases in the market price of XYZ stock and (b) the loss or gain on its
investment in XYZ stock for the same market price changes. To assess the effectiveness of the
hedge both at inception and on an ongoing basis, the company could compare the respective
gains and losses from different market price changes. The ongoing assessment of effectiveness
also must consider the actual changes in the fair value of the put options held and of the
investment in XYZ stock during the hedge period.
Page 48
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
87. Consistent with the company’s method of assessing effectiveness, the hedge would be
ineffective to the extent that the actual realized and unrealized gains or losses from changes in
the fair value of the options held is greater or less than the change in value of the investment in
XYZ stock. The underlying for the put option contracts is the market price of XYZ stock.
Therefore, if Company D continually monitors the delta ratio and adjusts the number of options
held accordingly, the changes in the fair value of the options and of the hedged item may almost
completely offset, resulting in only a small amount of ineffectiveness to be recognized in
earnings.
Example 5: Fair Value Hedge of a Treasury Bond with a Put Option Contract
88. Company E owns a Treasury bond and wants to protect itself against the fair value
exposure to declines in the price of the bond. The company purchases an at-the-money put
option on a Treasury security with the same terms (remaining maturity, notional amount, and
interest rate) as the Treasury bond held and designates the option as a hedge of the fair value
exposure of the Treasury bond. Company E plans to hold the put option until it expires.
Assessing the hedge’s expected effectiveness and measuring ineffectiveness
89. Because Company E plans to hold the put option (a static hedge) rather than manage the
position with a delta-neutral strategy, it could assess whether it expects the hedge to be highly
effective at achieving offsetting changes in fair value by calculating and comparing the changes
in the intrinsic value of the option and changes in the price (fair value) of the Treasury bond for
different possible market prices. In assessing the expectation of effectiveness on an ongoing
basis, the company also must consider the actual changes in the fair value of the Treasury bond
and in the intrinsic value of the option during the hedge period.
90. However, because the pertinent critical terms of the option and the bond are the same in
this example, the company could expect the changes in value of the bond attributable to changes
in market interest rates and changes in the intrinsic value of the option to offset completely
during the period that the option is in the money. That is, there will be no ineffectiveness
because the company has chosen to exclude changes in the option’s time value from the
effectiveness test. Because of that choice, Company E must recognize changes in the time value
of the option directly in earnings.
Example 6: Fair Value Hedge of an Embedded Purchased Option with a Written Option
91. Company F issues five-year, fixed-rate debt with an embedded (purchased) call option and,
with a different counterparty, writes a call option to neutralize the call feature in the debt. The
embedded call option and the written call option have the same effective notional amount,
underlying fixed interest rate, and strike price. (The strike price of the option in the debt usually
is referred to as the call price.) The embedded option also can be exercised at the same times as
the written option. Company F designates the written option as a fair value hedge of the
embedded prepayment option component of the fixed-rate debt.
Page 49
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Assessing the hedge’s expected effectiveness and measuring ineffectiveness
92. To assess whether the hedge is expected to be highly effective in achieving offsetting
changes in fair value, Company F could estimate and compare the changes in fair values of the
two options for different market interest rates. Because this Statement does not permit
derivatives, including embedded derivatives whether or not they are required to be accounted for
separately, to be separated into components, Company F can only designate a hedge of the entire
change in fair value of the embedded purchased call option. The resulting changes in fair value
will be included currently in earnings. Changes in the fair value of the written option also will
be included currently in earnings; any ineffectiveness thus will be automatically reflected in
earnings. (The hedge is likely to have some ineffectiveness because the premium for the written
call option is unlikely to be the same as the premium for the embedded purchased call option.)
Example 7: Cash Flow Hedge of a Forecasted Purchase of Inventory with a Forward Contract
93. Company G forecasts the purchase of 500,000 pounds of Brazilian coffee for U.S. dollars
in 6 months. It wants to hedge the cash flow exposure associated with changes in the U.S. dollar
price of Brazilian coffee. Rather than acquire a derivative based on Brazilian coffee, the
company enters into a 6-month forward contract to purchase 500,000 pounds of Colombian
coffee for U.S. dollars and designates the forward contract as a cash flow hedge of its forecasted
purchase of Brazilian coffee. All other terms of the forward contract and the forecasted
purchase, such as delivery locations, are the same.
Assessing the hedge’s expected effectiveness and measuring ineffectiveness
94. Company G bases its assessment of hedge effectiveness and measure of ineffectiveness on
changes in forward prices, with the resulting gain or loss discounted to reflect the time value of
money. Because of the difference in the bases of the forecasted transaction (Brazilian coffee)
and forward contract (Colombian coffee), Company G may not assume that the hedge will
automatically be highly effective in achieving offsetting cash flows. Both at inception and on an
ongoing basis, Company G could assess the effectiveness of the hedge by comparing changes in
the expected cash flows from the Colombian coffee forward contract with the expected net
change in cash outflows for purchasing the Brazilian coffee for different market prices. (A
simpler method that should produce the same results would consider the expected future
correlation of the prices of Brazilian and Colombian coffee, based on the correlation of those
prices over past six-month periods.)
95. In assessing hedge effectiveness on an ongoing basis, Company G also must consider the
extent of offset between the change in expected cash flows on its Colombian coffee contract and
the change in expected cash flows for the forecasted purchase of Brazilian coffee. Both changes
would be measured on a cumulative basis for actual changes in the forward price of the
respective coffees during the hedge period.
96. Because the only difference between the forward contract and forecasted purchase relates
Page 50
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
to the type of coffee (Colombian versus Brazilian), Company G could consider the changes in
the cash flows on a forward contract for Brazilian coffee to be a measure of perfectly offsetting
changes in cash flows for its forecasted purchase of Brazilian coffee. For example, for given
changes in the U.S. dollar prices of six-month and three-month Brazilian and Colombian
contracts, Company G could compute the effect of a change in the price of coffee on the
expected cash flows of its forward contract on Colombian coffee and of a forward contract for
Brazilian coffee as follows:
Estimate of Change in Cash Flows
Hedging
Instrument:
Forward Contract
on Colombian
Coffee
Estimate of
Forecasted
Transaction:
Forward Contract
on Brazilian
Coffee
Forward price of Colombian
and Brazilian coffee:
At hedge inception—6-month price $ 2.54 $ 2.43
3 months later—3-month price 2.63 2.53
Cumulative change in price—gain $ .09 $ .10
× 500,000 pounds of coffee × 500,000 × 500,000
Estimate of change in cash flows $ 45,000 $ 50,000
97. Using the above amounts, Company G could evaluate effectiveness 3 months into the
hedge by comparing the $45,000 change on its Colombian coffee contract with what would have
been a perfectly offsetting change in cash flow for its forecasted purchase—the $50,000 change
on an otherwise identical forward contract for Brazilian coffee. The hedge would be ineffective
to the extent that there was a difference between the changes in the present value of the expected
cash flows on (a) the company’s Colombian coffee contract and (b) a comparable forward
contract for Brazilian coffee (the equivalent of the present value of $5,000 in the numerical
example).
Example 8: Cash Flow Hedge with a Basis Swap
98. Company H has a 5-year, $100,000 variable-rate asset and a 7-year, $150,000 variable-rate
liability. The interest on the asset is payable by the counterparty at the end of each month based
on the prime rate as of the first of the month. The interest on the liability is payable by Company
H at the end of each month based on LIBOR as of the tenth day of the month (the liability’s
anniversary date). The company enters into a 5-year interest rate swap to pay interest at the
prime rate and receive interest at LIBOR at the end of each month based on a notional amount of
$100,000. Both rates are determined as of the first of the month. Company H designates the
Page 51
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
swap as a hedge of 5 years of interest receipts on the $100,000 variable-rate asset and the first 5
years of interest payments on $100,000 of the variable-rate liability.
Assessing the hedge’s expected effectiveness and measuring ineffectiveness
99. Company H may not automatically assume that the hedge always will be highly effective at
achieving offsetting changes in cash flows because the reset date on the receive leg of the swap
differs from the reset date on the corresponding variable-rate liability. Both at hedge inception
and on an ongoing basis, the company’s assessment of expected effectiveness could be based on
the extent to which changes in LIBOR have occurred during comparable 10-day periods in the
past. Company H’s ongoing assessment of expected effectiveness and measurement of actual
ineffectiveness would be on a cumulative basis and would incorporate the actual interest rate
changes to date. The hedge would be ineffective to the extent that the cumulative change in cash
flows on the prime leg of the swap did not offset the cumulative change in expected cash flows
on the asset, and the cumulative change in cash flows on the LIBOR leg of the swap did not
offset the change in expected cash flows on the hedged portion of the liability. The terms of the
swap, the asset, and the portion of the liability that is hedged are the same, with the exception of
the reset dates on the liability and the receive leg of the swap. Thus, the hedge will only be
ineffective to the extent that LIBOR has changed between the first of the month (the reset date
for the swap) and the tenth of the month (the reset date for the liability).
Example 9: Cash Flow Hedge of Forecasted Sale with a Forward Contract
100. Company I, a U.S. dollar functional currency company, forecasts the sale of 10,000 units of
its principal product in 6 months to French customers for FF500,000 (French francs). The
company wants to hedge the cash flow exposure of the French franc sale related to changes in
the US$-FF exchange rate. It enters into a 6-month forward contract to exchange the FF500,000
it expects to receive in the forecasted sale for the U.S. dollar equivalent specified in the forward
contract and designates the forward contract as a cash flow hedge of the forecasted sale.
Assessing the hedge’s expected effectiveness and measuring ineffectiveness
101. Company I chooses to assess hedge effectiveness at inception and during the term of the
hedge based on (a) changes in the fair value of the forward contract attributable to changes in the
US$-FF spot rate and (b) changes in the present value of the current U.S. dollar equivalent of the
forecasted receipt of FF500,000. Because the critical terms of the forward contract and the
forecasted transaction are the same, presumably there would be no ineffectiveness unless there is
a reduction in the expected sales proceeds from the forecasted sales. Because Company I is
assessing effectiveness based on spot rates, it would exclude the change in the fair value of the
forward contract attributable to changes in the difference between the forward rate and spot rate
from the measure of hedge ineffectiveness and report it directly in earnings.
Example 10: Attempted Hedge of a Forecasted Sale with a Written Call Option
102. Company J forecasts the sale in 9 months of 100 units of product with a current market
Page 52
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
price of $95 per unit. The company’s objective is to sell the upside potential associated with the
forecasted sale by writing a call option for a premium. The company plans to use the premium
from the call option as an offset to decreases in future cash inflows from the forecasted sale that
will occur if the market price of the product decreases below $95. Accordingly, Company J sells
an at-the-money call option on 100 units of product with a strike price of $95 for a premium.
The premium represents only the time value of the option. The option is exercisable at any time
within nine months.
103. Company J’s objective of using the premium from the written call option as an offset to
any decrease in future cash inflows would not meet the notion of effectiveness in this Statement.
Future changes in the market price of the company’s product will not affect the premium that
Company J received, which is all related to time value in this example and thus is the maximum
amount by which Company J can benefit. That is, the company could not expect the cash flows
on the option to increase so that, at different price levels, a decrease in cash flows from the
forecasted sale would be offset by an increase in cash flows on the option.
Appendix B: EXAMPLES ILLUSTRATING APPLICATION OF THIS
STATEMENT
Section 1: Hedging Relationships
104. This appendix presents examples that illustrate the application of this Statement. The
examples do not address all possible uses of derivatives as hedging instruments. For simplicity,
commissions and most other transaction costs, initial margin, and income taxes are ignored
unless otherwise stated in an example. It is also assumed in each example that there are no
changes in creditworthiness that would alter the effectiveness of any of the hedging
relationships.
Example 1: Fair Value Hedge of a Commodity Inventory
105. This example illustrates the accounting for a fair value hedge of a commodity inventory. In
the first scenario, the terms of the hedging derivative have been negotiated to produce no
ineffectiveness in the hedging relationship. In the second scenario, there is ineffectiveness in the
hedging relationship. To simplify the illustration and focus on basic concepts, the derivative in
these two scenarios is assumed to have no time value. In practice, a derivative used for a fair
value hedge of a commodity would have a time value that would change over the term of the
hedging relationship. The changes in that time value would be recognized in earnings as they
occur, either because they represent ineffectiveness or because they are excluded from the
assessment of effectiveness (as discussed in paragraph 63). Other examples in this section
illustrate accounting for the time value component of a derivative.
Page 53
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Scenario 1—No Ineffectiveness in the Hedging Relationship
106. ABC Company decides to hedge the risk of changes during the period in the overall fair
value of its entire inventory of Commodity A by entering into a derivative contract, Derivative
Z. On the first day of period 1, ABC enters into Derivative Z and neither receives nor pays a
premium (that is, the fair value at inception is zero). ABC designates the derivative as a hedge
of the changes in fair value of the inventory due to changes in the price of Commodity A during
period 1. The hedging relationship qualifies for fair value hedge accounting. ABC will assess
effectiveness by comparing the entire change in fair value of Derivative Z with the change in the
market price of the hedged commodity inventory. ABC expects no ineffectiveness because (a)
the notional amount of Derivative Z matches the amount of the hedged inventory (that is,
Derivative Z is based on the same number of bushels as the number of bushels of the commodity
that ABC designated as hedged) and (b) the underlying of Derivative Z is the price of the same
variety and grade of Commodity A as the inventory at the same location.
107. At inception of the hedge, Derivative Z has a fair value of zero and the hedged inventory
has a carrying amount of $1,000,000 and a fair value of $1,100,000. On the last day of period 1,
the fair value of Derivative Z has increased by $25,000, and the fair value of the inventory has
decreased by $25,000. The inventory is sold, and Derivative Z is settled on the last day of period
1. The following table illustrates the accounting for the situation described above.
Debit (Credit)
Cash Derivative Inventory Earnings
Period 1
Recognize change in fair
value of derivative $ 25,000 $ (25,000)
Recognize change in fair $ (25,000) 25,000
value of inventory
Recognize revenue from sale $1,075,000 (1,075,000)
Recognize cost of sale of (975,000) 975,000
inventory
Recognize settlement of
derivative 25,000 (25,000) _________ _________
Total $ 1,100,000 $ 0 $(1,000,000) $(100,000)
108. If ABC had sold the hedged inventory at the inception of the hedge, its gross profit on that
sale would have been $100,000. The above example illustrates that, by hedging the risk of
changes in the overall fair value of its inventory, ABC recognized the same gross profit at the
end of the hedge period even though the fair value of its inventory decreased by $25,000.
Page 54
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Scenario 2—Ineffectiveness in the Hedging Relationship
109. No ineffectiveness was recognized in earnings in the above situation because the gain on
Derivative Z exactly offsets the loss on the inventory. However, if the terms of Derivative Z did
not perfectly match the inventory and its fair value had increased by $22,500 as compared with
the decline in fair value of the inventory of $25,000, then ineffectiveness of $2,500 would have
been recognized in earnings. The following table illustrates that situation (all other facts are
assumed to be the same as in Scenario 1).
Debit (Credit)
Cash Derivative Inventory Earnings
Period 1
Recognize change in fair
value of derivative $ 22,500
Recognize change in fair $ (22,500)
value of inventory $ (25,000) 25,000
Recognize revenue from sale $1,075,000 (1,075,000)
Recognize cost of sale of
inventory (975,000) 975,000
Recognize settlement of
derivative 22,500 (22,500) _________ _________
Total $1,097,500 $ 0 $(1,000,000) $ (97,500)
110. The difference between the effect on earnings in this scenario and the effect on earnings in
Scenario 1 is the $2,500 of hedge ineffectiveness.
Example 2: Fair Value Hedge of Fixed-Rate Interest-Bearing Debt
Purpose of the Example
111. This example demonstrates the mechanics of reporting an interest rate swap used as a fair
value hedge of an interest-bearing liability. It is not intended to demonstrate how to compute the
fair value of an interest rate swap or an interest-bearing liability. This example has been
simplified by assuming that the interest rate applicable to a payment due at any future date is the
same as the rate for a payment due at any other date (that is, the yield curve is flat). Although
that is an unrealistic assumption, it makes the amounts used in the example easier to understand
without detracting from the purpose of the example.
112. The fair values of the swap in this example are determined using the “zero-coupon
method.” That method involves computing and summing the present value of each future net
Page 55
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
settlement that would be required by the contract terms if future spot interest rates match the
forward rates implied by the current yield curve. The discount rates used are the spot interest
rates implied by the current yield curve for hypothetical zero coupon bonds due on the date of
each future net settlement on the swap. The zero-coupon method is not the only acceptable
method. Explanations of other acceptable methods of determining the fair value of an interest
rate swap can be obtained from various published sources. Fair values also may be available
from dealers in interest rate swaps and other derivatives.
113. In this example, the term and notional amount of the interest rate swap match the term and
principal amount of the interest-bearing liability being hedged. The fixed and variable interest
rates used to determine the net settlements on the swap match the current yield curve, and the
sum of the present values of the expected net settlements is zero at inception. Thus, paragraph
68 of this Statement permits the reporting entity to assume that there will be no ineffectiveness.
Assessment of effectiveness at one of the swap’s repricing dates would confirm the validity of
that assumption.
114. A shortcut method can be used to produce the same reporting results as the method
illustrated in this example. This shortcut is only appropriate for a fair value hedge of a fixed-rate
asset or liability using an interest rate swap and only if the assumption of no ineffectiveness is
appropriate. 21 The steps in the shortcut method are as follows:
a. Determine the difference between the fixed rate to be received on the swap and the fixed
rate to be paid on the bonds.
b. Combine that difference with the variable rate to be paid on the swap.
c. Compute and recognize interest expense using that combined rate and the fixed-rate
liability’s principal amount. (Amortization of any purchase premium or discount on the
liability also must be considered, although that complication is not incorporated in this
example.)
d. Determine the fair value of the interest rate swap.
e. Adjust the carrying amount of the swap to its fair value and adjust the carrying amount of
the liability by an offsetting amount.
Amounts determined using the shortcut method and the facts in this example will match the
amounts in paragraph 117 even though the shortcut does not involve explicitly amortizing the
hedge accounting adjustments on the debt. That is, the quarterly adjustments of the debt and
explicit amortization of previous adjustments will have the same net effect on earnings as the
shortcut method.
Assumptions
115. On July 1, 20X1, ABC Company borrows $1,000,000 to be repaid on June 30, 20X3. On
that same date, ABC also enters into a two-year receive-fixed, pay-variable interest rate swap.
ABC designates the interest rate swap as a hedge of the changes in the fair value of the fixed-rate
debt attributable to changes in market interest rates. The terms of the interest rate swap and the
Page 56
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
debt are as follows:
Interest Rate Swap Fixed-Rate Debt
Trade date and borrowing date* July 1, 20X1 July 1, 20X1
Termination date and maturity date June 30, 20X3 June 30, 20X3
Notional amount and principal amount $1,000,000 $1,000,000
Fixed interest rate* 6.41% 6.41%
Variable interest rate 3-month US$ LIBOR Not applicable
Settlement dates and interest payment dates* End of each calendar
quarter
End of each calendar
quarter
Reset dates End of each calendar
quarter through
March 31, 20X3
Not applicable
____________________
*These terms need not match for the assumption of no ineffectiveness to be appropriate. (Refer to paragraphs 68
and 69.)
116. The US$ LIBOR rates that are in effect at inception of the hedging relationship and at each
of the quarterly reset dates are assumed to be as follows:
Reset Date 3-Month LIBOR Rate
7/1/X1 6.41%
9/30/X1 6.48%
12/31/X1 6.41%
3/31/X2 6.32%
6/30/X2 7.60%
9/30/X2 7.71%
12/31/X2 7.82%
3/31/X3 7.42%
Page 57
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Amounts to Be Reported
117. The following table summarizes the fair values of the debt and the swap at each quarter
end, the details of the changes in the fair values during each quarter (including accrual and
payment of interest, the effect of changes in rates, and level-yield amortization of hedge
accounting adjustments), the expense for each quarter, and the net cash payments for each
quarter. The calculations of fair value of both the debt and the swap are made using LIBOR. (A
discussion of the appropriate discount rate appears in paragraph 70.)
Page 58
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Fixed-Rate
Debt
Interest Rate
Swap Expense
Net
Payment
July 1, 20X1 $(1,000,000) $ 0
Interest accrued (16,025) 0 $ (16,025)
Payments (receipts) 16,025 0 $ 16,025
Effect of change in rates 1,149 (1,149) 0 _________
September 30, 20X1 (998,851) (1,149) $ (16,025) $ 16,025
Interest accrued (16,025) (19) $ (16,044)
Payments (receipts) 16,025 175 $ 16,200
Amortization of basis adjustments (156) 0 (156)
Effect of change in rates (993) 993 0 _________
December 31, 20X1 (1,000,000) 0 $(16,200) $ 16,200
Interest accrued (16,025) 0 $(16,025)
Payments (receipts) 16,025 0 $ 16,025
Amortization of basis adjustments 0 0 0
Effect of change in rates (1,074) 1,074 0 _________
March 31, 20X2 (1,001,074) 1,074 $(16,025) $ 16,025
Interest accrued (16,025) 17 $(16,008)
Payments (receipts) 16,025 (225) $ 15,800
Amortization of basis adjustments 208 0 208
Effect of change in rates 12,221 (12,221) 0 _________
June 30, 20X2 (988,645) (11,355) $(15,800) $ 15,800
Interest accrued (16,025) (216) $(16,241)
Payments (receipts) 16,025 2,975 $ 19,000
Amortization of basis adjustments (2,759) 0 (2,759)
Effect of change in rates 789 (789) 0 _________
September 30, 20X2 (990,615) (9,385) $(19,000) $ 19,000
Interest accrued (16,025) (181) $(16,206)
Payments (receipts) 16,025 3,250 $ 19,275
Amortization of basis adjustments (3,069) 0 (3,069)
Effect of change in rates 532 (532) 0 _________
December 31, 20X2 (993,152) (6,848) $(19,275) $ 19,275
Interest accrued (16,025) (134) $(16,159)
Payments (receipts) 16,025 3,525 $ 19,550
Amortization of basis adjustments (3,391) 0 (3,391)
Effect of change in rates (978) 978 0 _________
March 31, 20X3 (997,521) (2,479) $(19,550) $ 19,550
Interest accrued (16,025) (46) $(16,071)
Payments (receipts) 1,016,025 2,525 $1,018,550
Amortization of basis adjustments (2,479) 0 (2,479) _________
June 30, 20X3 $ 0 $ 0 $(18,550) $1,018,550
Page 59
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
118. The table demonstrates two important points that explain why the shortcut method
described in paragraph 114 produces the same results as the computation in the above table when
there is no ineffectiveness in the hedging relationship.
a. In every quarter, the effect of changes in rates on the swap completely offsets the effect of
changes in rates on the debt. That is as expected because there is no ineffectiveness.
b. In every quarter except the last when the principal is repaid, the expense equals the cash
payment.
119. The following table illustrates the computation of interest expense using the shortcut
method described in paragraph 114. The results are the same as the results computed in the
above table.
Quarter Ended
(a)
Difference
between
Fixed Rates
(b)
Variable
Rate on
Swap
(c)
Sum
(a) + (b)
(d)
Debt’s
Principal
Amount
(e)
Interest
Expense
((c) × (d))/4
September 30, 20X1 0.00% 6.41% 6.41% $1,000,000 $16,025
December 31, 20X1 0.00% 6.48% 6.48% 1,000,000 16,200
March 31, 20X2 0.00% 6.41% 6.41% 1,000,000 16,025
June 30, 20X2 0.00% 6.32% 6.32% 1,000,000 15,800
September 30, 20X2 0.00% 7.60% 7.60% 1,000,000 19,000
December 31, 20X2 0.00% 7.71% 7.71% 1,000,000 19,275
March 31, 20X3 0.00% 7.82% 7.82% 1,000,000 19,550
June 30, 20X3 0.00% 7.42% 7.42% 1,000,000 18,550
120. As stated in the introduction to this example, a flat yield curve is assumed for simplicity.
An upward-sloping yield curve would have made the computations more complex. Paragraph
116 would have shown different interest rates for each quarterly repricing date, and the present
value of each future payment would have been computed using a different rate (as described in
paragraph 112). However, the basic principles are the same. As long as there is no
ineffectiveness in the hedging relationship, the shortcut method is appropriate.
Example 3: Fair Value Hedge—Using a Forward Contract to Purchase Foreign Currency to Hedge
a Firm Commitment Denominated in a Different Foreign Currency
121. This example illustrates a fair value hedge of a firm commitment to purchase an asset for a
price denominated in a foreign currency. In this example, the hedging instrument and the firm
commitment are denominated in different foreign currencies. Consequently, the hedge is not
perfectly effective, and ineffectiveness is recognized immediately in earnings. (The entity in the
Page 60
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
example could have designed a hedge with no ineffectiveness by using a hedging instrument
denominated in the same foreign currency as the firm commitment with terms that match the
appropriate terms in the firm commitment.)
122. MNO Company’s functional currency is the U.S. dollar. On February 3, 20X7, MNO
enters into a firm commitment to purchase a machine for delivery on May 1, 20X7. The price of
the machine will be 270,000 Dutch guilders (Dfl270,000). Also on February 3, 20X7, MNO
enters into a forward contract to purchase 240,000 Deutsche marks (DM240,000) on May 1,
20X7. MNO will pay $0.6125 per DM1 (a total of $147,000), which is the current forward rate
for an exchange on May 1, 20X7. MNO designates the forward contract as a hedge of its risk of
changes in the fair value of the firm commitment resulting from changes in the U.S.
dollar–Dutch guilder forward exchange rate.
123. MNO will assess effectiveness by comparing the overall changes in the fair value of the
forward contract to the changes in fair value in U.S. dollars of the firm commitment due to
changes in U.S. dollar–Dutch guilder forward exchange rates. MNO expects the forward
contract to be highly effective as a hedge because:
a. DM240,000 is approximately equal to Dfl270,000 at the May 1, 20X1 forward exchange
rate in effect on February 3, 20X7.
b. Settlement of the forward contract and the firm commitment will occur on the same date.
c. In recent years, changes in the value in U.S. dollars of Deutsche marks over three-month
periods have been highly correlated with changes in the value in U.S. dollars of Dutch
guilders over those same periods.
Ineffectiveness will result from the difference between changes in the U.S. dollar equivalent of
DM240,000 (the notional amount of the forward contract) and changes in the U.S. dollar
equivalent of Dfl270,000 (the amount to be paid for the machine). The difference between the
spot rate and the forward exchange rate is not excluded from the hedging relationship because
changes in the fair value of the firm commitment are being measured using forward exchange
rates. 22
124. The forward exchange rates in effect on certain key dates are assumed to be as follows:
Date
$-DM
Forward Exchange
Rate for Settlement
on 5/1/X7
$-Dfl
Forward Exchange
Rate for Settlement
on 5/1/X7
Inception of the hedge—2/3/X7 $0.6125 = DM1 $0.5454 = Dfl1
Quarter end—3/31/X7 $0.5983 = DM1 $0.5317 = Dfl1
Machine purchase—5/1/X7 $0.5777 = DM1 $0.5137 = Dfl1
Page 61
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
125. The U.S. dollar equivalent and changes in the U.S. dollar equivalent of the forward
contract and the firm commitment, the changes in fair value of the forward contract and the firm
commitment, and the ineffectiveness of the hedge on those same key dates are shown in the
following table. A 6 percent discount rate is used in this example.
2/3/X7 3/31/X7 5/1/X7
Forward contract
$-DM forward exchange rate for settlement
on May 1, 20X7 $ 0.6125 $ 0.5983 $ 0.5777
Units of currency (DM) × 240,000 × 240,000 × 240,000
Forward price of DM240,000 in dollars 147,000 143,592 138,648
Contract price in dollars (147,000) (147,000) (147,000)
Difference $ 0 $ (3,408) $ (8,352)
Fair value (present value of the difference) $ 0 $ (3,391) $ (8,352)
Change in fair value during the period $ (3,391) $ (4,961)
Firm commitment
$-Dfl forward exchange rate for settlement
on May 1, 20X7 $ 0.5454 $ 0.5317 $ 0.5137
Units of currency (Dfl) × 270,000 × 270,000 × 270,000
Forward price of Dfl270,000 in dollars (147,258) (143,559) (138,699)
Initial forward price in dollars 147,258 147,258 147,258
Difference $ 0 $ 3,699 $ 8,559
Fair value (present value of the difference) $ 0 $ 3,681 $ 8,559
Change in fair value during the period $ 3,681 $ 4,878
Hedge ineffectiveness (difference between
changes in fair values of the forward
contract denominated in Deutsche marks
and the firm commitment denominated in
Dutch guilders)
$ 290 $ (83)
This Statement requires that MNO recognize immediately in earnings all changes in fair values
of the forward contract. Because MNO is hedging the risk of changes in fair value of the firm
commitment attributable to changes in the forward exchange rates, this Statement also requires
recognizing those changes immediately in earnings.
Page 62
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
126. On May 1, 20X7, MNO fulfills the firm commitment to purchase the machine and settles
the forward contract. The entries illustrating fair value hedge accounting for the hedging
relationship and the purchase of the machine are summarized below.
Debit (Credit)
Cash
Firm
Commitment
Forward
Contract Machine Earnings
March 31, 20X7
Recognize change in
fair value of
firm commitment $ 3,681 $(3,681)
Recognize change in
fair value of
forward contract $(3,391) 3,391
(290)
April 30, 20X7
Recognize change in
fair value of firm
commitment 4,878 (4,878)
Recognize change in
fair value of
forward contract (4,961) 4,961
83
May 1, 20X7
Recognize settlement
of forward contract $ (8,352) 8,352
Recognize purchase
of machine (138,699) (8,559) _____ $147,258 _____
Total $(147,051) $ 0 $ 0 $147,258 $ (207)
Note: To simplify this example and focus on the effects of the hedging relationship, other
amounts that would be involved in the purchase of the machine by MNO (for example, shipping
costs and installation costs) have been ignored.
The effect of the hedge is to recognize the machine at its price in Dutch guilders (Dfl270,000)
translated at the forward rate in effect at the inception of the hedge ($0 .5454 per Dfl1).
Example 4: Cash Flow Hedge of the Forecasted Sale of a Commodity Inventory
127. This example illustrates the accounting for a cash flow hedge of a forecasted sale of a
commodity. The terms of the hedging derivative have been negotiated to match the terms of the
forecasted transaction. Thus, there is no ineffectiveness. The assumptions in this example are
similar to those in Example 1, including the assumption that there is no time value in the
Page 63
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
derivative. However, the entity has chosen to hedge the variability of the cash flows from the
forecasted sale of the commodity instead of the changes in its fair value.
128. ABC Company decides to hedge the risk of changes in its cash flows relating to a
forecasted sale of 100,000 bushels of Commodity A by entering into a derivative contract,
Derivative Z. ABC expects to sell the 100,000 bushels of Commodity A on the last day of
period 1. On the first day of period 1, ABC enters into Derivative Z and designates it as a cash
flow hedge of the forecasted sale. ABC neither pays nor receives a premium on Derivative Z
(that is, its fair value is zero). The hedging relationship qualifies for cash flow hedge
accounting. ABC expects that there will be no ineffectiveness from the hedge because (a) the
notional amount of Derivative Z is 100,000 bushels and the forecasted sale is for 100,000
bushels, (b) the underlying of Derivative Z is the price of the same variety and grade of
Commodity A that ABC expects to sell (assuming delivery to ABC’s selling point), and (c) the
settlement date of Derivative Z is the last day of period 1 and the forecasted sale is expected to
occur on the last day of period 1.
129. At inception of the hedge, the expected sales price of 100,000 bushels of Commodity A is
$1,100,000. On the last day of period 1, the fair value of Derivative Z has increased by $25,000,
and the expected sales price of 100,000 bushels of Commodity A has decreased by $25,000.
Both the sale of 100,000 bushels of Commodity A and the settlement of Derivative Z occur on
the last day of period 1. The following table illustrates the accounting, including the net impact
on earnings and other comprehensive income (OCI), for the situation described above.
Debit (Credit)_______
Cash Derivative OCI Earnings
Recognize change in fair value
of derivative $ 25,000 $(25,000)
Recognize revenue from sale $1,075,000 $(1,075,000)
Recognize settlement of derivative 25,000 (25,000)
Reclassify change in fair value
of derivative to earnings _________ ______ 25,000 (25,000)
Total $1,100,000 $ 0 $ 0 $(1,100,000)
130. At the inception of the hedge, ABC anticipated that it would receive $1,100,000 from the
sale of 100,000 bushels of Commodity A. The above example illustrates that by hedging the risk
of changes in its cash flows relating to the forecasted sale of 100,000 bushels of Commodity A,
ABC still received a total of $1,100,000 in cash flows even though the sales price of Commodity
A declined during the period.
Page 64
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Example 5: Cash Flow Hedge of Variable-Rate Interest-Bearing Asset
Purpose of the Example
131. This example demonstrates the mechanics of accounting for an interest rate swap used as a
cash flow hedge of variable interest receipts. It is not intended to demonstrate how to compute
the fair value of an interest rate swap. As in Example 2, the zero-coupon method 23 is used to
determine the fair values. (Unlike Example 2, the yield curve in this example is assumed to be
upward sloping, that is, interest rates are higher for payments due further into the future). In this
example, the term, notional amount, and repricing date of the interest rate swap match the term,
repricing date, and principal amount of the interest-bearing asset on which the hedged interest
receipts are due. The swap terms are "at the market" (as described in paragraphs 68 and 69), so
it has a zero value at inception. Thus, the reporting entity is permitted to assume that there will
be no ineffectiveness.
132. A shortcut method can be used to produce the same reporting results as the method
illustrated in this example. This shortcut is only appropriate if the assumption of no
ineffectiveness applies for an interest rate swap used as a cash flow hedge of interest receipts on
a variable-rate asset (or interest payments on a variable-rate liability). The steps in the shortcut
method are as follows: 24
a. Determine the difference between the variable rate to be paid on the swap and the variable
rate to be received on the bonds.
b. Combine that difference with the fixed rate to be received on the swap.
c. Compute and recognize interest income using that combined rate and the variable-rate
asset’s principal amount. (Amortization of any purchase premium or discount on the asset
must also be considered, although that complication is not incorporated in this example.)
d. Determine the fair value of the interest rate swap.
e. Adjust the carrying amount of the swap to its fair value and adjust other comprehensive
income by an offsetting amount.
Background and Assumptions
133. On July 1, 20X1, XYZ Company invests $10,000,000 in variable-rate corporate bonds that
pay interest quarterly at a rate equal to the 3-month US$ LIBOR rate plus 2.25 percent. The
$10,000,000 principal will be repaid on June 30, 20X3.
134. Also on July 1, 20X1, XYZ enters into a two-year receive-fixed, pay-variable interest rate
swap and designates it as a cash flow hedge of the variable-rate interest receipts on the corporate
bonds. The risk designated as being hedged is the risk of changes in cash flows attributable to
changes in market interest rates. The terms of the interest rate swap and the corporate bonds are
shown below.
Page 65
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Interest Rate Swap Corporate Bonds
Trade date and borrowing date* July 1, 20X1 July 1, 20X1
Termination date June 30, 20X3 June 30, 20X3
Notional amount $10,000,000 $10,000,000
Fixed interest rate 6.65% Not applicable
Variable interest rate † 3-month US$ LIBOR 3-month US$ LIBOR +
+ 2.25%
Settlement dates and interest End of each calendar quarter End of each calendar quarter
payment dates*
Reset dates End of each calendar End of each calendar
quarter through March 31, 20X3 quarter through March 31, 20X3
____________________
*These terms need not match for the assumption of no ineffectiveness to be appropriate. (Refer to paragraphs 68
and 69.)
†Only the interest rate basis (for example, LIBOR) must match. The spread over LIBOR does not invalidate the
assumption of no ineffectiveness.
135. Because the conditions described in paragraph 68 are met, XYZ is permitted to assume that
there is no ineffectiveness in the hedging relationship and to recognize in other comprehensive
income the entire change in the fair value of the swap.
136. The three-month US$ LIBOR rates in effect at the inception of the hedging relationship
and at each of the quarterly reset dates are assumed to be as follows:
Reset Date 3-Month LIBOR Rate
7/1/X1 5.56%
9/30/X1 5.63%
12/31/X1 5.56%
3/31/X2 5.47%
6/30/X2 6.75%
9/30/X2 6.86%
12/31/X2 6.97%
3/31/X3 6.57%
Amounts to Be Reported
137. XYZ must reclassify to earnings the amount in accumulated other comprehensive income
as each interest receipt affects earnings. In determining the amounts to reclassify each quarter, it
is important to recognize that the interest rate swap does not hedge the bonds. Instead, it hedges
the eight variable interest payments to be received. That is, each of the eight quarterly
settlements on the swap is associated with an interest payment to be received on the bonds.
Under the zero-coupon method discussed in paragraph 131, the present value of each quarterly
Page 66
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
settlement is computed separately. Because each payment occurs at a different point on the yield
curve, a different interest rate must be used to determine its present value. As each individual
interest receipt on the bonds is recognized in earnings, the fair value of the related quarterly
settlement on the swap is reclassified to earnings. The fair values and changes in fair values of
the interest rate swap and the effects on earnings and other comprehensive income (OCI) for
each quarter are as follows:
Swap
Debit (Credit)
OCI
Debit (Credit)
Earnings
Debit (Credit)
Cash
Debit (Credit)
July 1, 20X1 $ 0
Interest accrued 0
Payment (receipt) (27,250) $27,250
Effect of change in rates 52,100 $(52,100)
Reclassification to earnings _______ 27,250 $(27,250) ______
September 30, 20X1 24,850 (24,850) $(27,250) $27,250
Interest accrued 330 (330)
Payment (receipt) (25,500) $25,500
Effect of change in rates 74,120 (74,120)
Reclassification to earnings _______ 25,500 $(25,500) ______
December 31, 20X1 73,800 (73,800) $(25,500) $25,500
Interest accrued 1,210 (1,210)
Payment receipt (27,250) $27,250
Effect of change in rates 38,150 (38,150)
Reclassification to earnings ______ 27,250 $(27,250) ______
March 31, 20X2 85,910 (85,910) $(27,250) $27,250
Interest accrued 1,380 (1,380)
Payment (receipt) (29,500) $29,500
Effect of change in rates (100,610) 100,610
Reclassification to earnings ________ 29,500 $(29,500) _ _____
June 30, 20X2 (42,820) 42,820 $(29,500) $29,500
Interest accrued (870) 870
Payment (receipt) 2,500 $(2,500)
Effect of change in rates 8,030 (8,030)
Reclassification to earnings _______ (2,500) $ 2,500 ______
September 30, 20X2 (33,160) 33,160 $ 2,500 $(2,500)
Interest accrued (670) 670
Payment (receipt) 5,250 $(5,250)
Effect of change in rates 6,730 (6,730)
Reclassification to earnings ______ (5,250) $ 5,250 ______
December 31, 20X2 (21,850) 21,850 $ 5,250 $(5,250)
Interest accrued (440) 440
Payment (receipt) 8,000 $(8,000)
Effect of change in rates 16,250 (16,250)
Page 67
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
g , ( , )
Reclassification to earnings ______ (8,000) $ 8,000 ______
March 31, 20X3 1,960 (1,960) $ 8,000 $(8,000)
Interest accrued 40 (40)
Payment (receipt) (2,000) $ 2,000
Reclassification to earnings ______ 2,000 $ (2,000) ______
June 30, 20X3 $ 0 $ 0 $ (2,000) $ 2,000
138. The table shows that, in each quarter, the net cash receipt or payment on the swap equals
the income or expense to be recorded. The net effect on earnings of the interest on the bonds and
the reclassification of gains or losses on the swap is shown below.
Earnings
For the Quarter
Ending Interest on Bonds
Gains (Losses)
Reclassified from OCI Net Effect
9/30/X1 $ 195,250 $27,250 $ 222,500
12/31/X1 197,000 25,500 222,500
3/31/X2 195,250 27,250 222,500
6/30/X2 193,000 29,500 222,500
9/30/X2 225,000 (2,500) 222,500
12/31/X2 227,750 (5,250) 222,500
3/31/X3 230,500 (8,000) 222,500
6/30/X3 220,500 2,000 222,500
Totals $1,684,250 $95,750 $1,780,000
139. In this example, the shortcut method described in paragraph 132 works as follows. The
difference between the variable rate on the swap and the variable rate on the asset is a net receipt
of 2.25 percent. That rate combined with the 6.65 percent fixed rate received on the swap is 8.9
percent. The computed interest income is $890,000 per year or $222,500 per quarter, which is
the same as the amount in the table in paragraph 138.
Example 6: Accounting for a Derivative’s Gain or Loss in a Cash Flow Hedge—Effectiveness
Based on the Entire Change in the Derivative’s Fair Value
140. This example has been designed to illustrate application of the guidance for cash flow
hedges described in paragraph 30 of this Statement. At the beginning of period 1, XYZ
Company enters into a qualifying cash flow hedge of a transaction forecasted to occur early in
period 6. XYZ’s documented policy is to assess hedge effectiveness by comparing the changes
in present value of the expected future cash flows on the forecasted transaction to all of the
hedging derivative’s gain or loss (that is, no time value component will be excluded as discussed
in paragraph 63). In this hedging relationship, XYZ has designated changes in cash flows
related to the forecasted transaction attributable to any cause as the hedged risk.
Page 68
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
141. The following table includes the assumptions for this example and details the steps
necessary to account for a cash flow hedge that is not perfectly effective.
Fair Value of Derivative
Increase (Decrease)
Present Value of
Expected Future
Cash Flows on
Hedged Transaction
Increase (Decrease)
Period
(A)
Change
during the
Period
(B)
Cumulative
Change
(C)
Change
during the
Period
(D)
Cumulative
Change
(E)
Lesser of
the Two
Cumulative
Changes
(F)
Adjustment
to OCI
1 $100 $100 $ (96) $ (96) $ 96 $ 96
2 94 194 (101) (197) 194 98
3 (162) 32 160 (37) 32 (162)
4 (101) (69) 103 66 (66) (98)
5 30 (39) (32) 34 (34) 32
Step 1: Determine the change in fair value of the derivative and the change in present value of
the cash flows on the hedged transaction (columns A and C).
Step 2: Determine the cumulative changes in fair value of the derivative and the cumulative
changes in present value of the cash flows on the hedged transaction (columns B and
D).
Step 3: Determine the lesser of the absolute values of the two amounts in Step 2 (column E).
Step 4: Determine the change during the period in the lesser of the absolute values (column F).
Step 5: Adjust the derivative to reflect its change in fair value and adjust other comprehensive
income by the amount determined in Step 4. Balance the entry, if necessary, with an
adjustment to earnings.
142. The following are the entries required to account for the above cash flow hedge.
Debit (Credit)
Period Description Derivative Earnings OCI
1 Adjust derivative to fair value and OCI by
the calculated amount $ 100 $(4) $(96)
2 Adjust derivative to fair value and OCI by
the calculated amount 94 4 (98)
3 Adjust derivative to fair value and OCI by
the calculated amount (162) 0 162
Page 69
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
( )
4 Adjust derivative to fair value and OCI by
the calculated amount (101) 3 98
5 Adjust derivative to fair value and OCI by
the calculated amount 30 2 (32)
143. The following table reconciles the beginning and ending balances in accumulated other
comprehensive income.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income—Debit (Credit)
Period
Beginning
Balance
Change in
Fair Value Reclassification
Ending
Balance
1 $ 0 $(96) $ 0 $ (96)
2 (96) (94) (4) (194)
3 (194) 162 0 (32)
4 (32) 98 0 66
5 66 (30) (2) 34
The reclassification column relates to reclassifications between earnings and other
comprehensive income. In period 2, the $(4) in that column relates to the prior period’s
derivative gain that was previously recognized in earnings. That amount is reclassified to other
comprehensive income in period 2 because the cumulative gain on the derivative is less than the
amount necessary to offset the cumulative change in the present value of expected future cash
flows on the hedged transaction. In period 5, the $(2) in the reclassification column relates to the
derivative loss that was recognized in other comprehensive income in a prior period. At the end
of period 4, the derivative’s cumulative loss of $69 was greater in absolute terms than the $66
increase in the present value of expected future cash flows on the hedged transaction. That $3
excess had been recognized in earnings during period 4. In period 5, the value of the derivative
increased (and reduced the cumulative loss) by $30. The present value of the expected cash
flows on the hedged transaction decreased (and reduced the cumulative increase) by $32. The
gain on the derivative in period 5 was $2 smaller, in absolute terms, than the decrease in the
present value of the expected cash flows on the hedged transaction. Consequently, the entire
gain on the derivative is recognized in other comprehensive income. In addition, in absolute
terms, the $3 cumulative excess of the loss on the derivative over the increase in the present
value of the expected cash flows on the hedged transaction (which had previously been
recognized in earnings) increased to $5. As a result, $2 is reclassified from other comprehensive
income to earnings so that the $5 cumulative excess has been recognized in earnings.
Example 7: Designation and Discontinuance of a Cash Flow Hedge of the Forecasted Purchase of
Inventory
144. This example illustrates the effect on earnings and other comprehensive income of
discontinuing a cash flow hedge by dedesignating the hedging derivative before the variability of
Page 70
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
the cash flows from the hedged forecasted transaction has been eliminated. It also discusses the
effect that the location of a physical asset has on the effectiveness of a hedging relationship.
145. On February 3, 20X1, JKL Company forecasts the purchase of 100,000 bushels of corn on
May 20, 20X1. It expects to sell finished products produced from the corn on May 31, 20X1.
On February 3, 20X1, JKL enters into 20 futures contracts, each for the purchase of 5,000
bushels of corn on May 20, 20X1 (100,000 in total) and immediately designates those contracts
as a hedge of the forecasted purchase of corn.
146. JKL chooses to assess effectiveness by comparing the entire change in fair value of the
futures contracts to changes in the cash flows on the forecasted transaction. JKL estimates its
cash flows on the forecasted transaction based on the futures price of corn adjusted for the
difference between the cost of corn delivered to Chicago and the cost of corn delivered to
Minneapolis. JKL does not choose to use a tailing strategy (as described in paragraph 64). JKL
expects changes in fair value of the futures contracts to be highly effective at offsetting changes
in the expected cash outflows for the forecasted purchase of corn because (a) the futures
contracts are for the same variety and grade of corn that JKL plans to purchase and (b) on May
20, 20X1, the futures price for delivery on May 20, 20X1 will be equal to the spot price (because
futures prices and spot prices converge as the delivery date approaches). However, the hedge
may not be perfectly effective. JKL will purchase corn for delivery to its production facilities in
Minneapolis, but the price of the futures contracts is based on delivery of corn to Chicago. If the
difference between the price of corn delivered to Chicago and the price of corn delivered to
Minneapolis changes during the period of the hedge, the effect of that change will be included
currently in earnings according to the provisions of paragraph 30 of this Statement.
147. On February 3, 20X1, the futures price of corn for delivery to Chicago on May 20, 20X1 is
$2.6875 per bushel resulting in a total price of $268,750 for 100,000 bushels.
148. On May 1, 20X1, JKL dedesignates the related futures contracts and closes them out by
entering into offsetting contracts on the same exchange. As of that date, JKL had recognized in
accumulated other comprehensive income gains on the futures contracts of $26,250. JKL still
plans to purchase 100,000 bushels of corn on May 20, 20X1. Consequently, the gains that
occurred prior to dedesignation will remain in other comprehensive income until the finished
product is sold. If JKL had not closed out the futures contracts when it dedesignated them, any
further gains or losses would have been recognized in earnings.
149. On May 20, 20X1, JKL purchases 100,000 bushels of corn, and on May 31, 20X1, JKL
sells the finished product.
Page 71
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
150. The futures prices of corn that are in effect on key dates are assumed to be as follows:
Date
Futures Price per
Bushel for Delivery
to Chicago on
May 20, 20X1
Futures Price
Adjusted
for Delivery to
Minneapolis on
May 20, 20X1
Inception of hedging relationship—February
3, 20X1 $2.6875 $2.7375
End of quarter—March 31, 20X1 3.1000 3.1500
Discontinue hedge—May 1, 20X1 2.9500 3.0000
Purchase of corn—May 20, 20X1 2.8500 2.9000
151. The changes in fair value of the futures contracts between inception (February 3, 20X1)
and discontinuation (May 1, 20X1) of the hedge are as follows:
February 3–
March 31, 20X1
April 1–
May 1, 20X1
Futures price at beginning of period $ 2.6875 $ 3.1000
Futures price at end of period 3.1000 2.9500
Change in price per bushel 0.4125 (0.1500)
Bushels under contract (20 contracts @ 5,000
bushels each) × 100,000 × 100,000
Change in fair value—gain (loss) $ 41,250 (15,000)
152. The following table displays the entries to recognize the effects of (a) entering into futures
contracts as a hedge of the forecasted purchase of corn, (b) dedesignating and closing out the
futures contracts, (c) completing the forecasted purchase of corn, and (d) selling the finished
products produced from the corn. Because the difference in prices between corn delivered to
Chicago and corn delivered to Minneapolis ($.05 per bushel, as illustrated in paragraph 150) did
not change during the period of the hedge, no ineffectiveness is recognized in earnings. If that
difference had changed, the resulting ineffectiveness would have been recognized immediately
in earnings.
Page 72
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Debit (Credit)
Cash Inventory OCI Earnings
March 31, 20X1 (end of quarter)
Recognize change in fair value
of futures contracts $ 41,250 $(41,250)
May 1, 20X1 (discontinue hedge)
Recognize change in fair value
of futures contracts (15,000) 15,000
May 20, 20X1
Recognize purchase of corn (290,000) $290,000
May 31, 20X1
Recognize cost of sale of
product (290,000) $290,000
Reclassify changes in fair value
of futures contracts to
earnings _______ _______ 26,250 (26,250)
Total $(263,750) $ 0 $ 0 $263,750
Note: To simplify this example and focus on the effects of the hedging relationship, the margin account with the
clearinghouse and certain amounts that would be involved in a sale of JKL's inventory (for example, additional
costs of production, selling costs, and sales revenue) have been ignored.
The effect of the hedging strategy is that the cost of the corn recognized in earnings when the
finished product was sold was $263,750. If the hedging relationship had not been discontinued
early, the cost recognized in earnings would have been $273,750, which was the futures price of
the corn, adjusted for delivery to Minneapolis, at the inception of the hedge. Without the
strategy, JKL would have recognized $290,000, which was the price of corn delivered to
Minneapolis at the time it was purchased.
Example 8: Changes in a Cash Flow Hedge of Forecasted Interest Payments with an Interest Rate
Swap
Background
153. This example describes the effects on earnings and other comprehensive income of certain
changes in a cash flow hedging relationship. It presents two different scenarios. In the first, the
variability of the hedged interest payments is eliminated before the hedging derivative expires.
In the second, the interest rate index that is the basis for the hedged interest payments is changed
to a different index before the hedging derivative expires.
154. MNO Company enters into an interest rate swap (Swap 1) and designates it as a hedge of
the variable interest payments on a series of $5 million notes with 90-day terms. MNO plans to
continue issuing new 90-day notes over the next five years as each outstanding note matures.
Page 73
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
The interest on each note will be determined based on LIBOR at the time each note is issued.
Swap 1 requires a settlement every 90 days, and the variable interest rate is reset immediately
following each payment. MNO pays a fixed rate of interest (6.5 percent) and receives interest at
LIBOR. MNO neither pays nor receives a premium at the inception of Swap 1. The notional
amount of the contract is $5 million, and it expires in 5 years.
155. Because Swap 1 meets all of the conditions discussed in paragraph 68, MNO is permitted
to assume that there will be no ineffectiveness in the hedging relationship and to use the shortcut
method illustrated in Example 2.
Scenario 1—Two Undesignated Interest Rate Swaps
156. At the end of the second year of the 5-year hedging relationship, MNO discontinues its
practice of issuing 90-day notes. Instead, MNO issues a 3-year, $5 million note with a fixed rate
of interest (7.25 percent). Because the interest rate on the three-year note is fixed, the variability
of the future interest payments has been eliminated. Thus, Swap 1 no longer qualifies for cash
flow hedge accounting. However, the net gain or loss on Swap 1 in accumulated other
comprehensive income is not reclassified to earnings immediately. Immediate reclassification is
required (and permitted) only if it becomes probable that the hedged transactions (future interest
payments) will not occur. The variability of the payments has been eliminated, but it still is
probable that they will occur. Thus, those gains or losses will continue to be reclassified from
accumulated other comprehensive income to earnings as the interest payments affect earnings (as
required by paragraph 31).25
157. Rather than liquidate the pay-fixed, receive-variable Swap 1, MNO enters into a
pay-variable, receive-fixed interest rate swap (Swap 2) with a 3-year term and a notional amount
of $5 million. MNO neither pays nor receives a premium. Like Swap 1, Swap 2 requires a
settlement every 90 days and reprices immediately following each settlement. The relationship
between 90-day interest rates and longer term rates has changed since MNO entered into Swap 1
(that is, the shape of the yield curve is different). As a result, Swap 2 has different terms and its
settlements do not exactly offset the settlements on Swap 1. Under the terms of Swap 2, MNO
will receive a fixed rate of 7.25 percent and pay interest at LIBOR.
158. The two swaps are not designated as hedging instruments and are reported at fair value.
The changes in fair value are reported immediately in earnings and offset each other to a
significant degree.
Scenario 2—Two Interest Rate Swaps Designated as a Hedge of Future Variable Interest Payments
159. At the end of the second year of the 5-year hedging relationship, MNO discontinues its
practice of issuing 90-day notes and issues a 3-year, $5 million note with a rate of interest that
adjusts every 90 days to the prime rate quoted on that day. Swap 1 is no longer effective as a
cash flow hedge because the receive-variable rate on the swap is LIBOR, and the prime rate and
LIBOR are expected to change differently. Thus, the cash flows from the swap will not
Page 74
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
effectively offset changes in cash flows from the three-year note.
160. The net gain or loss on Swap 1 in accumulated other comprehensive income as of the date
MNO issues the three-year note is not reclassified into earnings immediately. Immediate
reclassification would be required only if it becomes probable that the hedged transactions
(future interest payments) will not occur. The expected amounts of those payments have
changed (because they will be based on prime instead of LIBOR, as originally expected), but it
still is probable that the payments will occur. Thus, those gains or losses will continue to be
reclassified to earnings as the interest payments affect earnings.
161. Rather than liquidate Swap 1 and obtain a separate derivative to hedge the variability of the
prime-rate-based interest payments, MNO enters into a pay-LIBOR, receive-prime basis swap.
The basis swap has a $5 million notional amount and a 3-year term and requires a settlement
every 90 days. MNO designates Swap 1 and the basis swap in combination as the hedging
instrument in a cash flow hedge of the variable interest payments on the three-year note. On the
three-year note, MNO pays interest at prime. On the basis swap, MNO receives interest at prime
and pays interest at LIBOR. On Swap 1, MNO receives interest at LIBOR and pays interest at
6.5 percent. Together, the cash flows from the two derivatives are effective at offsetting changes
in the interest payments on the three-year note. Changes in fair values of the two swaps are
recognized in other comprehensive income and are reclassified to earnings when the hedged
forecasted transactions (the variable interest payments) affect earnings (as required by paragraph
31). Because the two swaps in combination meet the conditions discussed in paragraph 68,
MNO is permitted to assume no ineffectiveness and use the shortcut method illustrated in
Example 5.
Example 9: Accounting for a Derivative’s Gain or Loss in a Cash Flow Hedge—Effectiveness
Based on Changes in Intrinsic Value
162. This example illustrates application of the accounting guidance for cash flow hedges
described in paragraph 30 of this Statement. At the beginning of period 1, XYZ Company
purchases for $9.25 an at-the-money call option on 1 unit of Commodity X with a strike price of
$125.00 to hedge a purchase of 1 unit of that commodity projected to occur early in period 5.
XYZ’s documented policy is to assess hedge effectiveness by comparing changes in cash flows
on the hedged transaction (based on changes in the spot price) with changes in the option
contract’s intrinsic value. Because the hedging instrument is a purchased call option, its intrinsic
value cannot be less than zero. If the price of the commodity is less than the option’s strike
price, the option is out-of-the-money. Its intrinsic value cannot decrease further regardless of
how far the commodity price falls, and the intrinsic value will not increase until the commodity
price increases to exceed the strike price. Thus, changes in cash flows from the option due to
changes in its intrinsic value will offset changes in cash flows on the forecasted purchase only
when the option is in-the-money or at-the-money. That phenomenon is demonstrated in period 3
in the following table when the commodity price declines by $1.25. Because the commodity
price is $.75 below the option’s strike price, the option’s intrinsic value declines by only $.50 (to
zero). The effect reverses in period 4 when the commodity price increases by $6.50 and the
Page 75
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
option’s intrinsic value increases by $5.75.
Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4
Assumptions
Ending market price of Commodity X $127.25 $125.50 $124.25 $130.75
Ending fair value of option:
Time value $ 7.50 $ 5.50 $ 3.00 $ 0.00
Intrinsic value 2.25 0.50 0.00 5.75
Total $ 9.75 $ 6.00 $ 3.00 $ 5.75
Change in time value $ (1.75) $ (2.00) $ (2.50) $ (3.00)
Change in intrinsic value 2.25 (1.75) (0.50) 5.75
Total current-period gain (loss)
on derivative $ 0.50 $ (3.75) $ (3.00) $ 2.75
Gain (loss) on derivative, adjusted
to remove the component excluded
from effectiveness test:
For the current period $ 2.25 $ (1.75) $ (0.50) $ 5.75
Cumulative 2.25 0.50 0.00 5.75
Change in expected future cash
flows on hedged transaction:
For the current period (2.25) 1.75 1.25 (6.50)
Cumulative (2.25) (0.50) 0.75 (5.75)
Balance to be reflected in
accumulated other comprehensive
income (paragraph 30(b))
Lesser (in absolute amounts) of
derivative's cumulative gain (loss)
or amount necessary to offset the
offset the cumulative offset the
cumulative change in expected
future cash flows on hedged
transaction $ 2.25 $ 0.50 $ 0.00 $ 5.75
163. The following are the entries required to account for the above cash flow hedge. The steps
involved in determining the amounts are the same as in Example 6.
Debit (Credit) _____
Period Description Derivative Earnings OCI
1 Adjust derivative to fair value and
OCI by the calculated amount $ 0.50 $1.75 $(2.25)
Page 76
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
2 Adjust derivative to fair value and
OCI by the calculated amount (3.75) 2.00 1.75
3 Adjust derivative to fair value and
OCI by the calculated amount (3.00) 2.50 0.50
4 Adjust derivative to fair value and
OCI by the calculated amount 2.75 3.00 (5.75)
164. The following table reconciles the beginning and ending balances in accumulated other
comprehensive income.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income—Debit (Credit)
Period Beginning Balance
Change in
Intrinsic Value Ending Balance
1 $ 0.00 $(2.25) $(2.25)
2 (2.25) 1.75 (0.50)
3 (0.50) 0.50 0.00
4 0.00 (5.75) (5.75)
The amount reflected in earnings relates to the component excluded from the effectiveness test,
that is, the time value component. No reclassifications between other comprehensive income
and earnings of the type illustrated in Example 6 are required because no hedge ineffectiveness
is illustrated in this example. (The change in cash flows from the hedged transaction was not
fully offset in period 3. However, that is not considered ineffectiveness. As described in
paragraph 20(b), a purchased call option is considered effective if it provides one-sided offset.)
Example 10: Cash Flow Hedge of the Foreign Currency Exposure in a Royalty Arrangement
165. This example illustrates the accounting for a hedging relationship involving a single
hedging derivative and three separate forecasted transactions. The three transactions occur on
three separate dates, but the payment on receivables related to all three occurs on the same date.
The settlement of the hedging derivative will occur on the date the receivable is paid.
166. DEF Company’s functional currency is the U.S. dollar. ZYX’s functional currency is the
Deutsche mark (DM). Effective January 1, 20X1, DEF enters into a royalty agreement with
ZYX Company that gives ZYX the right to use DEF’s technology in manufacturing Product X.
On April 30, 20X1, ZYX will pay DEF a royalty of DM1 million for each unit of Product X sold
by that date. DEF expects ZYX to sell one unit of Product X on January 31, one on February 28,
and one on March 31. The forecasted royalty is probable because ZYX has identified a demand
for Product X and no other supplier has the capacity to fill that demand.
167. Also on January 1, 20X1, DEF enters into a forward contract to sell DM3 million on April
30, 20X1 for a price equal to the forward price of $0.6057 per Deutsche mark. DEF designates
the forward contract as a hedge of the risk of changes in its functional-currency-equivalent cash
Page 77
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
flows attributable to changes in the Deutsche mark–U.S. dollar exchange rates related to the
forecasted receipt of DM3 million from the royalty agreement. The spot price and forward price
of Deutsche marks at January 1, 20X1 and the U.S. dollar equivalent of DM3 million at those
prices are assumed to be as follows:
Prices at January 1, 20X1 $ per DM
$ Equivalent of
DM3 Million
Spot price $0.6019 $1,805,700
4-month forward price 0.6057 1,817,100
168. DEF will exclude from its assessment of effectiveness the portion of the fair value of the
forward contract attributable to the spot-forward difference (the difference between the spot
exchange rate and the forward exchange rate). That is, DEF will recognize changes in that
portion of the derivative's fair value in earnings but will not consider those changes to represent
ineffectiveness. DEF will estimate the cash flows on the forecasted transactions based on the
current spot exchange rate and will discount that amount. Thus, DEF will assess effectiveness
by comparing (a) changes in the fair value of the forward contract attributable to changes in the
dollar spot price of Deutsche marks and (b) changes in the present value of the forecasted cash
flows based on the current spot exchange rate. Those two changes will exactly offset because
the currency and the notional amount of the forward contract match the currency and the total of
the expected foreign currency amounts of the forecasted transactions. Thus, if DEF dedesignates
a proportion of the forward contract each time a royalty is earned (as described in the following
paragraph), the hedging relationship will meet the “highly effective” criterion.
169. As each royalty is earned, DEF recognizes a receivable and royalty income. The
forecasted transaction (the earning of royalty income) has occurred. The receivable is an asset,
not a forecasted transaction, and is not eligible for cash flow hedge accounting. Nor is it eligible
for fair value hedge accounting of the foreign exchange risk because changes in the receivable's
fair value due to exchange rate changes are recognized immediately in earnings. (Paragraph
21(c) prohibits hedge accounting in that situation.) Consequently, DEF will dedesignate a
proportion of the forward contract corresponding to the earned royalty. As the royalty is
recognized in earnings and each proportion of the derivative is dedesignated, the related
derivative gain or loss in accumulated other comprehensive income is reclassified into earnings.
After that date, any gain or loss on the dedesignated proportion of the derivative and any
transaction loss or gain on the royalty receivable 26 will be recognized in earnings and will
substantially offset each other.
170. The spot prices and forward prices for settlement on April 30, 20X1 in effect at inception
of the hedge (January 1, 20X1) and at the end of each month between inception and April 30,
20X1 are assumed to be as follows:
Page 78
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
$ per DM
Spot Price
Forward Price
for Settlement
on 4/30/X1
January 1 $0.6019 $0.6057
January 31 0.5970 0.6000
February 28 0.5909 0.5926
March 31 0.5847 0.5855
April 30 0.5729 0.5729
171. The changes in fair value of the forward contract that are recognized each month in
earnings and other comprehensive income are shown in the following table. The fair value of the
forward is the present value of the difference between the U.S. dollars to be received on the
forward ($1,817,100) and the U.S. dollar equivalent of DM3 million based on the current
forward rate. A 6 percent discount rate is used in this example.
Debit (Credit)
Forward
Contract Earnings OCI
Fair value on January 1 $ 0
Period ended January 31:
Change in spot-forward
difference 2,364 $ (2,364)
Change in fair value of
dedesignated proportion 0 0
Change in fair value of
designated proportion 14,482 $(14,482)
Reclassification of gain 0 (4,827) 4,827
Fair value on January 31 16,846
Period ended February 28:
Change in spot-forward
difference 3,873 (3,873)
Change in fair value of
dedesignated proportion 6,063 (6,063)
Change in fair value of
designated proportion 12,127 (12,127)
Reclassification of gain 0 (10,891) 10,891
Page 79
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Fair value on February 28 38,900
Period ended March 31:
Change in spot-forward
difference 2,718 (2,718)
Change in fair value of
dedesignated proportion 12,458 (12,468)
Change in fair value of
designated proportion 6,213 (6,213)
Reclassification of gain 0 (17,104) 17,104
Fair value on March 31 60,298
Period ended April 30:
Change in spot-forward
difference 2,445 (2,445)
Change in fair value of
dedesignated proportion 35,657 (35,657)
Change in fair value of
designated proportion 0 _______ 0
Fair value on April 30 $98,400
Cumulative effect $(98,400) $ 0
172. The effect on earnings of the royalty agreement and hedging relationship illustrated in this
example is summarized by month in the following table.
Amounts Recognized in Earnings Related to
Receivable Forward Contract
Amount
Attributable
to the
Amount Difference Total
$ Equivalent Foreign Attributable between the Amount
of DM1 Currency to the Spot and Reported
Period Million Transaction Dedesignated Reclassification Forward in
Ended Royalty Gain (Loss) Proportion from OCI Rates Earnings
January 31 $ 597,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 4,827 $ 2,364 $ 604,191
February 28 590,900 (6,100) 6,063 10,891 3,873 605,627
March 31 584,700 (12,400) 12,458 17,104 2,718 604,580
April 30 0 (35,400) 35,657 0 2,445 2,702
$1,772,600 $ (53,900) $ 54,178 $32,822 $ 11,400 $1,817,100
$98,400
Page 80
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Example 11: Reporting Cash Flow Hedges in Comprehensive Income and Accumulated Other
Comprehensive Income
173. TUV Company’s cash flow hedge transactions following adoption of this Statement
through the end of 20X4 are as follows:
a. It continually purchases pork belly futures contracts to hedge its anticipated purchases of
pork belly inventory.
b. In 20X2, it entered into a Deutsche mark forward exchange contract to hedge the foreign
currency risk associated with the expected purchase of a pork belly processing machine with
a five-year life that it bought from a vendor in Germany at the end of 20X2.
c. In 20X2, it entered into a 10-year interest rate swap concurrent with the issuance of 10-year
variable rate debt (cash flow hedge of future variable interest payments).
d. In January 20X4, it entered into a two-year French franc forward exchange contract to hedge
a forecasted export sale (denominated in French francs, expected to occur in December
20X5) of hot dogs to a large customer in France. In June 20X4, it closed the forward
contract, but the forecasted transaction is still expected to occur.
174. The following table reconciles the beginning and ending accumulated other comprehensive
income balances for 20X4. It supports the comprehensive income display and disclosures that
are required under Statement 130, as amended by this Statement. It is assumed that there are no
other amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income. The after-tax amounts assume a 30
percent effective tax rate.
Other Comprehensive Income—Debit (Credit)
Accumulated Accumulated
Other Changes in Other
Comprehensive Fair Value Comprehensive
Income Recognized Reclassification Income as of
as of 1/1/X4 in 20X4 Adjustments 12/31/X4
Derivatives designated
as hedges of:
Inventory purchases $ 230 $ 85 $(270) $ 45
Equipment purchase 120 (30) 90
Variable interest rate
payments (40) 10 5 (25)
Export sale 0 (50) 0 (50)
Before-tax totals $ 310 $ 45 $(295) $ 60
After-tax totals $ 217 $ 32 $(207) $ 42
175. The following table illustrates an acceptable method, under the provisions of Statement 130
Page 81
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
as amended by this Statement, of reporting the transactions described in paragraphs 173 and 174
in earnings, comprehensive income, and shareholders’ equity.
Effect of Selected Items on Earnings and Comprehensive Income
Year Ended December 31, 20X4
Debit (Credit)
Effect on earnings before taxes:
Cost of goods sold $ 270
Depreciation 30
Interest (5)
Total 295
Income tax effect (88)*
Effect on earnings after taxes $ 207
Other comprehensive income, net of tax:
Cash flow hedges:
Net derivative losses, net of tax effect of $13 32
Reclassification adjustments, net of tax effect of $88 (207)
Net change (175)
Effect on total comprehensive income $ 32
*This example assumes that it is appropriate under the circumstances, in accordance with FASB
Statement No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes, to recognize the related income tax benefit in
the current year.
Effect of Selected Items on Shareholders’ Equity
Year Ended December 31, 20X4
Debit (Credit)
Accumulated other comprehensive income:
Balance on December 31, 20X3 $ 217
Net change during the year related to cash flow hedges (175)
Balance on December 31, 20X4 $ 42
Section 2: Examples Illustrating Application of the Clearly-and-Closely-Related Criterion
to Derivative Instruments Embedded in Hybrid Instruments
176. The following examples discuss instruments that contain a variety of embedded derivative
instruments. They illustrate how the provisions of paragraphs 12–16 of this Statement would be
applied to contracts with the described terms. If the terms of a contract are different from the
described terms, the application of this Statement by either party to the contract may be affected.
Page 82
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
The illustrative instruments and related assumptions in Examples 12–27 are based on examples
in Exhibit 96-12A of EITF Issue No. 96-12, "Recognition of Interest Income and Balance Sheet
Classification of Structured Notes."
177. Specifically, each example (a) provides a brief discussion of the terms of an instrument that
contains an embedded derivative and (b) analyzes the instrument (as of the date of inception) in
relation to the provisions of paragraphs 12–16 that require an embedded derivative to be
accounted for according to this Statement if it is not clearly and closely related to the host
contract. Unless otherwise stated, the examples are based on the assumptions (1) that if the
embedded derivative and host portions of the contract are not clearly and closely related, a
separate instrument with the same terms as the embedded derivative would meet the scope
requirements in paragraphs 6–11 and (2) that the contract is not remeasured at fair value under
otherwise applicable generally accepted accounting principles with changes in fair value
currently included in earnings.
178. Example 12: Inverse Floater. A bond with a coupon rate of interest that varies inversely
with changes in specified general interest rate levels or indexes (for example, LIBOR).
Example: Coupon = 5.25 percent for 3 months to July 1994; thereafter at 8.75
percent ??6-month U.S. $ LIBOR to January 1995. "Stepping" option allows for
spread and caps to step semiannually to maturity.
Scope Application: An inverse floater contains an embedded derivative (a
fixed-for-floating interest rate swap) that is referenced to an interest rate index (in
this example, LIBOR) that alters net interest payments that otherwise would be
paid by the debtor or received by the investor on an interest-bearing host contract.
If the embedded derivative could potentially result in the investor’s not
recovering substantially all of its initial recorded investment in the bond (that is,
if the inverse floater contains no floor to prevent any erosion of principal due to a
negative interest rate), the embedded derivative is not considered to be clearly and
closely related to the host contract (refer to paragraph 13(a)). In that case, the
embedded derivative should be separated from the host contract and accounted for
by both parties pursuant to the provisions of this Statement. (In this example,
there appears to be no possibility of the embedded derivative increasing the
investor’s rate of return on the host contract to an amount that is at least double
the initial rate of return on the host contract [refer to paragraph 13(b)].) In
contrast, if the embedded derivative could not potentially result in the investor’s
failing to recover substantially all of its initial recorded investment in the bond,
the embedded derivative is considered to be clearly and closely related to the host
contract and separate accounting for the derivative is neither required nor
permitted.
179. Example 13: Levered Inverse Floater. A bond with a coupon that varies indirectly with
Page 83
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
changes in general interest rate levels and applies a multiplier (greater than 1.00) to the specified
index in its calculation of interest.
Example: Accrues at 6 percent to June 1994; thereafter at 14.55 percent – (2.5 ?
3-month U.S. $ LIBOR).
Scope Application: A levered inverse floater can be viewed as an inverse floater
in which the embedded interest rate swap is leveraged. Similar to Example 12,
the embedded derivative would not be clearly and closely related to the host
contract if it potentially could result in the investor’s not recovering substantially
all of its initial recorded investment in the bond (refer to paragraph 13(a)) because
there is no floor to the interest rate. In that case, the embedded derivative (the
leveraged interest rate swap) should be separated from the host contract and
accounted for by both parties pursuant to the provisions of this Statement. In
contrast, if an embedded derivative could not potentially result in the investor’s
failing to recover substantially all of its initial recorded investment in the bond
and if there was no possibility of the embedded derivative increasing the
investor’s rate of return on the host contract to an amount that is at least double
the initial rate of return on the host contract (refer to paragraph 13(b), the
embedded derivative is considered to be clearly and closely related to the host
contract and no separate accounting for the derivative is required or permitted.
180. Example 14: Delevered Floater. A bond with a coupon rate of interest that lags overall
movements in specified general interest rate levels or indices.
Example: Coupon = (.5 ??10-year constant maturity treasuries (CMT)) + 1.25
percent.
Scope Application: A delevered floater may be viewed as containing an
embedded derivative (a deleveraged swap or a series of forward agreements) that
is referenced to an interest rate index (for example, 50 percent of 10-year CMT)
that alters net interest payments that otherwise would be paid or received on an
interest-bearing host contract but could not potentially result in the investor’s
failing to recover substantially all of its initial recorded investment in the bond
(refer to paragraph 13(a)). (In this example, there appears to be no possibility of
the embedded derivative increasing the investor’s rate of return on the host
contract to an amount that is at least double the initial rate of return on the host
contract [refer to paragraph 13(b)].) The embedded derivative is considered to be
clearly and closely related to the host contract as described in paragraph 13 of this
Statement. Therefore, the embedded derivative should not be separated from the
host contract.
181. Example 15: Range Floater. A bond with a coupon that depends on the number of days
Page 84
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
that a reference rate stays within a preestablished collar; otherwise, the bond pays either zero
percent interest or a below-market rate.
Example: Standard range floater—The investor receives 5.5 percent on each day
that 3-month US$ LIBOR is between 3 percent and 4 percent, with the upper limit
increasing annually after a specified date. The coupon will be equal to zero
percent for each day that 3-month US$ LIBOR is outside that range.
Scope Application: A range floater may be viewed as containing embedded
derivatives (two written conditional exchange option contracts with notional
amounts equal to the par value of the fixed-rate instrument) that are referenced to
an interest rate index (in this example, LIBOR) that alter net interest payments
that otherwise would be paid by the debtor or received by the investor on an
interest-bearing host contract but could not potentially result in the investor’s
failing to recover substantially all of its initial recorded investment in the bond
(refer to paragraph 13(a)). In this example, there appears to be no possibility of
increasing the investor’s rate of return on the host contract to an amount that is at
least double the initial rate of return on the host contract (refer to paragraph
13(b)). The embedded derivatives are considered to be clearly and closely related
to the host contract as described in paragraph 13 of this Statement. Therefore, the
embedded derivatives should not be separated from the host contract.
182. Example 16: Ratchet Floater. A bond that pays a floating rate of interest and has an
adjustable cap, adjustable floor, or both that move in sync with each new reset rate.
Example: Coupon = 3-month U.S. $ LIBOR + 50 basis points. In addition to
having a lifetime cap of 7.25 percent, the coupon will be collared each period
between the previous coupon and the previous coupon plus 25 basis points.
Scope Application: A ratchet floater may be viewed as containing embedded
derivatives (combinations of purchased and written options that create changing
caps and floors) that are referenced to an interest rate index (in this example,
LIBOR) that alter net interest payments that otherwise would be paid by the
debtor or received by the investor on an interest-bearing host contract but could
not potentially result in the investor’s failing to recover substantially all of its
initial recorded investment in the bond (refer to paragraph 13(a)). In this
example, there appears to be no possibility of increasing the investor’s rate of
return on the host contract to an amount that is at least double the initial rate of
return on the host contract (refer to paragraph 13(b)). The embedded derivatives
are considered to be clearly and closely related to the host contract as described in
paragraph 13 of this Statement. Therefore, the embedded derivatives should not
be separated from the host contract.
Page 85
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
183. Example 17: Fixed-to-Floating Note. A bond that pays a varying coupon (first-year coupon
is fixed; second- and third-year coupons are based on LIBOR, Treasury bills, or prime rate).
Scope Application: A fixed-to-floating note may be viewed as containing an
embedded derivative (a forward-starting interest rate swap) that is referenced to
an interest rate index (such as LIBOR) that alters net interest payments that
otherwise would be paid by the debtor or received by the investor on an
interest-bearing host instrument but could not potentially result in the investor’s
failing to recover substantially all of its initial recorded investment in the bond
(refer to paragraph 13(a)). Likewise, there is no possibility of increasing the
investor’s rate of return on the host contract to an amount that is both at least
double the initial rate of return on the host contract and at least twice what
otherwise would be the market return for a contract that has the same terms as the
host contract and that involves a debtor with a similar credit quality (refer to
paragraph 13(b)). The embedded derivative is considered to be clearly and
closely related to the host contract as described in paragraph 13 of this Statement.
Therefore, the embedded derivative should not be separated from the host
contract.
184. Example 18: Indexed Amortizing Note. A bond that repays principal based on a
predetermined amortization schedule or target value. The amortization is linked to changes in a
specific mortgage-backed security index or interest rate index. The maturity of the bond changes
as the related index changes. This instrument includes a varying maturity. (It is assumed for this
example that the bond’s terms could not potentially result in the investor’s failing to recover
substantially all of its initial recorded investment in the bond [refer to paragraph 13(a)] nor is
there the possibility of increasing the investor’s rate of return on the host contract to an amount
that is both at least double the initial rate of return on the host contract and at least twice what
otherwise would be the market return for a contract that has the same terms as the host contract
and that involves a debtor with a similar credit quality [refer to paragraph 13(b)].)
Scope Application: An indexed amortizing note can be viewed as a fixed-rate
amortizing note combined with a conditional exchange option contract that
requires partial or total "early" payment of the note based on changes in a specific
mortgage-backed security index or a specified change in an interest rate index.
Because the requirement to prepay is ultimately tied to changing interest rates, the
embedded derivative is considered to be clearly and closely related to a fixed-rate
note. Therefore, the embedded derivative should not be separated from the host
contract.
185. Example 19: Equity-Indexed Note. A bond for which the return of interest, principal, or
both is tied to a specified equity security or index (for example, the Standard and Poor’s 500
[S&P 500] index). This instrument may contain a fixed or varying coupon rate and may place all
or a portion of principal at risk.
Page 86
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Scope Application: An equity-indexed note essentially combines an
interest-bearing instrument with a series of forward exchange contracts or option
contracts. Often, a portion of the coupon interest rate is, in effect, used to
purchase options that provide some form of floor on the potential loss of principal
that would result from a decline in the referenced equity index. Because forward
or option contracts for which the underlying is an equity index are not clearly and
closely related to an investment in an interest-bearing note, those embedded
derivatives should be separated from the host contract and accounted for by both
parties pursuant to the provisions of this Statement.
186. Example 20: Variable Principal Redemption Bond. A bond whose principal redemption
value at maturity depends on the change in an underlying index over a predetermined
observation period. A typical example would be a bond that guarantees a minimum par
redemption value of 100 percent and provides the potential for a supplemental principal payment
at maturity as compensation for the below-market rate of interest offered with the instrument.
Example: A supplemental principal payment will be paid to the investor, at
maturity, if the final S&P 500 closing value (determined at a specified date) is
less than its initial value at date of issuance and the 10-year CMT is greater than 2
percent as of a specified date. In all cases, the minimum principal redemption
will be 100 percent of par.
Scope Application: A variable principal redemption bond essentially combines an
interest-bearing investment with an option that is purchased with a portion of the
bond's coupon interest payments. Because the embedded option entitling the
investor to an additional return is partially contingent on the S&P 500 index
closing above a specified amount, it is not clearly and closely related to an
investment in a debt instrument. Therefore, the embedded option should be
separated from the host contract and accounted for by both parties pursuant to the
provisions of this Statement.
187. Example 21: Crude Oil Knock-in Note. A bond that has a 1 percent coupon and guarantees
repayment of principal with upside potential based on the strength of the oil market.
Scope Application: A crude oil knock-in note essentially combines an
interest-bearing instrument with a series of option contracts. A significant portion
of the coupon interest rate is, in effect, used to purchase options that provide the
investor with potential gains resulting from increases in specified crude oil prices.
Because the option contracts are indexed to the price of crude oil, they are not
clearly and closely related to an investment in an interest-bearing note.
Therefore, the embedded option contract should be separated from the host
contract and accounted for by both parties pursuant to the provisions of this
Page 87
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Statement.
188. Example 22: Gold-Linked Bull Note. A bond that has a fixed 3 percent coupon and
guarantees repayment of principal with upside potential if the price of gold increases.
Scope Application: A gold-linked bull note can be viewed as combining an
interest-bearing instrument with a series of option contracts. A portion of the
coupon interest rate is, in effect, used to purchase call options that provide the
investor with potential gains resulting from increases in gold prices. Because the
option contracts are indexed to the price of gold, they are not clearly and closely
related to an investment in an interest-bearing note. Therefore, the embedded
option contracts should be separated from the host contract and accounted for by
both parties pursuant to the provisions of this Statement.
189. Example 23: Step-up Bond. A bond that provides an introductory above-market yield and
steps up to a new coupon, which will be below then-current market rates or, alternatively, the
bond may be called in lieu of the step-up in the coupon rate.
Scope Application: A step-up bond can be viewed as a fixed-rate bond with an
embedded call option and a changing interest rate feature. The bond pays an
initial above-market interest rate to compensate for the call option and the future
below-market rate (that is, below the forward yield curve, as determined at
issuance based on the existing upward-sloping yield curve). Because the call
option is related to changes in interest rates, it is clearly and closely related to an
investment in a fixed-rate bond. Therefore, the embedded derivatives should not
be separated from the host contract.
190. Example 24: Credit-Sensitive Bond. A bond that has a coupon rate of interest that resets
based on changes in the issuer's credit rating.
Scope Application: A credit-sensitive bond can be viewed as combining a
fixed-rate bond with a conditional exchange contract (or an option) that entitles
the investor to a higher rate of interest if the credit rating of the issuer declines.
Because the creditworthiness of the debtor and the interest rate on a debt
instrument are clearly and closely related, the embedded derivative should not be
separated from the host contract.
191. Example 25: Inflation Bond. A bond with a contractual principal amount that is indexed to
the inflation rate but cannot decrease below par; the coupon rate is typically below that of
traditional bonds of similar maturity.
Scope Application: An inflation bond can be viewed as a fixed-rate bond for
which a portion of the coupon interest rate has been exchanged for a conditional
Page 88
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
exchange contract (or option) indexed to the consumer price index, or other index
of inflation in the economic environment for the currency in which the bond is
denominated, that entitles the investor to payment of additional principal based on
increases in the referenced index. Such rates of inflation and interest rates on the
debt instrument are considered to be clearly and closely related. Therefore, the
embedded derivative should not be separated from the host contract.
192. Example 26: Disaster Bond. A bond that pays a coupon above that of an otherwise
comparable traditional bond; however, all or a substantial portion of the principal amount is
subject to loss if a specified disaster experience occurs.
Scope Application: A disaster bond can be viewed as a fixed-rate bond combined
with a conditional exchange contract (an option). The investor receives an
additional coupon interest payment in return for giving the issuer an option
indexed to industry loss experience on a specified disaster. Because the option
contract is indexed to the specified disaster experience, it cannot be viewed as
being clearly and closely related to an investment in a fixed-rate bond. Therefore,
the embedded derivative should be separated from the host contract and
accounted for by both parties pursuant to the provisions of this Statement.
However, if the “embedded derivative” entitles the holder of the option (that is,
the issuer of the disaster bond) to be compensated only for changes in the value of
specified assets or liabilities for which the holder is at risk (including the liability
for insurance claims payable due to the specified disaster) as a result of an
identified insurable event (refer to paragraph 10(c)(2)), a separate instrument with
the same terms as the “embedded derivative” would not meet the Statement's
definition of a derivative in paragraphs 6–11. In that circumstance, because the
criterion in paragraph 12(c) would not be met, there is no embedded derivative to
be separated from the host contract, and the disaster bond would not be subject to
the requirements of this Statement. The investor is essentially providing a form
of insurance or reinsurance coverage to the issuer.
193. Example 27: Specific Equity-Linked Bond. A bond that pays a coupon slightly below that
of traditional bonds of similar maturity; however, the principal amount is linked to the stock
market performance of an equity investee of the issuer. The issuer may settle the obligation by
delivering the shares of the equity investee or may deliver the equivalent fair value in cash.
Scope Application: A specific equity-linked bond can be viewed as combining an
interest-bearing instrument with, depending on its terms, a series of forward
exchange contracts or option contracts based on an equity instrument. Often, a
portion of the coupon interest rate is used to purchase options that provide some
form of floor on the loss of principal due to a decline in the price of the referenced
equity instrument. The forward or option contracts do not qualify for the
Page 89
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
exception in paragraph 10(e)(2) because the shares in the equity investee owned
by the issuer meet the definition of a financial instrument. Because forward or
option contracts for which the underlying is the price of a specific equity
instrument are not clearly and closely related to an investment in an
interest-bearing note, the embedded derivative should be separated from the host
contract and accounted for by both parties pursuant to the provisions of this
Statement.
194. Example 28: Dual Currency Bond. A bond providing for repayment of principal in U.S.
dollars and periodic interest payments denominated in a foreign currency. In this example, a
U.S. entity with the dollar as its functional currency is borrowing funds from an independent
party with those repayment terms as described.
Scope Application: Because the portion of this instrument relating to the periodic
interest payments denominated in a foreign currency is subject to the requirement
in Statement 52 to recognize the foreign currency transaction gain or loss in
earnings, the instrument should not be considered as containing an embedded
foreign currency derivative instrument pursuant to paragraph 15 of this Statement.
In this example, the U.S. entity has the dollar as the functional currency and is
making interest payments in a foreign currency. Remeasurement of the liability is
required using future equivalent dollar interest payments determined by the
current spot exchange rate and discounted at the historical effective interest rate.
195. Example 29: Short-Term Loan with a Foreign Currency Option. A U.S. lender issues a
loan at an above-market interest rate. The loan is made in U.S. dollars, the borrower's functional
currency, and the borrower has the option to repay the loan in U.S. dollars or in a fixed amount
of a specified foreign currency.
Scope Application: This instrument can be viewed as combining a loan at
prevailing market interest rates and a foreign currency option. The lender has
written a foreign currency option exposing it to changes in foreign currency
exchange rates during the outstanding period of the loan. The premium for the
option has been paid as part of the interest rate. Because the borrower has the
option to repay the loan in U.S. dollars or in a fixed amount of a specified foreign
currency, the provisions of paragraph 15 are not relevant to this example.
Paragraph 15 addresses foreign-currency-denominated interest or principal
payments but does not apply to foreign currency options. Because a foreign
currency option is not clearly and closely related to issuing a loan, the embedded
option should be separated from the host contract and accounted for by both
parties pursuant to the provisions of this Statement. In contrast, if both the
principal payment and the interest payments on the loan had been payable only in
a fixed amount of a specified foreign currency, there would be no embedded
foreign currency derivative pursuant to this Statement.
Page 90
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
196. Example 30: Lease Payment in Foreign Currency. A U.S. company’s operating lease with
a Japanese lessor is payable in yen. The functional currency of the U.S. company is the U.S.
dollar.
Scope Application: Paragraph 15(a) provides that contracts, other than financial
instruments, that specify payments denominated in the currency of the primary
economic environment in which any substantial party to that contract operates
shall not be separated from the host contract and considered a derivative
instrument for purposes of this Statement. Using available information about the
lessor and its operations, the U.S. company may decide it is reasonable to
conclude that the yen would be the currency of the primary economic
environment in which the Japanese lessor operates, consistent with the functional
currency notion in Statement 52. (That decision can be based on available
information and reasonable assumptions about the counterparty; representations
from the counterparty are not required.) Thus, the lease should not be viewed as
containing an embedded swap converting U.S. dollar lease payments to yen.
Alternatively, if the lease payments are specified in a currency seemingly
unrelated to each party’s functional currency, such as drachmas (assuming the
leased property is not in Greece), the embedded foreign currency swap should be
separated from the host contract and accounted for as a derivative for purposes of
this Statement because the provisions of paragraph 15 would not apply and a
separate instrument with the same terms would meet the definition of a derivative
instrument in paragraphs 6–11.
197. Example 31: Certain Purchases in a Foreign Currency. A U.S. company enters into a
contract to purchase corn from a local American supplier in six months for yen; the yen is the
functional currency of neither party to the transaction. The corn is expected to be delivered and
used over a reasonable period in the normal course of business.
Scope Application: Paragraph 10(b) excludes contracts that require future delivery of
commodities that are readily convertible to cash from the accounting for derivatives if the
commodities will be delivered in quantities expected to be used or sold by the reporting
entity over a reasonable period in the normal course of business. However, the corn
purchase contract must be examined to determine whether it contains an embedded
derivative that warrants separate accounting. The corn purchase contract can be viewed
as a forward contract for the purchase of corn and an embedded foreign currency swap
from the purchaser’s functional currency (the U.S. dollar) to yen. Because the yen is the
functional currency of neither party to the transaction and the purchase of corn is
transacted internationally in many different currencies, the contract does not qualify for
the exception in paragraph 15 that precludes separating the embedded foreign currency
derivative from the host contract. The embedded foreign currency swap should be
separated from the host contract and accounted for as a derivative for purposes of this
Page 91
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Statement because a separate instrument with the same terms would meet the definition
of a derivative instrument in paragraphs 6–11.
198. Example 32: Participating Mortgage. A mortgage in which the investor receives a
below-market interest rate and is entitled to participate in the appreciation in the market value of
the project that is financed by the mortgage upon sale of the project, at a deemed sale date, or at
the maturity or refinancing of the loan. The mortgagor must continue to own the project over the
term of the mortgage.
Scope Application: This instrument has a provision that entitles the investor to
participate in the appreciation of the referenced real estate (the “project”).
However, a separate contract with the same terms would be excluded by the
exception in paragraph 10(e)(2) because settlement is based on the value of a
nonfinancial asset of one of the parties that is not readily convertible to cash.
(This Statement does not modify the guidance in AICPA Statement of Position
97-1, Accounting by Participating Mortgage Loan Borrowers.)
199. Example 33: Convertible Debt. An investor receives a below-market interest rate and
receives the option to convert its debt instrument into the equity of the issuer at an established
conversion rate. The terms of the conversion require that the issuer deliver shares of stock to the
investor.
Scope Application: This instrument essentially contains a call option on the
issuer’s stock. Under the provisions of this Statement, the accounting by the
issuer and investor can differ. The issuer's accounting depends on whether a
separate instrument with the same terms as the embedded written option would be
a derivative instrument pursuant to paragraphs 6–11 of this Statement. Because
the option is indexed to the issuer's own stock and a separate instrument with the
same terms would be classified in stockholders' equity in the statement of
financial position, the written option is not considered to be a derivative
instrument for the issuer under paragraph 11(a) and should not be separated from
the host contract.
In contrast, if the terms of the conversion allow for a cash settlement rather than
delivery of the issuer’s shares at the investor’s option, the exception in paragraph
11(a) for the issuer does not apply because the contract would not be classified in
stockholders’ equity in the issuer’s statement of financial position. In that case,
the issuer should separate the embedded derivative from the host contract and
account for it pursuant to the provisions of this Statement because (a) an option
based on the entity’s stock price is not clearly and closely related to an
interest-bearing debt instrument and (b) the option would not be considered an
equity instrument of the issuer.
Page 92
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Similarly, if the convertible debt is indexed to another entity’s publicly traded
common stock, the issuer should separate the embedded derivative from the host
contract and account for it pursuant to the provisions of this Statement because (a)
an option based on another entity’s stock price is not clearly and closely related to
an investment in an interest-bearing note and (b) the option would not be
considered an equity instrument of the issuer.
The exception in paragraph 11 does not apply to the investor's accounting.
Therefore, in both cases described above, the investor should separate the
embedded option contract from the host contract and account for the embedded
option contract pursuant to the provisions of this Statement because the option
contract is based on the price of another entity’s equity instrument and thus is not
clearly and closely related to an investment in an interest-bearing note. However,
if the terms of conversion do not allow for a cash settlement and if the common
stock delivered upon conversion is privately held (that is, is not readily
convertible to cash), the embedded derivative would not be separated from the
host contract because it would not meet the criteria in paragraph 9.
200. Example 34: Variable Annuity Products. These products are investment contracts as
contemplated in Statements 60 and 97. Similar to variable life insurance products, policyholders
direct their investment account asset mix among a variety of mutual funds composed of equities,
bonds, or both, and assume the risks and rewards of investment performance. The funds are
generally maintained in separate accounts by the insurance company. Contract terms provide
that if the policyholder dies, the greater of the account market value or a minimum death benefit
guarantee will be paid. The minimum death benefit guarantee is generally limited to a return of
premium plus a minimum return (such as 3 or 4 percent); this life insurance feature represents
the fundamental difference from the life insurance contracts that include significant (rather than
minimal) levels of life insurance. The investment account may have various payment
alternatives at the end of the accumulation period. One alternative is the right to purchase a life
annuity at a fixed price determined at the initiation of the contract.
Scope Application: Variable annuity product structures as contemplated in
Statement 97 are generally not subject to the scope of this Statement (except for
payment options at the end of the accumulation period), as follows:
??Death benefit component. Paragraph 10(c)(1) excludes a death benefit from
the scope of this Statement because the payment of the death benefit is the
result of an identifiable insurable event instead of changes in an underlying.
The death benefit in this example is limited to the floor guarantee of the
investment account, calculated as the premiums paid into the investment
account plus a guaranteed rate of return, less the account market value.
Statement 60 remains the applicable guidance for the insurance-related
liability accounting.
Page 93
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
??Investment component. The policyholder directs certain premium investments
in the investment account that includes equities, bonds, or both, which are
held in separate accounts that are owned by the policyholder and separate
from the insurer’s general account assets. This component is viewed as a
direct investment because the policyholder directs and owns these
investments. This component is not a derivative because the policyholder has
invested the premiums in acquiring those investments. Furthermore, any
embedded derivatives within those investments should not be separated from
the host contract by the insurer because the separate account assets are already
marked-to-market under Statement 60. In contrast, if the product were an
equity-index-based interest annuity (rather than a variable annuity), the
investment component would not be viewed as a direct investment because
the policyholder does not own those investments, which are assets recorded in
the general account of the insurance company. As a result, the host contract
would be a debt instrument, and the equity-index-based derivative should be
separated and accounted for as a derivative instrument.
??Investment account surrender right at market value. Because this right is
exercised only at the fund market value (without the insurer’s floor guarantee)
and relates to an investment owned by the insured, this right is not within the
scope of this Statement.
??Payment alternatives at the end of the accumulation period. Payment
alternatives are options subject to the requirements of this Statement if interest
rates or other underlying variables affect the value.
Section 3: Examples Illustrating Application of the Transition Provisions
201. Assume that at December 31, 1999, a calendar-year entity has the following derivatives
and hedging relationships in place (for simplicity, income tax effects are ignored):
Before Transition Adjustment—December 31, 1999
Asset (Liability)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)
GAAP Assumed Post-
Classification Transition-Date
Carrying Fair prior Previous Hedge Accounting under
Item Amount Value to Transition Resembles This Statement
Hedges existing
A. inventory (though
fair value changes
have not been Fair value hedge of
Forward contract $ 0 $(1,500) recognized) Fair value hedge inventory
Page 94
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Hedged by forward
Inventory 5,000 6,400 contract
B. Would not qualify as a
hedge of the held-to-
maturity security—
Hedges fixed-rate account for swap as a
Interest rate swap 0 180 bond Fair value hedge nonhedging derivative*
Fixed-rate bond
(classified as Hedged by interest
held-to-maturity) 1,000 800 rate swap
C. Fair value hedge of
Interest rate swap 0 (350) Hedges fixed-rate bond Fair value hedge the fixed-rate bond
Hedged by interest
Fixed-rate bond rate swap (cost basis
(classified as is $650; unrealized
available-for-sale) 1,000 1,000 holding gain is $350)
Other comprehensive
income (Statement
115) (350) N/A
D. Foreign currency Hedges firm purchase Fair value hedge of the
forward contracts 1,000 1,200 commitment Fair value hedge firm commitment
Deferred gain related
to foreign currency
Deferred credit (1,000) N/A forward contract
Firm commitment
to pay foreign Hedged by foreign
currency to purchase currency forward
machinery 0 (1,200) contract
E. Swap that was hedging
a probable forecasted
transaction was termi-
nated prior to 12/31/99 Since the swap is no
Swap (no longer held) — — and the related gain longer held, there is no
Deferred credit (1,000) N/A was deferred Cash flow hedge new designation
F. Hedges a probable
forecasted transaction Forward could possibly
Page 95
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
2-year forward projected to occur in qualify as a hedging
contract 0 1,000 1 year Cash flow hedge instrument
G. Hedges a probable
6-month futures forecasted transaction
contract (cash projected to occur in
settled daily) 0 0 6 months Cash flow hedge Cash flow hedge
Deferred loss related
Deferred debit 500 N/A to futures contract N/A
____________________
*Prior to the effective date of Statement 133, generally accepted accounting principles did not prohibit hedge
accounting for a hedge of the interest rate risk in a held-to-maturity security. Thus, transition adjustments may be
necessary for hedges of that type because that type of hedging relationship will no longer qualify for hedge
accounting under the provisions of this Statement. At the date of initial application, an entity may reclassify any
held-to-maturity security into the available-for-sale or trading category (refer to paragraph 54).
202. To determine transition accounting, existing hedge relationships must be identified as
either a fair value type of hedge or a cash flow type of hedge as identified pursuant to this
Statement. They do not have to meet the hedge criteria of this Statement. That identification is
indicated in column (e) of the above table.
203. At transition, an entity has an opportunity to redesignate hedging relationships. This
example makes certain assumptions regarding post-transition-date accounting pursuant to this
Statement as indicated in column (f) of the above table that cannot necessarily be determined
from the information provided in this example. The appropriate conditions in this Statement
must be met to continue hedge accounting for periods subsequent to transition. However,
determining whether a potential hedging relationship meets the conditions of this Statement does
not impact the transition accounting. For purposes of determining transition adjustments,
existing hedging relationships are categorized as fair value or cash flow hedges based on their
general characteristics, without assessing whether all of the applicable conditions would be met.
204. After applying the transition provisions, the above items would be reflected in the financial
statements as follows:
After Transition Adjustment—January 1, 2000
Statement of Income
Financial Position Statement
Other Transition Explanation of
Asset Comprehensive Adjustment Accounting at
Item (Liability) Income Gain (Loss) Transition
A. Adjust to fair value by
Page 96
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
recognizing $1,500 loss as
Forward contract $(1,500) N/A $ (1,500) a transition adjustment
Recognize offsetting
$1,400 gain as a transition
Inventory 6,400 N/A 1,400 adjustment*
Net impact $ (100)
B. Adjust to fair value by
recognizing $180 gain as a
Interest rate swap 180 N/A $ 180 transition adjustment
Fixed-rate bond Recognize offsetting $180
(classified as held- loss as a transition
to-maturity) 820 N/A (180) adjustment
Net impact $ 0
C. Adjust to fair value by
recognizing a $350 loss as
Interest rate swap (350) N/A $ (350) a transition adjustment
Fixed-rate bond Remove offsetting $350
(classified as gain previously reported in
available-for-sale) 1,000 N/A — OCI (Statement 115) and
Other comprehensive recognize as a transition
income (OCI) N/A— 350 adjustment
Net impact $ 0
D. Adjust to fair value by
Foreign currency recognizing $200 gain as a
forward contract 1,200 N/A $ 200 transition adjustment
Remove deferred credit
and recognize as a
Deferred credit 0 N/A 1,000 transition adjustment
Firm commitment to Recognize offsetting
pay foreign currency $1,200 loss as a
to purchase machinery
(1,200)
N/A (1,200) transition adjustment
Net impact $ 0
Page 97
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
E. No asset exists for the
Terminated swap — — $ — terminated swap
Remove the deferred credit
and recognize in OCI—to
be reclassified into earnings
consistent with the earnings
Deferred credit — N/A — effect of the hedged
OCI N/A $(1,000) — forecasted transaction
Net impact $ 0
F. Adjust to fair value by
recognizing $1,000 gain in
OCI—to be reclassified into
earnings consistent with the
earnings effect of the
hedged forecasted
Forward contract 1,000(1,000) $ 0 transaction
G. Asset already reported at
fair value—no adjustment
Futures contract 0 N/A — necessary
Remove deferred debit and
recognize in OCI—to be
reclassified into earnings
consistent with the earn-
Deferred debit — N/A — ings effect of the hedged
OCI N/A 500 — forecasted transaction
Net impact $ 0
____________________
*The transition adjustment for the gain on the hedged inventory is limited to the amount that is offset by the loss on
the hedging derivative. The entire $1,400 gain is recognized in this example because it is less than the $1,500 loss
on the derivative. If the inventory gain had been more than $1,500, only $1,500 would have been recognized as a
transition adjustment.
205. In the initial year of application, an entity would also disclose the amounts of deferred
gains and losses included in other comprehensive income that are expected to be reclassified into
earnings within the next 12 months.
Page 98
Appendix C
BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS
CONTENTS
Paragraph
Numbers
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 206
Background Information ...................................................................................... 207–216
Fundamental Decisions Underlying the Statement .............................................. 217–231
Benefits and Costs of This Statement .................................................................. 232–243
Problems with Previous Accounting and Reporting Practices....................... 233–237
This Statement Mitigates Those Problems..................................................... 238–243
Scope and Definition............................................................................................ 244–311
Why Hedging Instruments Are Limited to Derivatives ................................. 246–247
Defining Characteristics of a Derivative Instrument...................................... 248–266
Underlyings and Notional Amounts or Payment Provisions ................... 250–254
Initial Investment in the Contract............................................................. 255–258
Net Settlement .......................................................................................... 259–266
Assets That Are Readily Convertible to Cash.................................... 264–266
Commodity Contracts .................................................................................... 267–272
Normal Purchases and Normal Sales ....................................................... 271–272
Financial Instruments ..................................................................................... 273–290
Trade Date versus Settlement Date Accounting ...................................... 274–276
Regular-Way Security Trades ............................................................ 275–276
Insurance Contracts .................................................................................. 277–283
Exception for Derivatives That Serve as Impediments to
Recognition of a Sale ..................................................................................... 284
Exception for Instruments Classified in Stockholders' Equity................. 285–286
Stock-Based Compensation Contracts ............................................................. 287
Contingent Consideration in a Business Combination............................. 288–289
Application to Specific Contracts .................................................................... 290
The Scope of Statement 119........................................................................... 291–292
Embedded Derivatives ................................................................................... 293–311
Approaches Considered............................................................................ 294–298
Accounting for Embedded Derivatives Separately from the
Host Contract.......................................................................................... 299–303
The Clearly-and-Closely-Related Approach............................................ 304–311
Fair Value Measurement Guidance...................................................................... 312–319
Consideration of a Discount or Premium in the Valuation of a Large Position..... 315
Valuation of Liabilities................................................................................... 316–317
Valuation of Deposit Liabilities ....................................................................... 317
Other Fair Value Measurement Guidance...................................................... 318–319
Page 99
Demand for Hedge Accounting............................................................................ 320–329
Hedges of Fair Value Exposures............................................................................ 321
Hedges of Cash Flow Exposures.................................................................... 322–329
Hedge Accounting Approaches Considered ........................................................ 330–350
Measure All Financial Instruments at Fair Value .......................................... 331–334
Mark-to-Fair-Value Hedge Accounting......................................................... 335–337
Comprehensive Income Approach ................................................................. 338–344
Full-Deferral Hedge Accounting.................................................................... 345–348
Synthetic Instrument Accounting................................................................... 349–350
Hedge Accounting in This Statement................................................................... 351–383
Exposures to Changes in Fair Value or Changes in Cash Flow..................... 353–356
Hedge Accounting in This Statement and Risk Reduction ............................ 357–359
A Compound Derivative May Not Be Separated into Risk Components ...... 360–361
Fair Value Hedges.......................................................................................... 362–370
Accelerated Recognition of the Gain or Loss on a Hedged Item............. 363–368
Attributable to the Risk Being Hedged .............................................. 364–366
Entire Gain or Loss Attributable to Risk Being Hedged.................... 367–368
Measurement of Hedged Item's Gain or Loss .................................................. 369
The Exposure Draft's Exception for Certain Firm Commitments.................... 370
Cash Flow Hedges.......................................................................................... 371–383
First Two Objectives-Avoid Conceptual Difficulties and
Increase Visibility .......................................................................................... 373
Third and Fourth Objectives-Reflect Ineffectiveness and
Impose Limitations................................................................................. 374–383
Measure of Hedge Ineffectiveness ..................................................... 379–381
Limitations on Cash Flow Hedges ..................................................... 382–383
General Criteria to Qualify for Designation as a Hedge ...................................... 384–431
Designation, Documentation, and Risk Management............................................ 385
Highly Effective in Achieving Offsetting Changes in Fair Values
or Cash Flows............................................................................................... 386–401
Basis Swaps.............................................................................................. 391–395
Written Options........................................................................................ 396–401
Exposures to Changes in Fair Value or Cash Flows That
Could Affect Reported Earnings .................................................................. 402–404
The Hedged Item or Transaction Is Not Remeasured through Earnings
for the Hedged Risk...................................................................................... 405–407
Risks That May Be Designated as Being Hedged.......................................... 408–421
Financial Assets and Liabilities................................................................ 411–415
Nonfinancial Assets and Liabilities.......................................................... 416–421
Simultaneous Hedges of Fair Value and Cash Flow Exposures .................... 422–425
Prohibition against Hedge Accounting for Hedges of Interest Rate Risk
of Debt Securities Classified as Held-to-Maturity ...................................... 426–431
Additional Qualifying Criteria for Fair Value Hedges......................................... 432–457
Specific Identification .................................................................................... 432–436
Recognized Asset or Liability or Unrecognized Firm Commitment ............. 437–442
Definition of a Firm Commitment ........................................................... 440–442
Page 100
Single Asset or Liability or a Portfolio of Similar Assets
or Similar Liabilities..................................................................................... 443–450
Items the Exposure Draft Prohibited from Designation as
Hedged Items in Fair Value Hedges ........................................................... 451–457
Oil or Gas That Has Not Been Produced and Similar Items.................... 452–453
Leases ............................................................................................................... 454
Investment Accounted for by the Equity Method ............................................ 455
Other Exclusions ...................................................................................... 456–457
Additional Qualifying Criteria for Cash Flow Hedges ........................................ 458–473
Specific Identification ............................................................................................ 458
Single Transaction or Group of Individual Transactions ............................... 459–462
Probability of a Forecasted Transaction......................................................... 463–465
Contractual Maturity ...................................................................................... 466–468
Transaction with External Third Party........................................................... 469–471
Forecasted Transactions Prohibited from Designation as the Hedged
Item in a Cash Flow Hedge .......................................................................... 472–473
Foreign Currency Hedges..................................................................................... 474–487
Carried Forward from Statement 52............................................................... 475–480
Fair Value Hedges of Foreign Currency Risk
in Available-for-Sale Securities ............................................................. 479–480
Broadening of Statement 52........................................................................... 481–487
Forecasted Intercompany Foreign Currency Transactions....................... 482–487
Discontinuing Hedge Accounting ........................................................................ 488–494
Discontinuing Fair Value Hedge Accounting ................................................ 489–491
Discontinuing Cash Flow Hedge Accounting................................................ 492–494
Interaction with Standards on Impairment ........................................................... 495–498
Current Earnings Recognition of Certain Derivative Losses ....................................... 499
Accounting by Not-for-Profit Organizations and Other Entities
That Do Not Report Earnings............................................................................. 500–501
Disclosures ........................................................................................................... 502–513
Effective Date and Transition .............................................................................. 514–524
Transition Provisions for Embedded Derivatives .......................................... 518–522
Transition Provisions for Compound Derivatives.......................................... 523–524
Page 101
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Appendix C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND BASIS FOR
CONCLUSIONS
Introduction
206. This appendix summarizes considerations that Board members deemed significant in
reaching the conclusions in this Statement. It includes reasons for accepting certain views and
rejecting others. Individual Board members gave greater weight to some factors than to others.
Background Information
207. The Board is addressing the accounting for derivative instruments 27 and hedging activities
as part of its broad project on financial instruments. That project was added to the Board's
agenda in 1986 to address financial reporting issues that were arising, or that were given a new
sense of urgency, as a result of financial innovation. The project initially focused on disclosures
and resulted in the issuance of FASB Statements No. 105, Disclosure of Information about
Financial Instruments with Off-Balance-Sheet Risk and Financial Instruments with
Concentrations of Credit Risk, in March 1990, and No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of
Financial Instruments, in December 1991. This Statement supersedes Statement 105 and
amends Statement 107.
208. An FASB staff-authored Research Report, Hedge Accounting: An Exploratory Study of
the Underlying Issues, was published in September 1991.28 An FASB Discussion Memorandum,
Recognition and Measurement of Financial Instruments, was issued in November 1991 as a
basis for considering the financial accounting and reporting issues of recognition and
measurement raised by financial instruments. The recognition and measurement phase of the
financial instruments project, which began with the issuance of that Discussion Memorandum,
resulted in the issuance of FASB Statements No. 114, Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of
a Loan, and No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, in May
1993, FASB Statement No. 118, Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan—Income
Recognition and Disclosures, in October 1994, and FASB Statement No. 125, Accounting for
Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities, in June 1996.
209. Concern about financial reporting for derivative instruments and hedging activities is an
international phenomenon. In October 1995, an FASB staff-authored Special Report, Major
Issues Related to Hedge Accounting, was published jointly with representatives of the
accounting standards-setting bodies of the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia and the
International Accounting Standards Committee. 29 That Special Report discusses many of the
issues that needed to be resolved in developing a hedge accounting model.
Page 102
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
210. The Board began deliberating issues relating to derivatives and hedging activities in
January 1992. From then until June 1996, the Board held 100 public meetings to discuss various
issues and proposed accounting approaches, including 74 Board meetings, 10 meetings with
members of the Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Council, 7 meetings with members of
the Financial Instruments Task Force and its subgroup on hedging, and 9 meetings with outside
representatives. In addition, individual Board members and staff visited numerous companies in
a variety of fields and participated in meetings with different representational groups, both
nationally and internationally, to explore how different entities manage risk and how those risk
management activities should be accounted for.
211. In June 1993, the Board issued a report, "A Report on Deliberations, Including Tentative
Conclusions on Certain Issues, related to Accounting for Hedging and Other Risk-adjusting
Activities." That report included background information about the Board's deliberations and
some tentative conclusions on accounting for derivatives and hedging activities. It also solicited
comments from constituents and provided the basis for two public meetings in September 1993.
212. Concern has grown about the accounting and disclosure requirements for derivatives and
hedging activities as the extent of use and the complexity of derivatives and hedging activities
have rapidly increased in recent years. Changes in global financial markets and related financial
innovations have led to the development of new derivatives used to manage exposures to risk,
including interest rate, foreign exchange, price, and credit risks. Many believe that accounting
standards have not kept pace with those changes. Derivatives can be useful risk management
tools, and some believe that the inadequacy of financial reporting may have discouraged their
use by contributing to an atmosphere of uncertainty. Concern about inadequate financial
reporting also was heightened by the publicity surrounding large derivative losses at a few
companies. As a result, the Securities and Exchange Commission, members of Congress, and
others urged the Board to deal expeditiously with reporting problems in this area. For example,
a report of the General Accounting Office prepared for Congress in 1994 recommended, among
other things, that the FASB "proceed expeditiously to develop and issue an exposure draft that
provides comprehensive, consistent accounting rules for derivative products. . . ." 30 In addition,
some users of financial statements asked for improved disclosures and accounting for derivatives
and hedging. For example, one of the recommendations in the December 1994 report published
by the AICPA Special Committee on Financial Reporting, Improving Business Reporting—A
Customer Focus, was to address the disclosures and accounting for innovative financial
instruments.
213. Because of the urgency of improved financial information about derivatives and related
activities, the Board decided, in December 1993, to redirect some of its efforts toward enhanced
disclosures and, in October 1994, issued FASB Statement No. 119, Disclosure about Derivative
Financial Instruments and Fair Value of Financial Instruments. This Statement supersedes
Statement 119.
Page 103
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
214. In June 1996, the Board issued an Exposure Draft, Accounting for Derivative and Similar
Financial Instruments and for Hedging Activities. Approximately 300 organizations and
individuals responded to the Exposure Draft, some with multiple letters. In November 1996, 36
individuals and organizations presented their views at 4 days of public hearings. In addition, six
enterprises participated in a limited field test of the provisions of the Exposure Draft. In
December 1996, the Board's Financial Instruments Task Force met to discuss the issues raised
during the comment letter process and during the public hearings. The Board considered the
comments and field test results during its redeliberations of the issues addressed by the Exposure
Draft in 21 public meetings in the first 7 months of 1997. The Financial Instruments Task Force
met again with the Board in April 1997 and discussed, among other things, proposed changes to
the Exposure Draft reflected in a draft of a Statement. As a consequence of the comments
received, the Board made certain changes to the proposals in the Exposure Draft.
215. In August 1997, a draft of the standards section of this Statement and related examples was
made available to the Financial Instruments Task Force and other interested parties for comment
on its clarity and operationality. The Board received approximately 150 comment letters on that
draft and discussed those comments in 10 open Board meetings. Those comments also led to
changes to the requirements, intended to make the Statement clearer and more operational.
216. This Statement is an additional step in the Board's project on financial instruments and is
intended to address the immediate problems about the recognition and measurement of
derivatives while the Board's vision of having all financial instruments measured at fair value in
the statement of financial position is pursued. Certain provisions of this Statement will be
reconsidered as the Board continues to address the issues in its broad project on financial
instruments.
Fundamental Decisions Underlying the Statement
217. The Board made four fundamental decisions about how to account for derivatives and
hedging activities; those decisions became the cornerstones of this Statement:
a. Derivative instruments represent rights or obligations that meet the definitions of assets or
liabilities and should be reported in financial statements.
b. Fair value is the most relevant measure for financial instruments and the only relevant
measure for derivative instruments. Derivative instruments should be measured at fair
value, and adjustments to the carrying amounts of hedged items should reflect changes in
their fair value (that is, gains or losses) that are attributable to the risk being hedged and that
arise while the hedge is in effect.
c. Only items that are assets or liabilities should be reported as such in financial statements.
d. Special accounting for items designated as being hedged should be provided only for
qualifying items. One aspect of qualification should be an assessment of the expectation of
effective offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows during the term of the hedge for the
risk being hedged.
Page 104
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
218. Derivative instruments represent rights or obligations that meet the definitions of assets or
liabilities and should be reported in financial statements. Derivatives are assets or liabilities
because they represent rights or obligations. FASB Concepts Statement No. 6, Elements of
Financial Statements, describes the characteristics of assets and liabilities as follows:
An asset has three essential characteristics: (a) it embodies a probable future
benefit that involves a capacity, singly or in combination with other assets, to
contribute directly or indirectly to future net cash inflows, (b) a particular entity
can obtain the benefit and control others' access to it, and (c) the transaction or
other event giving rise to the entity's right to or control of the benefit has already
occurred. . . .
A liability has three essential characteristics: (a) it embodies a present duty or
responsibility to one or more other entities that entails settlement by probable
future transfer or use of assets at a specified or determinable date, on occurrence
of a specified event, or on demand, (b) the duty or responsibility obligates a
particular entity, leaving it little or no discretion to avoid the future sacrifice, and
(c) the transaction or other event obligating the entity has already happened.
[paragraphs 26 and 36]
219. The ability to settle a derivative in a gain position by receiving cash, another financial
asset, or a nonfinancial asset is evidence of a right to a future economic benefit and is compelling
evidence that the instrument is an asset. Similarly, the payment of cash, a financial asset, or a
nonfinancial asset that is required to settle a derivative in a loss position is evidence of a duty to
sacrifice assets in the future and indicates that the instrument is a liability. The Board believes
that recognizing those assets and liabilities will make financial statements more complete and
more informative. Before the issuance of this Statement, many derivatives were
"off-balance-sheet" because, unlike conventional financial instruments such as stocks, bonds,
and loans, derivatives often reflect at their inception only a mutual exchange of promises with
little or no transfer of tangible consideration.
220. Fair value is the most relevant measure for financial instruments and the only relevant
measure for derivative instruments. Derivative instruments should be measured at fair value,
and adjustments to the carrying amounts of hedged items should reflect changes in their fair
value (that is, gains or losses) that are attributable to the risk being hedged and that arise while
the hedge is in effect. In 1991, with the issuance of Statement 107, the Board concluded that
disclosure of fair value information about financial instruments is useful to present and potential
investors, creditors, and other users of financial statements in making rational investment, credit,
and other decisions. Statement 107 describes the Board's rationale:
Fair values of financial instruments depict the market's assessment of the
present value of net future cash flows directly or indirectly embodied in them,
discounted to reflect both current interest rates and the market's assessment of the
Page 105
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
risk that the cash flows will not occur. Investors and creditors are interested in
predicting the amount, timing, and uncertainty of future net cash inflows to an
entity, as those are the primary sources of future cash flows from the entity to
them. Periodic information about the fair value of an entity's financial
instruments under current conditions and expectations should help those users
both in making their own predictions and in confirming or correcting their earlier
expectations.
Information about fair value better enables investors, creditors, and other
users to assess the consequences of an entity's investment and financing
strategies, that is, to assess its performance. For example, information about fair
value shows the effects of a decision to borrow using fixed-rate rather than
floating-rate financial instruments or of a decision to invest in long-term rather
than short-term instruments. Also, in a dynamic economy, information about fair
value permits continuous reassessment of earlier decisions in light of current
circumstances. [paragraphs 40 and 41]
221. The Board believes fair values for financial assets and liabilities provide more relevant and
understandable information than cost or cost-based measures. In particular, the Board believes
that fair value is more relevant to financial statement users than cost for assessing the liquidity or
solvency of an entity because fair value reflects the current cash equivalent of the entity's
financial instruments rather than the price of a past transaction. With the passage of time,
historical prices become irrelevant in assessing present liquidity or solvency.
222. The Board also believes fair value measurement is practical for most financial assets and
liabilities. Fair value measurements can be observed in markets or estimated by reference to
markets for similar instruments. If market information is not available, fair value can be
estimated using other measurement techniques, such as discounted cash flow analyses and option
or other pricing models, among others.
223. The Board believes fair value is the only relevant measurement attribute for derivatives.
Amortized cost is not a relevant measure for derivatives because the historical cost of a
derivative often is zero, yet a derivative generally can be settled or sold at any time for an
amount equivalent to its fair value. Statement 115 provides reasoning for the belief that
amortized cost may be relevant for debt securities that will be held to maturity. In the absence of
default, that cost will be realized at maturity, and any interim unrealized gains or losses will
reverse. That reasoning does not hold for derivatives or for other financial instruments. The
volatility of derivatives' fair values and the irrelevance of amortized cost for derivatives
convinced the Board that fair value is the only relevant measure for derivatives and that all
derivatives should be reported in financial statements at fair value. (The latter part of the Board's
second fundamental decision, which deals with the mechanics of hedge accounting, is discussed
in paragraphs 362 and 363.)
224. Some of the Board's constituents contend that reporting derivatives at fair value will not
Page 106
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
result in more useful information than results from present practice. Some also say that reporting
derivatives at fair value will result in reported gains or losses and increases or decreases in
reported equity that are "artificial" because they do not reflect economic benefits or detriments.
Some of those concerns are based in part on concerns about using different measurement
attributes for derivatives and for other financial instruments. The Board agrees that financial
statements would be even more useful if all financial instruments were reported at fair value, and
that is its long-term goal. However, some of the arguments against reporting derivatives at fair
value are made in the context of assertions that fair value measurements do not provide useful
information for either derivatives or other instruments. The following simple example illustrates
why the Board does not agree with that view.
225. Bank A and Bank B have identical financial positions at December 31, 20X1, as follows:
Loans $10 billion Liabilities $ 9 billion
________ Equity 1 billion
Total assets $10 billion Total liabilities and equity $10 billion
Both banks' assets consist entirely of variable-rate loans. Both also have fixed-rate debt at 9
percent.
226. In January of 20X2, Bank A becomes concerned that market interest rates will fall below
the current level of 10 percent, and it therefore enters into a pay-variable,
receive-fixed-at-10-percent interest rate swap. Bank B, on the other hand, chooses not to hedge
its variable-rate loans. Bank A's swap will reprice every three months, beginning on April 15,
20X2. By March 31, 20X2, interest rates have fallen significantly, and the fair value of Bank A's
swap is $1 billion.
227. For simplicity, the example assumes that each bank's interest income for the first quarter of
20X2 was exactly offset by expenses so that both had earnings of zero. The effects of deferred
taxes also are ignored. Thus, if the change in fair value of Bank A's interest rate swap is
excluded from its financial statements, as was general practice before this Statement, both banks'
balance sheets at March 31, 20X2 would continue to appear as presented in paragraph 225.
However, the two banks are not in the same economic position—Bank A has a $1 billion asset
that Bank B does not.
228. The following statement of financial position, which reflects the requirements of this
Statement if Bank A accounts for the swap as a cash flow hedge, better reflects Bank A's
economic position at March 31, 20X2:
Page 107
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Loans $10 billion Liabilities $ 9 billion
Interest rate swap 1 billion Equity:
Beginning equity 1 billion
Gain on swap 1 billion
Total equity 2 billion
Total assets $11 billion Total liabilities and equity $11 billion
Bank A's statement of comprehensive income for the quarter ending March 31, 20X2 will report
a gain of $1 billion. Bank B's comprehensive income for the same period will be reported as
zero. Under previous accounting for swaps, Bank A would only accrue periodic cash receipts or
payments on the swap as the swap reprices and those receipts or payments become due. In
contrast, the financial statements of Banks A and B at March 31, 20X2 presented in accordance
with this Statement signal to investors and creditors that the future reported earnings and cash
flows of the banks will be different. If interest rates remain below 10 percent during the
remainder of the term of the loans, Bank A will report higher earnings and will receive higher
cash inflows than Bank B. Indeed, whatever happens to interest rates in the future, the two
banks are likely to be affected differently. Under previous reporting practices for interest rate
swaps and many other derivatives, Bank A and Bank B would have looked exactly alike at
March 31, 20X2. However, the two banks are not in the same economic position at March 31,
20X2, and Bank A's increase in reported equity reflects the real difference in the position of the
two banks. That increase in equity is by no means "artificial."
229. Only items that are assets or liabilities should be reported as such in financial statements.
Derivatives are assets or liabilities, and the Board decided that they should be reported in
financial statements (fundamental decision 1) and measured at fair value (fundamental decision
2). If derivatives are measured at fair value, the losses or gains that result from changes in their
fair values must be reported in the financial statements. However, those losses or gains are not
separate assets or liabilities because they have none of the essential characteristics of assets or
liabilities as described in paragraph 218. The act of designating a derivative as a hedging
instrument does not convert a subsequent loss or gain into an asset or a liability. A loss is not an
asset because no future economic benefit is associated with it. The loss cannot be exchanged for
cash, a financial asset, or a nonfinancial asset used to produce something of value, or used to
settle liabilities. Similarly, a gain is not a liability because no obligation exists to sacrifice assets
in the future. Consequently, the Board concluded that losses or gains on derivatives should not
be reported as assets or liabilities in a statement of financial position.
230. Special accounting for items designated as being hedged should be provided only for
qualifying items. One aspect of qualification should be an assessment of the expectation of
effective offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows during the term of the hedge for the risk
being hedged. Because hedge accounting is elective and relies on management's intent, it should
be limited to transactions that meet reasonable criteria. The Board concluded that hedge
Page 108
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
accounting should not be permitted in all cases in which an entity might assert that a relationship
exists between items or transactions. A primary purpose of hedge accounting is to link items or
transactions whose changes in fair values or cash flows are expected to offset each other. The
Board therefore decided that one of the criteria for qualification for hedge accounting should
focus on the extent to which offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows on the derivative and
the hedged item or transaction during the term of the hedge are expected and ultimately
achieved.
231. The offset criterion precludes hedge accounting for certain risk management techniques,
such as hedges of strategic risk. For example, a U.S. manufacturer, with no export business, that
designates a forward contract to buy U.S. dollars for Japanese yen as a hedge of its U.S. dollar
sales would fail the requirement that the cash flows of the derivative are expected to be highly
effective in achieving offsetting cash flows on the hedged transaction. A weakened yen might
allow a competitor to sell goods imported from Japan more cheaply, undercutting the domestic
manufacturer's prices and reducing its sales volume and revenues. However, it would be
difficult for the U.S. manufacturer to expect a high degree of offset between a decline in U.S.
sales revenue due to increased competition and cash inflows on a foreign currency derivative.
Any relationship between the exposure and the "hedging" derivative typically would be quite
indirect, would depend on price elasticities, and would be only one of many factors influencing
future results. In addition, the risk that a desired or expected number of transactions will not
occur, that is, the potential absence of a transaction, is not a hedgeable risk under this Statement.
Hedge accounting in this Statement is limited to the direct effects of price changes of various
kinds (commodity prices, interest rates, and so on) on fair values of assets and liabilities and the
cash flows from transactions, including qualifying forecasted transactions.
Benefits and Costs of This Statement
232. In accomplishing its mission, the Board follows certain precepts, including the precept to
promulgate standards only when the expected benefits of the information exceed the perceived
cost. The Board works to determine that a proposed standard will fill a significant need and that
the costs imposed to meet the standard, as compared to other alternatives, are justified in relation
to the overall benefits of the resulting information.
Problems with Previous Accounting and Reporting Practices
233. The first step in considering whether the benefits of a new accounting standard will justify
the related costs is to identify the problems in the existing accounting guidance that a new
standard seeks to resolve. The problems with previous accounting and reporting practices for
derivatives and hedging activities are discussed below.
234. The effects of derivatives were not transparent in the basic financial statements. Under the
varied accounting practices that existed before the issuance of this Statement, some derivatives
were recognized in financial statements, others were not. If recognized in financial statements,
Page 109
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
some realized and unrealized gains and losses on derivatives were deferred from earnings
recognition and reported as part of the carrying amount (or "basis") of a related item or as if they
were freestanding assets and liabilities. Users of financial statements found it difficult to
determine what an entity had or had not done with derivatives and the related effects because the
basic financial statements often did not report the rights or obligations associated with derivative
instruments.
235. The accounting guidance for derivative instruments and hedging activities was incomplete.
Before the issuance of this Statement, accounting standards specifically addressed only a few
types of derivatives. Statement 52 addressed foreign exchange forward contracts, and Statement
80 addressed exchange-traded futures contracts. Only those two Statements specifically
provided for "hedge accounting." That is, only those Statements provided special accounting to
permit a gain or loss on a derivative to be deferred beyond the period in which it otherwise
would be recognized in earnings because it was designated as a hedging instrument. The EITF
addressed the accounting for some derivatives and for some hedging activities not covered in
either Statement 52 or Statement 80. However, that effort was on an ad hoc basis and gaps
remained in the authoritative literature. Accounting practice filled some gaps on specific issues,
such as with "synthetic instrument accounting" as described in paragraph 349, but without
commonly understood limitations on the appropriate use of that accounting. The result was that
(a) many derivative instruments were carried "off-balance-sheet" regardless of whether they
were formally part of a hedging strategy, (b) practices were inconsistent among entities, and (c)
users of financial reports had inadequate information.
236. The accounting guidance for derivative instruments and hedging activities was
inconsistent. Under previous accounting guidance, the required accounting treatment differed
depending on the type of instrument used in a hedge and the type of risk being hedged. For
example, an instrument hedging an anticipated transaction may have qualified for special
accounting if it was a purchased option with certain characteristics or an interest rate futures
contract, but not if it was a foreign currency forward or futures contract. Derivatives also were
measured differently under previous standards—futures contracts were reported at fair value,
foreign currency forward contracts were reported at amounts that reflected changes in foreign
exchange spot rates but not changes in forward rates and that were not discounted for the time
value of money, and other derivatives often were unrecognized or were reported at nominal
amounts not closely related to the fair value of the derivatives (for example, reported at the net
cash due that period). Accounting standards also were inconsistent on whether qualification for
hedge accounting was based on risk assessment at an entity-wide or an individual-transaction
level.
237. The accounting guidance for derivatives and hedging was difficult to apply. The lack of a
single, comprehensive approach to accounting for derivatives and hedging made the accounting
guidance difficult to apply. The incompleteness of FASB Statements on derivatives and hedging
forced entities to look to a variety of different sources, including the numerous EITF issues and
nonauthoritative literature, to determine how to account for specific instruments or transactions.
Page 110
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Because there often was nothing directly on point, entities analogized to other existing guidance.
Different sources of analogy often conflicted, and a wide range of answers sometimes was
deemed supportable, but those answers often were subject to later challenge.
This Statement Mitigates Those Problems
238. This Statement mitigates those four problems. It increases the visibility, comparability,
and understandability of the risks associated with derivatives by requiring that all derivatives be
reported as assets or liabilities and measured at fair value. It reduces the inconsistency,
incompleteness, and difficulty of applying previous accounting guidance and practice by
providing comprehensive guidance for all derivatives and hedging activities. The
comprehensive guidance in this Statement also eliminates some accounting practices, such as
"synthetic instrument accounting," that had evolved beyond the authoritative literature.
239. In addition to mitigating the previous problems, this Statement accommodates a range of
hedge accounting practices by (a) permitting hedge accounting for most derivative instruments,
(b) permitting hedge accounting for cash flow hedges of forecasted transactions for specified
risks, and (c) eliminating the requirement in Statement 80 that an entity demonstrate risk
reduction on an entity-wide basis to qualify for hedge accounting. The combination of
accommodating a range of hedge accounting practices and removing the uncertainty about the
accounting requirements for certain strategies should facilitate, and may actually increase,
entities' use of derivatives to manage risks.
240. The benefits of improving financial reporting for derivatives and hedging activities come at
a cost. Even though much of the information needed to implement this Statement is substantially
the same as was required for prior accounting standards for many hedges, and therefore should
be available, many entities will incur one-time costs for requisite systems changes. But the
benefits of more credible and more understandable information will be ongoing.
241. The Board believes that accounting requirements should be neutral and should not
encourage or discourage the use of particular types of contracts. That desire for neutrality must
be balanced with the need to reflect substantive economic differences between different
instruments. This Statement is the product of a series of many compromises made by the Board
to improve financial reporting for derivatives and hedging activities while giving consideration
to cost-benefit issues, as well as current practice. The Board believes that most hedging
strategies for which hedge accounting is available in current practice have been reasonably
accommodated. The Board recognizes that this Statement does not provide special accounting
that accommodates some risk management strategies that certain entities wish to use, such as
hedging a portfolio of dissimilar items. However, this Statement clarifies and accommodates
hedge accounting for more types of derivatives and different views of risk, and provides more
consistent accounting for hedges of forecasted transactions than did the limited guidance that
existed before this Statement.
242. Some constituents have said that the requirements of this Statement are more complex than
Page 111
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
existing guidance. The Board disagrees. It believes that compliance with previous guidance was
more complex because the lack of a single, comprehensive framework forced entities to
analogize to different and often conflicting sources of guidance. The Board also believes that
some constituents' assertions about increased complexity may have been influenced by some
entities' relatively lax compliance with previous guidance. For example, the Board understands
that not all entities complied with Statement 80's entity-wide risk reduction criterion to qualify
for hedge accounting, and that also may have been true for requirements for hedging a portfolio
of dissimilar items. The Board also notes that some of the more complex requirements of this
Statement, such as reporting the gain or loss on a cash flow hedge in earnings in the periods in
which the hedged transaction affects earnings, are a direct result of the Board's efforts to
accommodate respondents' wishes.
243. The Board took several steps to minimize the incremental costs of the accounting and
disclosure requirements of this Statement. For example, this Statement relies on the valuation
guidance provided in Statement 107, which most entities have been applying for several years.
The Board also decided not to continue the previously required assessment of risk at an
entity-wide level, which constituents said is very difficult and costly to make. This Statement
also reduces the disclosure requirements that previously were required for derivatives. Some of
the previous disclosure requirements for derivatives were intended to partially compensate for
inadequate accounting; improving the information provided in the basic financial statements
makes possible a reduction in such disclosures.
Scope and Definition
244. As already discussed, the Board decided that derivative instruments should be measured at
fair value. The Board also decided that accounting for gains or losses that result from measuring
derivatives at fair value should depend on whether or not the derivative instrument is designated
and qualifies as a hedging instrument. Those decisions require that the Board clearly identify (a)
those instruments to which this Statement applies and (b) the criteria that must be met for a
relationship to qualify for hedge accounting.
245. The Board decided that this Statement should apply to many, but not all, instruments that
are often described as derivatives. In reaching that decision, the Board observed that prior
accounting standards did not clearly distinguish derivative instruments from other financial and
nonfinancial instruments. Financial statement preparers, users, and other interested parties often
have trouble clearly distinguishing between instruments that are commonly considered
derivatives and other instruments. Accordingly, they often do not agree on whether certain
instruments are derivatives. This Statement defines derivative instruments based on their
characteristics; the resulting definition may not always coincide with what some market
participants consider to be derivatives.
Page 112
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Why Hedging Instruments Are Limited to Derivatives
246. This Statement limits hedge accounting to those relationships in which derivative
instruments and certain foreign-currency-denominated nonderivative instruments are designated
as hedging instruments and the necessary qualifying criteria are met. The Board recognizes that
there may be valid reasons for entering into transactions intended to be hedges using
nonderivative instruments, but the Board continues to believe that permitting nonderivative
instruments to be designated as hedging instruments would be inappropriate.
247. Achieving the Board's long-term objective of having all financial instruments—both
derivative and nonderivative—measured at fair value would eliminate the need for hedge
accounting for the risks inherent in existing financial instruments. Both the hedging instrument
and the hedged item would be measured at fair value. Accounting for the gains and losses on
each in the same way would leave no measurement anomalies to which to apply hedge
accounting. As further discussed in paragraphs 326 and 327, the Board considers hedge
accounting for forecasted transactions to be inappropriate from a conceptual perspective. In
practice, hedge accounting for forecasted (anticipated) transactions has been limited to
derivatives, and the Board does not think it would be appropriate to extend hedge accounting for
what is not a conceptually defensible practice to nonderivative instruments. To include
nonderivative financial instruments, other than in circumstances already permitted by existing
accounting pronouncements, as hedging instruments also would add complexity and delay
issuing guidance on accounting for derivative instruments. The Board therefore decided to limit
hedge accounting to derivatives. Consequently, items such as securities, trade receivables and
payables, and deposit liabilities at banks may not be designated as hedging instruments except
that, consistent with existing provisions in Statement 52, nonderivative instruments that give rise
to transaction gains or losses may be designated as hedges of certain foreign currency exposures.
Defining Characteristics of a Derivative Instrument
248. The Board considered defining a derivative instrument in this Statement by merely
referencing those instruments commonly understood to be derivatives. That would be similar to
the method used in paragraph 5 of Statement 119, which said that ". . . a derivative financial
instrument is a futures, forward, swap, or option contract, or other financial instrument with
similar characteristics." However, the expansion of financial markets and continued
development of innovative financial instruments and other contracts could ultimately render
obsolete a definition based solely on examples. Currently, contracts often referred to as
derivatives have characteristics similar to other contracts that often are not considered to be
derivative instruments. For example, purchase orders for certain raw materials have many
similarities to forward contracts that are referenced to those same raw materials. The Board is
concerned that the existing distinctions between many types of contracts are likely to become
even more blurred as new innovative instruments are developed. Therefore, to distinguish
between similar contracts and to deal with new instruments that may be developed in the future,
this Statement provides a definition of derivative instruments based on distinguishing
Page 113
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
characteristics rather than merely referring to classes of instruments or titles used to describe
them.
249. For purposes of this Statement, a derivative instrument is a financial instrument or other
contract that has all three of the following characteristics:
a. It has (1) one or more underlyings and (2) one or more notional amounts or payment
provisions or both.
b. It requires no initial net investment or an initial net investment that is smaller than would be
required for other types of contracts that would be expected to have a similar response to
changes in market factors.
c. Its terms require or permit net settlement, it can readily be settled net by a means outside the
contract, or it provides for delivery of an asset that puts the recipient in a position not
substantially different from net settlement.
The Board believes those three characteristics capture the essence of instruments, such as futures
and options, that have long been considered derivatives and instruments that are sufficiently
similar to those traditional derivatives that they should be accounted for similarly. The
following paragraphs discuss each characteristic in more depth. Section 1 of Appendix A
provides additional discussion of the three characteristics of a derivative instrument.
Underlyings and Notional Amounts or Payment Provisions
250. Derivative instruments typically permit the parties to participate in some or all of the
effects of changes in a referenced price, rate, or other variable, which is referred to as the
underlying, for example, an interest rate or equity index or the price of a specific security,
commodity, or currency. As the term is used in this Statement, a referenced asset or liability, if
any, is not itself the underlying of a derivative contract. Instead, the price or rate of the
associated asset or liability, which is used to determine the settlement amount of the derivative
instrument, is the underlying.
251. By itself, an underlying cannot determine the value or settlement of a derivative. Most
derivatives also refer to a notional amount, which is a number of units specified in the contract.
The multiplication or other arithmetical interaction of the notional amount and the underlying
determines the settlement of the derivative. However, rather than referring to a notional amount,
some derivatives instead contain a payment provision that requires settlement if an underlying
changes in a specified way. For example, a derivative might require a specified payment if a
referenced interest rate increases by 300 basis points. Reference to either a notional amount or a
payment provision is needed to compute the contract's periodic settlements and resulting changes
in fair value.
252. In concept, any observable variable, including physical as well as financial variables, may
be the underlying for a derivative instrument. For example, a contract might specify a payment
to be made if it rains more than one inch on a specified day. However, throughout the project
Page 114
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
that led to this Statement, discussion focused on more traditional derivatives for which the
underlying is some form of price, including an interest rate or exchange rate. For example,
paragraph 6 of the Exposure Draft referred to "a rate, an index of prices, or another market
indicator" in describing an underlying. Relatively late in the process that led to this Statement,
the Board considered expanding its scope to include all derivatives based on physical variables
but decided not to do so. It was concerned that constituents had not had sufficient opportunity to
consider the implications and potential measurement difficulties of including contracts based on
physical variables. The Board believes many contracts for which the underlying is a physical
variable are currently accounted for as insurance contracts, and it considers that accounting to be
adequate for now. However, the Board decided that any derivative instrument that is traded on
an exchange, including one based on a physical variable, should be subject to the requirements
of this Statement. Accordingly, any derivative based on a physical variable that eventually
becomes exchange traded will automatically become subject to the requirements of this
Statement. The Board does not believe that measurement or other implementation problems
exist for exchange-traded instruments.
253. This Statement also excludes from its scope a derivative instrument for which the
underlying is the price or value of a nonfinancial asset of one of the parties to the contract
provided that the asset is not readily convertible to cash. Similarly excluded is a derivative
instrument for which the underlying is the price or value of a nonfinancial liability of one of the
parties to the contract provided that the liability does not require delivery of an asset that is not
readily convertible to cash. A contract for which the underlying is specified volumes of sales or
service revenues by one of the parties also is excluded. Many such contracts are insurance
contracts. An example is a contract based on the condition or value of a building. Others
contain an element of compensation for service or for use of another entity's asset. An example
is a royalty agreement based on sales of a particular product.
254. Because a derivative may have an underlying that is a combination of variables, the Board
added a requirement to clarify the application of paragraph 10(e). Some of the variables in an
underlying that is a combination of variables may be subject to the exceptions in paragraph 10(e)
and others may not. The Board did not intend for all contracts with those types of underlyings to
be excluded automatically from the scope of this Statement. A contract with a combined
underlying is subject to the requirements of this Statement if its settlement is expected to change
in a way that is highly correlated with the way it would change if it was based on an underlying
that would not be eligible for one of the exceptions in paragraph 10(e).
Initial Investment in the Contract
255. The second characteristic of a derivative instrument refers to the relative amount of the
initial net investment in the contract. Providing the opportunity to participate in the price
changes of an underlying without actually having to own an associated asset or owe an
associated liability is the basic feature that distinguishes most traditional derivative instruments
from nonderivative instruments. Therefore, the Board decided that a contract that at inception
requires the holder or writer to invest or receive an amount approximating the notional amount
Page 115
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
of the contract is not a derivative instrument. The following example illustrates that fundamental
difference between a derivative instrument and a nonderivative instrument.
256. A party that wishes to participate in the changes in the fair value of 10,000 shares of a
specific marketable equity security can, of course, do so by purchasing 10,000 shares of that
security. Alternatively, the party may enter into a forward purchase contract with a notional
amount of 10,000 shares of that security and an underlying that is the price of that security.
Purchasing the shares would require an initial investment equal to the current price for 10,000
shares and would result in benefits such as the receipt of dividends (if any) and the ability to vote
the shares. A simple forward contract entered into at the current forward price for 10,000 shares
of the equity instrument would not require an initial investment equal to the notional amount but
would offer the same opportunity to benefit or lose from changes in the price of that security.
257. Some respondents to the Exposure Draft suggested that the definition of a derivative
instrument should include contracts that require gross exchanges of currencies (for example,
currency swaps that require an exchange of different currencies at both inception and maturity).
They noted that those contracts are commonly viewed as derivatives, are used in the same
manner as derivatives, and therefore should be included in the definition of a derivative
instrument. The Board agreed and notes that this Statement's definition of a derivative
instrument, as revised from the Exposure Draft, explicitly includes such currency swaps. The
Board observes that the initial exchange of currencies of equal fair values in those arrangements
does not constitute an initial net investment in the contract. Instead, it is the exchange of one
kind of cash for another kind of cash of equal value. The balance of the agreement, a forward
contract that obligates and entitles both parties to exchange specified currencies, on specified
dates, at specified prices, is a derivative instrument.
258. Paragraphs 6–11 of this Statement address only those contracts that in their entirety are
derivative instruments. A contract that requires a relatively large initial net investment may
include one or more embedded derivative instruments. The Board's conclusions on embedded
derivatives are discussed in paragraphs 293–311.
Net Settlement
259. The third distinguishing characteristic of a derivative instrument as defined in this
Statement is that it can be readily settled with only a net delivery of assets. Therefore, a
derivative contract must meet one of the following criteria:
a. It does not require either party to deliver an asset that is associated with its underlying or
that has a principal amount, stated amount, face value, number of shares, or other
denomination that is equal to the notional amount (or the notional amount plus a premium or
minus a discount).
b. It requires one of the parties to deliver such an asset, but there is a market mechanism that
facilitates net settlement.
c. It requires one of the parties to deliver such an asset, but that asset either is readily
Page 116
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
convertible to cash or is itself a derivative instrument.
260. The Exposure Draft proposed that derivative instruments be distinguished from other
instruments by determining whether (a) the holder could settle the contract with only a net cash
payment, either by its contractual terms or by custom, and (b) the net payment was determined
by reference to changes in the underlying. 31 Under the Exposure Draft, a contract that required
ownership or delivery of an asset associated with the underlying would have been a derivative
instrument if a mechanism existed in the market to enter into a closing contract with only a net
settlement or if the contract was customarily settled with only a net cash payment based on
changes in the underlying. The Board focused in the Exposure Draft on whether there is a
mechanism in the market for net settlement because it observed that many derivative instruments
are actively traded and can be closed or settled before the contract's expiration or maturity by net
settlement in active markets. The Board included the requirement for customary settlement in
the Exposure Draft for two reasons: (a) to prevent circumvention of the requirements of this
Statement by including nonsubstantive delivery provisions in a contract that otherwise would be
considered a derivative and (b) to include in the definition of a derivative all contracts that are
typically settled net even if the ability to settle net is not an explicit feature of the contract.
261. Several respondents to the Exposure Draft requested clarification of its net settlement
provisions. Respondents observed that the phrase mechanism in the market was unclear and
could lead to different interpretations in practice. They asked whether only an organized
exchange would constitute the type of market mechanism that the Board had in mind, or whether
a willingness of market participants to enter into such a contract in the over-the-counter or other
markets would require that the contract be viewed as a derivative instrument. This Statement
responds to those questions by indicating in paragraph 57(c)(2) that the Board intends market
mechanism to be interpreted broadly to include any institutional arrangement or side agreement
that permits either party to be relieved of all rights and obligations under the contract and to
liquidate its net position without incurring a significant transaction cost.
262. Respondents also questioned whether customary referred to the customs of the reporting
entity or the customs of the marketplace. They said that it would be difficult to discern the
custom of the marketplace for a non-exchange-traded instrument for which settlement
information is not publicly available. They also observed that market customs vary by industry
and over time. A criterion based on such customs therefore might lead to different answers at
different points in time (for example, customs that currently require gross settlement might
subsequently change) and for different participants to the contracts (for example, a bank might
customarily settle a certain type of contract with only a net payment of cash, while a
manufacturing entity might customarily settle the same type of contract by delivering the assets
associated with the underlying). The definition of a derivative in this Statement does not refer to
customary settlement. The Board decided that the provisions of paragraph 9 would achieve the
objective of the Exposure Draft.
263. During its redeliberations, the Board discussed whether the definition of a derivative
Page 117
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
instrument should depend on whether net settlement occurs in cash or for another asset. The
Board also discussed whether this Statement should apply to a derivative instrument in which at
least one of the items to be exchanged in the future is something other than a financial
instrument. The Board decided that the medium of exchange used in the net settlement of a
derivative contract should not determine whether the instrument is within the scope of this
Statement. A contract that can readily be settled net, whether the settlement is for cash or
another asset, should be within the scope of this Statement. As a result of that decision, the
Board also decided to delete financial from the term derivative financial instruments in
describing the instruments that are within the scope of this Statement.
Assets that are readily convertible to cash
264. The Board decided that a contract that requires delivery of an asset associated with the
underlying in a denomination equal to the notional amount should qualify as a derivative
instrument if the asset is readily convertible to cash. (Paragraphs 271 and 272 and 275 and 276,
respectively, discuss two exceptions to that provision.) As indicated in footnote 5, the term
readily convertible to cash refers to assets that “have (i) interchangeable (fungible) units and (ii)
quoted prices available in an active market that can rapidly absorb the quantity held by the entity
without significantly affecting the price.”
265. Net settlement is an important characteristic that distinguishes a derivative from a
nonderivative because it permits a contract to be settled without either party's accepting the risks
and costs customarily associated with owning and delivering the asset associated with the
underlying (for example, storage, maintenance, and resale). However, if the assets to be
exchanged or delivered are themselves readily convertible to cash, those risks are minimal or
nonexistent. Thus, the parties generally should be indifferent as to whether they exchange cash
or the assets associated with the underlying. The Board recognizes that determining whether
assets are readily convertible to cash will require judgment and sometimes will lead to different
applications in practice. However, the Board believes that the use of readily convertible to cash
permits an appropriate amount of flexibility and describes an important characteristic of the
derivative instruments addressed by this Statement.
266. The Board considered using the idea of readily obtainable elsewhere as is used in
Statement 125 to determine whether a derivative instrument that requires that the holder or writer
own or deliver the asset or liability that is associated with the underlying is within the scope of
this Statement. However, the Board noted that readily obtainable elsewhere relates to the
availability of an asset; not necessarily its liquidity. The Board decided that readily convertible
to cash is the appropriate criterion because it addresses whether the asset can be converted to
cash with little effort, not just whether the asset is readily available in the marketplace.
Commodity Contracts
267. Statements 105, 107, and 119 did not address commodity-based contracts because those
contracts require or permit future delivery of an item that is not a financial instrument.
Page 118
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Statement 105 explained that for a commodity-based contract ". . . the future economic benefit is
receipt of goods or services instead of a right to receive cash or an ownership interest in an entity
and the economic sacrifice is delivery of goods or services instead of an obligation to deliver
cash or an ownership interest in an entity" (paragraph 32). Some respondents to the Exposure
Draft that preceded Statement 119 suggested that the scope be expanded to include
commodity-based contracts. The Board decided not to expand the scope at that time principally
because of that project's accelerated timetable.
268. The Exposure Draft proposed that the definition of derivative include only financial
instruments. Nevertheless, the Exposure Draft would have included certain commodity contracts
because they often have many of the same characteristics as other derivative contracts. They
often are used interchangeably with other derivatives, and they present risks similar to other
derivatives. The Board initially proposed to resolve that apparent conflict by amending the
definition of financial instrument in Statement 107 to include contracts that permit a choice of
settlement by delivering either a commodity or cash. As discussed in paragraph 263, the Board
decided to change the scope of this Statement to address the accounting for derivative
instruments rather than just derivative financial instruments. Therefore, it was not necessary to
amend the definition of a financial instrument in Statement 107 to include certain
commodity-based contracts in the scope of this Statement.
269. Changing the scope of this Statement from derivative financial instruments to derivative
instruments results in including some contracts that settle net for a commodity or other
nonfinancial asset. The Board believes that including commodity-based contracts with the
essential characteristics of a derivative instrument within the scope of this Statement will help to
avoid accounting anomalies that result from measuring similar contracts differently. The Board
also believes that including those commodity-based contracts in this Statement will provide
worthwhile information to financial statement users and will resolve concerns raised by some
respondents to the Exposure Drafts that preceded Statements 107 and 119.
270. The Exposure Draft would have included only commodity-based contracts that permitted
net cash settlement, either by their contractual terms or by custom. For the reasons discussed in
paragraphs 264–266, the Board decided, instead, to include a contract that requires delivery of an
asset associated with the underlying if that asset is readily convertible to cash (for example, gold,
silver, corn, and wheat). Different accounting will result depending on whether or not the assets
associated with the underlying for a contract are readily convertible to cash. The Board
considers that difference to be appropriate because contracts that settle net or by delivering
assets readily convertible to cash provide different benefits and pose different risks than those
that require exchange of cash or other assets for an asset that is not readily convertible to cash.
Normal Purchases and Normal Sales
271. The Board decided that contracts that require delivery of nonfinancial assets that are
readily convertible to cash need not be accounted for as derivative instruments under this
Statement if the assets constitute normal purchases or normal sales of the reporting entity unless
Page 119
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
those contracts can readily be settled net. The Board believes contracts for the acquisition of
assets in quantities that the entity expects to use or sell over a reasonable period in the normal
course of business are not unlike binding purchase orders or other similar contracts to which this
Statement does not apply. The Board notes that the normal purchases and normal sales
exemption is necessary only for contracts based on assets that are readily convertible to cash.
272. The Board understands that the normal purchases and normal sales provision sometimes
will result in different parties to a contract reaching different conclusions about whether the
contract is required to be accounted for as a derivative instrument. For example, the contract
may be for ordinary sales by one party (and therefore not a derivative instrument) but not for
ordinary purchases by the counterparty (and therefore a derivative instrument). The Board
considered requiring both parties to account for a contract as a derivative instrument if the
purchases or sales by either party were other than ordinary in the normal course of business.
However, that approach would have required that one party to the contract determine the
circumstances of the other party to that same contract. Although the Board believes that the
accounting by both parties to a contract generally should be symmetrical, it decided that
symmetry would be impractical in this instance and that a potential asymmetrical result is
acceptable.
Financial Instruments
273. Some contracts require the holder or writer to deliver a financial asset or liability that is
associated with the underlying and that has a denomination equal to the notional amount of the
contract. Determining whether those contracts are derivative instruments depends, at least in
part, on whether the related financial assets or liabilities are readily convertible to cash.
Trade Date versus Settlement Date Accounting
274. Existing accounting practice is inconsistent about the timing of recognition of transfers of
various financial instruments. Some transfers of securities are recognized as of the date of trade
(often referred to as trade date accounting). Other transfers are recognized as of the date the
financial instrument is actually transferred and the transaction is settled (often referred to as
settlement date accounting). During the period between trade and settlement dates, the parties
essentially have entered into a forward contract that might meet the definition of a derivative if
the financial instrument is readily convertible to cash. Requiring that all forward contracts for
purchases and sales of financial instruments that are readily convertible to cash be accounted for
as derivatives would effectively require settlement date accounting for all such transactions.
Resolving the issue of trade date versus settlement date accounting was not an objective of the
project that led to this Statement. Therefore, the Board decided to explicitly exclude forward
contracts for "regular-way" security trades from the scope of this Statement.
Regular-way security trades
275. Regular-way security trades are those that are completed (or settled) within the time period
generally established by regulations and conventions in the marketplace or by the exchange on
Page 120
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
which the transaction is being executed. The notion of a regular-way security trade is based on
marketplace regulations or conventions rather than on the normal practices of an individual
entity. For example, if it is either required or customary for certain securities on a specified
exchange to settle within three days, a contract that requires settlement in more than three days is
not a regular-way security trade even if the entity customarily enters into contracts to purchase
such securities more than three days forward. The Board considered other approaches that
focused on reasonable settlement periods or customary settlement periods for the specific parties
to a transfer. The Board decided that those approaches were inferior because they lacked the
consistency and discipline that are provided by focusing on regular-way security trades. The
Board also believes that participants can reasonably determine settlement periods required by the
regulations or conventions of an active marketplace. Regulations or conventions may be more
difficult to determine for foreign or less active exchanges. However, the provisions in paragraph
10(a) apply only if the holder or writer of the contract is required to deliver assets that are readily
convertible to cash. Therefore, the regulations or conventions of the marketplace should be
reasonably apparent because the related market must be active enough to rapidly absorb the
quantities involved without significantly affecting the price.
276. The Board considered limiting the exclusion for regular-way security trades to purchases or
sales of existing securities. A forward contract for a regular-way trade of an existing security
entitles the purchaser to receive and requires the seller to deliver a specific security. The delay is
a matter of market regulations and conventions for delivery. In contrast, a forward contract for a
when-issued or other security that does not yet exist does not entitle or obligate the parties to
exchange a specific security. Instead, it entitles the issuer and holder to participate in price
changes that occur before the security is issued. For that reason, the Board would have preferred
that a forward contract on a security that does not yet exist be subject to the requirements of this
Statement. However, the Board was concerned that including, for example, to-be-announced
(TBA) Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) forward contracts and other
forward contracts for when-issued securities within the scope of this Statement might subject
some entities to potentially burdensome regulatory requirements for transactions in derivatives.
On balance, the Board decided to extend the regular-way exemption to purchases and sales of
when-issued and TBA securities. However, the exemption applies only if (a) there is no other
way to purchase or sell the security and (b) the trade will settle within the shortest period
permitted for the security.
Insurance Contracts
277. The Exposure Draft explicitly excluded insurance contracts, as defined in Statements 60,
97, and 113, from its definition of a derivative financial instrument. The insurance contracts
described in those Statements also were excluded from the scope of Statement 107, which states:
The Board concluded that disclosures about fair value should not be required
for insurance contracts. . . . The Board believes that definitional and valuation
difficulties are present to a certain extent in those contracts and obligations, and
that further consideration is required before decisions can be made about whether
Page 121
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
to apply the definition to components of those contracts and whether to require
disclosures about fair value for the financial components. [paragraph 74]
278. During the deliberations before issuance of the Exposure Draft, the Board decided to
specifically preclude an insurance contract from qualifying as a derivative because it believed
definitional and valuation difficulties still existed. The Exposure Draft observed that the
insurance industry and the accounting and actuarial professions have not reached a common
understanding about how to estimate the fair value of insurance contracts. Developing
measurement guidance for them might have delayed the issuance of guidance on accounting for
derivatives. The Board intends to reconsider the accounting for insurance contracts in other
phases of its financial instruments project.
279. Although the term insurance contract is frequently used in Statements 60, 97, and 113, it is
not clearly defined in those or other accounting pronouncements. As a result, the Exposure
Draft's provision that insurance contracts and reinsurance contracts generally are not derivative
instruments may not have been workable. The Board was concerned that the phrase insurance
contracts might be interpreted quite broadly to encompass most agreements or contracts issued
by insurance enterprises as part of their ongoing operations.
280. The accounting provisions for insurance contracts in Statements 60, 97, and 113 are
significantly different from the accounting provisions for derivative instruments in this
Statement. The Board was concerned that contracts that are substantially the same as other
derivative instruments might, instead, be accounted for as insurance contracts. The Board
therefore decided to eliminate the Exposure Draft's proposed scope exclusion for insurance
contracts and, instead, require that those contracts be included in or excluded from the scope of
this Statement based on their characteristics.
281. Insurance contracts often have some of the same characteristics as derivative instruments
that are within the scope of this Statement. Often, however, they lack one or more of those
characteristics. As a result, most traditional insurance contracts will not be derivative
instruments as defined in this Statement. They will be excluded from that definition because
they entitle the holder to compensation only if, as a result of an identifiable insurable event
(other than a change in price), the holder incurs a liability or there is an adverse change in the
value of a specific asset or liability for which the holder is at risk. However, contracts that in
their entirety meet this Statement's definition of a derivative instrument, whether issued by an
insurance enterprise or another type of enterprise, must be accounted for as such. The Board
does not believe that a decision on whether a contract must be accounted for as a derivative
should depend on the identity of the issuer. To help in applying the provisions of this Statement,
paragraph 10(c) provides some examples illustrating the application of the definition to
insurance contracts.
282. The Board acknowledges that many of the problems with determining the fair value of
traditional insurance liabilities are still unresolved. The Board notes, however, that many of the
Page 122
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
issues of how to measure the fair value of insurance contracts do not apply to instruments issued
by insurance enterprises that, in their entirety, qualify as derivative instruments under this
Statement. Instead, the methods for estimating the fair values of those contracts should be
similar to the methods used for derivative instruments with similar characteristics issued by other
types of enterprises.
283. Although many contracts issued by insurance enterprises will not, in their entirety, meet the
definition of a derivative instrument, some may include embedded derivatives that are required
by this Statement to be accounted for separately from the host contract. Contracts that may
include embedded derivatives include, but are not limited to, annuity contracts that promise the
policyholder a return based on selected changes in the S&P 500 index, variable life and annuity
contracts, and property and casualty contracts that combine protection for property damage and
changes in foreign currency exchange rates. Section 2 of Appendix B provides additional
guidance on insurance contracts with embedded derivative instruments.
Exception for Derivatives That Serve as Impediments to Recognition of a Sale
284. The existence of certain derivatives affects the accounting for the transfer of an asset or a
pool of assets. For example, a call option that enables a transferor to repurchase transferred
financial assets that are not readily available would prevent accounting for that transfer as a sale.
The consequence is that to recognize the call option would be to count the same thing twice.
The holder of the option already recognizes in its financial statements the assets that it has the
option to purchase. Thus those types of derivatives are excluded from the scope of this
Statement.
Exception for Instruments Classified in Stockholders' Equity
285. As noted in paragraph 3(a) of this Statement, derivative instruments are assets or liabilities.
Consequently, items appropriately classified in stockholders' equity in an entity's statement of
financial position are not within the scope of this Statement. The Board decided to clarify that
point by explicitly excluding from the scope of this Statement the accounting for such equity
instruments.
286. The Board considered whether this Statement also should exclude instruments that an
entity either can or must settle by issuing its own stock but that are indexed to something else.
For example, the Board discussed whether an instrument that requires settlement in the issuer's
or holder's common stock but that is indexed to changes in the S&P 500 index should be
excluded from the scope of this Statement. The Board currently has a project on its agenda that
considers whether certain instruments are equity or liabilities. That project will address the issue
of whether instruments to be settled in the entity's stock but indexed to something other than its
stock are liabilities or equity. The Board will reconsider the application of this Statement to such
contracts as necessary when that project is completed. Until that time, contracts that provide for
settlement in shares of an entity's stock but that are indexed in part or in full to something other
than the entity's stock are to be accounted for as derivative instruments if the contracts satisfy the
Page 123
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
criteria in paragraphs 6–10 of this Statement. Those contracts are to be classified as assets or
liabilities and not as part of stockholders' equity.
Stock-Based Compensation Contracts
287. Paragraph 11(b) of this Statement excludes the issuer's accounting for derivative
instruments issued in connection with stock-based compensation arrangements addressed in
FASB Statement No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Many such instruments
would be excluded by paragraph 11(a) because they are classified in stockholders' equity.
However, Statement 123 also addresses stock-based compensation arrangements that are
derivatives and that qualify as a liability of the issuer. The Board decided that the issuer's
accounting for those contracts is adequately addressed by Statement 123. As with the other
exclusions in paragraph 11, the holder's accounting for a derivative instrument in a compensation
arrangement addressed by Statement 123 is subject to this Statement.
Contingent Consideration in a Business Combination
288. Opinion 16 addresses the purchaser's (issuer's) accounting for contingent consideration
provided in a purchase business combination. The effect of a contingent consideration
arrangement on the accounting for a business combination often is significant and depends on
the terms and conditions of both the business combination and the contingent consideration
arrangement. Although contingent consideration arrangements may share at least some of the
characteristics of derivative instruments addressed by this Statement, the Board decided that
without further study it would be inappropriate to change the accounting for them by the entity
that accounts for the business combination. The Board currently has a project on its agenda to
reconsider the accounting for business combinations. It will consider this issue as part of that
project.
289. This Statement does apply to contracts that are similar to, but not accounted for as,
contingent consideration under the provisions of Opinion 16 if those contracts satisfy the scope
provisions either for a derivative instrument (paragraphs 6–10) or for a contract with an
embedded derivative instrument (paragraphs 12–16). In addition, this Statement applies to a
seller's (holder's) accounting for contingent consideration that meets its definition of a derivative.
For example, assume that a purchaser of a business issues to the seller a freestanding financial
instrument (as addressed in EITF Issue No. 97-8, "Accounting for Contingent Consideration
Issued in a Purchase Business Combination") that provides contingent consideration in a
purchase business combination under Opinion 16. That freestanding instrument is assumed to
meet this Statement's definition of a derivative instrument. The purchaser's accounting for the
instrument is explicitly excluded from the scope of this Statement, but the seller who receives the
instrument must account for it according to the requirements of this Statement.
Application to Specific Contracts
290. Several respondents to the Exposure Draft asked the Board for specific guidance about
whether some contracts meet the definition of a derivative instrument, including sales of
Page 124
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
securities not yet owned ("short sales"), take-or-pay contracts, and contracts with liquidating
damages or other termination clauses. The Board cannot definitively state whether those types
of contracts will always (or never) meet the definition because their terms and related customary
practices vary. In addition, the terms of the contracts or customary practices may change over
time, thereby affecting the determination of whether a particular type of contract meets the
definition of a derivative instrument. Appendix A provides examples illustrating how the
definition of a derivative instrument applies to certain specific situations.
The Scope of Statement 119
291. This Statement's definition of derivative contracts excludes certain contracts that were
included in the scope of Statement 119. For example, a loan commitment would be excluded if
it (a) requires the holder to deliver a promissory note that would not be readily convertible to
cash and (b) cannot readily be settled net. Other conditional and executory contracts that were
included in the scope of Statement 119 may not qualify as derivative instruments under the
definition in this Statement. The Board decided that some change in scope from Statement 119
is an appropriate consequence of defining derivative instruments based on their primary
characteristics.
292. This Statement supersedes Statement 119. Therefore, one result of excluding instruments
that were included in the scope of Statement 119 from the scope of this Statement is that some
disclosures previously required for those excluded contracts will no longer be required. The
Board considers that result to be acceptable. Moreover, Statement 107 continues to require
disclosure of the fair value of all financial instruments by the entities to which it applies.
Embedded Derivatives
293. The Board considers it important that an entity not be able to avoid the recognition and
measurement requirements of this Statement merely by embedding a derivative instrument in a
nonderivative financial instrument or other contract. Therefore, certain embedded derivatives
are included in the scope of this Statement if they would be subject to the Statement on a
freestanding basis. However, the Board also decided that some derivatives embedded in host
contracts, such as many of the prepayment or call options frequently included as part of
mortgage loans and other debt instruments, should be excluded from the scope of this Statement.
Approaches Considered
294. The Board considered a number of approaches for determining which contracts with
embedded derivatives should be included in the scope of this Statement. Some approaches
focused either on an instrument's yield or on its predominant characteristics. The Board decided
that those approaches would likely include callable or prepayable debt and perhaps other
instruments that often are not thought of as including an embedded derivative, even though they
do. The Board also was concerned about the operationality of those approaches.
295. The scope of the Exposure Draft included a contract with both nonderivative and derivative
Page 125
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
characteristics if some or all of its contractually required cash flows were determined by
reference to changes in one or more underlyings in a manner that multiplied or otherwise
exacerbated the effect of those changes. That scope was intended to incorporate embedded
forwards, swaps, and options with a notional amount that was greater than the face value of the
"host" contract or that otherwise "leveraged" the effect of changes in one or more underlyings.
Numerous respondents to the Exposure Draft asked for clarification of the phrase multiplies or
otherwise exacerbates and said that they did not understand why certain instruments were
included in the scope of the Exposure Draft while others were not.
296. The Board agreed with respondents that the approach in the Exposure Draft was difficult to
apply in a consistent manner. The Board also concluded that the Exposure Draft inappropriately
excluded some instruments from its scope and inappropriately included others. For example, an
instrument that paid a simple multiple of a market interest rate (for example, 120 percent of U.S.
dollar LIBOR) might be considered to have an embedded derivative that requires separate
accounting. In contrast, a structured note that paid a return based on 100 percent of the
appreciation in the fair value of an equity instrument would not be considered to have an
embedded derivative that requires separate accounting.
297. Some respondents to the Exposure Draft suggested that all financial instruments with
embedded derivatives be excluded from the scope of this Statement because existing accounting
standards for nonderivative instruments provide adequate guidance for those compound financial
instruments. The Board rejected that suggestion for three reasons. First, applying existing
accounting standards for nonderivative instruments would not necessarily achieve the Board's
goal of increasing the transparency of derivatives in the financial statements. For example,
existing guidance for the issuer's accounting for indexed debt instruments is incomplete and
would not necessarily result in recognition of changes in the fair value of the embedded
derivative in either the balance sheet or the income statement. Second, a derivative can be
embedded in a contract other than a financial instrument, such as a purchase order. The existing
accounting pronouncements for such contracts do not adequately address the accounting for
embedded derivatives in those contracts. Third, excluding all compound instruments from its
scope would make it possible to circumvent the provisions of this Statement. One apparent
reason that structured notes have become prevalent is that combining various features of
derivative and nonderivative instruments produces different accounting results than accounting
for each component separately, and participants in transactions involving structured notes
sometimes considered the accounting results attractive. Excluding all instruments that embed
derivative instruments in nonderivative host contracts from the scope of this Statement would
likely increase the incentive to combine those instruments to avoid accounting for derivative
instruments according to the provisions of this Statement.
298. Under the approach in the Exposure Draft, contracts designed to result in a rate of return
that differs in a nontrivial way from the change in price that would be realized from a direct
investment (or obligation) in the referenced asset(s) or other item(s) of an amount comparable to
the notional amount or par value of the contract would have been accounted for as derivative
Page 126
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
instruments. Clarifying the phrase multiplies or otherwise exacerbates would have addressed
some of the problems raised by respondents to the Exposure Draft, but it still would have
focused solely on whether the derivative feature resulted in a meaningful amount of positive or
negative leverage. It would not have addressed whether the derivative component and host
contract are of the type generally expected to be combined. The results still seemed
counterintuitive in that an instrument that paid interest of 120 percent of LIBOR (assuming that
120 percent was not deemed to be a trivial amount of leverage) would be accounted for as a
derivative instrument, but a note indexed to 100 percent of the S&P 500 index would not.
Accounting for Embedded Derivatives Separately from the Host Contract
299. The Exposure Draft would have required that both a host contract and an embedded
derivative feature, together, be accounted for as a derivative instrument if prescribed criteria
were met. As a result, some contracts with embedded derivative features would have been
accounted for like derivatives and could have been designated as hedging instruments. Some
respondents to the Exposure Draft were concerned that its approach would permit an entity to
use a cash instrument as a hedging instrument, which was generally precluded by the Exposure
Draft, simply by embedding an insignificant leverage factor in the interest formula. The Board
agreed with those respondents and decided that (a) it was inappropriate to treat instruments that
include both nonderivative and derivative components entirely as derivative instruments and (b)
nonderivative instruments should only be eligible as hedging instruments in selected
circumstances.
300. For several reasons, the Board decided to change the accounting for instruments with
embedded derivatives. Most importantly, accounting for the entire instrument as a derivative or
nonderivative is inconsistent with the accounting for hedged items required by this Statement.
For a fair value hedge, the Exposure Draft would have required that all or a proportionate part of
the total changes in fair value of a hedged item be recognized. However, this Statement requires
recognizing at its fair value only the portion or proportion of a hedged item attributable to the
risk being hedged. That change to a "separation-by-risk" approach is consistent with accounting
for a derivative separately from the host contract in which it is embedded. Accounting for the
derivative separately from the host contract also is more consistent with the objective of
measuring derivative instruments at fair value and does not result in measuring derivative
instruments differently simply because they are combined with other instruments.
301. The Board recognizes that there may be circumstances in which an embedded derivative
cannot be reliably identified and measured for separation from the host contract. In those
circumstances, this Statement requires that the entire contract, including both its derivative and
nonderivative portions, be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized currently
in earnings. The Board expects that an entity that enters into sophisticated investment and
funding strategies such as structured notes or other contracts with embedded derivatives will be
able to obtain the information necessary to reliably identify and measure the separate
components. Accordingly, the Board believes it should be unusual that an entity would conclude
that it cannot reliably separate an embedded derivative from its host contract.
Page 127
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
302. Instruments that include embedded derivatives that are not accounted for separately from
the host contract because the entity is unable to reliably identify and measure the derivative may
not be designated as hedging instruments. That prohibition applies to the entire contract, as well
as any portion of it, and addresses some of respondents' concerns about designating
nonderivative instruments as hedging instruments. Prohibiting an entire contract with an
embedded derivative from being designated as a hedging instrument will avoid the inappropriate
use of nonderivative instruments as hedging instruments. It also should serve as an incentive to
identify and separate derivative features from their host contracts.
303. Measuring an embedded derivative separately from its host contract will require judgment,
and sometimes such measurements may be difficult. The Board considered providing specific
guidelines for making such measurements but decided that such guidance could be unduly
restrictive and could not address all relevant concerns. Instead, the Board decided only to clarify
that the objective is to estimate the fair value of the derivative features separately from the fair
value of the nonderivative portions of the contract. Estimates of fair value should reflect all
relevant features of each component and their effect on a current exchange between willing
parties. For example, an embedded purchased option that expires if the contract in which it is
embedded is prepaid would have a different value than an option whose term is a specified
period that is not subject to truncation.
The Clearly-and-Closely-Related Approach
304. This Statement requires that an embedded derivative be accounted for separately from a
nonderivative host contract if (a) the derivative, considered on a freestanding basis, would be
accounted for as a derivative instrument under this Statement and (b) the economic
characteristics of the derivative and the host contract are not clearly and closely related to one
another. The first of those criteria ensures that only derivative instruments as defined by, and
subject to the requirements of, this Statement are accounted for separately. For example, the
issuer would not account separately for an option embedded in a hybrid instrument if, on a
freestanding basis, that option would be an equity instrument of the entity that is properly
classified in stockholders' equity. Whether the issuer should account separately for an equity
instrument embedded in an asset or a liability is an issue in the Board's project on liabilities and
equity.
305. The second criterion listed in paragraph 304 focuses on whether an embedded derivative
bears a close economic relationship to the host contract. As a practical matter, the Board decided
that not all embedded derivative features should be required to be accounted for separately from
the host contract. Many hybrid instruments with embedded derivatives that bear a close
economic relationship to the host contract were developed many years ago, for reasons that
clearly were not based on achieving a desired accounting result. Prepayable mortgages and other
prepayable debt instruments are examples of such familiar compound instruments with
embedded derivatives. The accounting for those types of hybrid instruments is well established
and generally has not been questioned. However, other embedded derivatives, such as an equity-
Page 128
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
or commodity-linked return included in a debt instrument that may cause the value of the
instrument to vary inversely with changes in interest rates, do not bear a close economic
relationship to the host contract. Even though conceptually all embedded derivatives should be
accounted for separately, the Board decided, as a practical accommodation, that only an
embedded derivative that is not considered to be clearly and closely related to its host contract
should be accounted for separately.
306. The Board expects the clearly-and-closely-related approach to affect a significant number
and wide variety of structured notes and other contracts that include embedded derivatives.
Applying the approach will require judgment, which may lead to different accounting for similar
instruments. To reduce that possibility, Appendix B provides examples illustrating how to apply
the approach.
307. The clearly-and-closely-related approach sometimes will result in different accounting by
the parties to a contract. For example, the issuer of convertible debt would not account for the
embedded derivative feature separately from the host contract if the derivative component, on a
freestanding basis, would not be subject to the requirements of this Statement because of the
exclusion in paragraph 11(a). However, an investor in the convertible debt instrument would not
be afforded that exclusion and would be required to account for the conversion feature separately
from the host contract if the criteria in paragraph 12 are met.
308. The holder and issuer of an equity instrument with an embedded put, such as puttable
common stock, would not, however, necessarily treat the embedded derivative differently. A put
option embedded in an equity security has the potential to convert the equity security to cash or
another asset, and conversion to cash according to the terms of the instrument is not a usual
characteristic of an equity security. Accordingly, a put option embedded in an equity security is
not clearly and closely related to the host contract if exercise of the put option would result in the
payment of cash or delivery of another asset by the issuer of a security (except in those
circumstances in which the put option is not considered to be a derivative pursuant to paragraph
11(a) because it is classified in shareholders’ equity). Because the embedded put is more closely
related to a liability than an equity security, both the issuer and the holder would account for it
separately if the criteria in paragraph 12 are met. However, if exercise of the put would result in
the issuance of additional equity instruments rather than paying cash or delivering another asset,
the put is considered to be clearly and closely related to the equity security.
309. Paragraphs 13–15 of this Statement discuss some common relationships between interest
rate features and host contracts, and foreign currency exchange rate features and host contracts.
That guidance is provided to simplify the analysis of whether some of the more common types of
contracts include embedded derivatives that require separate accounting. Paragraph 13 clarifies
that most interest-bearing instruments that include derivative features that serve only to alter net
interest payments that otherwise would be made on an interest-bearing host contract are
considered to be clearly and closely related to the host contract. However, an embedded
derivative that affects interest rates in such a way that the investor might not recover
Page 129
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
substantially all of its initial recorded investment is not considered to be clearly and closely
related to the host contract and therefore should be accounted for separately. Similarly, an
embedded derivative that could at least double the investor's initial rate of return on the host
contract and also could result in a rate of return that is at least twice what otherwise would be the
market return for a contract that has the same terms as the host contract and that involves a
debtor with similar credit quality is not considered to be clearly and closely related and should
be accounted for separately. The test for separate accounting pursuant to paragraph 13 should be
applied based on what is possible under the contractual terms and not on a probability basis. For
example, an embedded derivative that could under any circumstances result in the hybrid
instrument's being settled in such a way that the holder does not recover substantially all of its
initial recorded investment would not be considered to be clearly and closely related to the host
contract even though the possibility that such a situation would occur is remote.
310. The Board recognizes that the provisions of paragraph 13(a) might raise the question of
whether an interest-only strip is subject to the provisions of this Statement because the holder of
an interest-only strip may not recover substantially all of its initial recorded investment. The
Board notes that accounting for interest-only and principal-only strips is related to issues
concerning accounting for retained interests in securitizations that the Board is currently
reconsidering in conjunction with the implementation of Statement 125. Accordingly, the Board
decided to exclude from the scope of this Statement interest-only and principal-only strips that
meet the criteria in paragraph 14 and further consider the accounting for them in conjunction
with its consideration of accounting for retained interests in securitization.
311. Paragraph 15 provides that an embedded foreign currency derivative is not to be separated
from the host contract and considered a derivative pursuant to paragraph 12 if the host contract is
not a financial instrument and specifies payments denominated in either of the following
currencies:
a. The currency of the primary economic environment in which any substantial party to the
contract operates (that is, its functional currency)
b. The currency in which the price of the related good or service is routinely denominated in
international commerce (such as the U.S. dollar for crude oil transactions).
For example, a lease of U.S. real estate with payments denominated in Deutsche marks contains
an embedded derivative that should be viewed as clearly and closely related to the host lease
contract and thus does not require separate accounting if the Deutsche mark is the functional
currency of at least one substantial party to the lease. The Board decided that it was important
that the payments be denominated in the functional currency of at least one substantial party to
the transaction to ensure that the foreign currency is integral to the arrangement and thus
considered to be clearly and closely related to the terms of the lease. A contract with payments
denominated in a currency that is not the functional currency of any substantial party to that
contract includes an embedded derivative that is not considered to be clearly and closely related
to the host contract and should be accounted for separately under the provisions of this
Page 130
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Statement. The second exclusion in paragraph 15 also permits contractual payments to be
denominated in the currency in which the price of the related commodity or service is routinely
stated in international commerce without requiring separate accounting for an embedded
derivative. The Board decided that it would be appropriate to consider the currency in which
contracts for a given commodity are routinely denominated to be clearly and closely related to
those contracts, regardless of the functional currency of the parties to that contract.
Fair Value Measurement Guidance
312. The definition of fair value in this Statement is derived from paragraphs 42–44 of
Statement 125. The definition originated in paragraphs 5, 6, and 18–29 of Statement 107.
313. This Statement refers to Statement 107 for guidance in applying the definition of fair value.
Some respondents to the Exposure Draft asked either for additional guidance on estimating the
fair value of financial instruments or for amendments of part of the guidance in Statement 107.
They said that the guidance in Statement 107 is not robust enough for recognition purposes (as
opposed to disclosure) and allows too much variability in the estimates of fair value, especially
for items not traded on a public exchange. The Board decided for several reasons to retain the
guidance provided by Statement 107. Statement 107 has been in effect for several years, and
entities are familiar with its measurement guidance. In addition, Board members were concerned
that reevaluating and making the fair value guidance more prescriptive would significantly delay
issuance of this Statement. On balance, the Board decided that the measurement guidance in
Statement 107 is sufficient for use in applying this Statement. The Board will consider
measurement issues and likely provide additional guidance or change Statement 107's guidance
in some areas, perhaps including the areas discussed in the following paragraphs in the course of
its project on the fair value measurement of financial instruments.
314. Respondents to the Exposure Draft also provided comments on specific measurement
issues, focusing on the following three areas: (a) consideration of a discount or premium in the
valuation of a large position, (b) consideration of changes in creditworthiness in valuing a
debtor's liabilities, and (c) the valuation of deposit liabilities. Those areas are discussed below.
Consideration of a Discount or Premium in the Valuation of a Large Position
315. Consistent with Statement 107, the definition of fair value in this Statement precludes an
entity from using a "blockage" factor (that is, a premium or discount based on the relative size of
the position held, such as a large proportion of the total trading units of an instrument) in
determining the fair value of a large block of financial instruments. The definition of fair value
requires that fair value be determined as the product of the number of trading units of an asset
times a quoted market price if available. Statement 107 further clarifies the issue:
Under the definition of fair value in paragraph 5, the quoted price for a single
trading unit in the most active market is the basis for determining market price
Page 131
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
and reporting fair value. This is the case even if placing orders to sell all of an
entity's holdings of an asset or to buy back all of a liability might affect the price,
or if a market's normal volume for one day might not be sufficient to absorb the
quantity held or owed by an entity. [paragraph 6]
Some respondents to the Exposure Draft indicated that the guidance in Statement 107 (and
implicitly the definition of fair value in this Statement) should be revised to require or permit
consideration of a discount in valuing a large asset position. They asserted that an entity that
holds a relatively large amount (compared with average trading volume) of a traded asset and
liquidates the entire amount at one time likely would receive an amount less than the quoted
market price. Although respondents generally focused on a discount, holding a relatively large
amount of an asset might sometimes result in a premium over the market price for a single
trading unit. The Board currently believes that the use of a blockage factor would lessen the
reliability and comparability of reported estimates of fair value.
Valuation of Liabilities
316. Some respondents to the Exposure Draft noted that Statement 107 permits an entity to
choose whether to consider changes in its own creditworthiness in determining the fair value of
its debt and asked for further guidance on that issue. The definition of fair value in Statement
125 says that in measuring liabilities at fair value by discounting estimated future cash flows, an
objective is to use discount rates at which those liabilities could be settled in an arm's-length
transaction. However, the FASB's pronouncements to date have not broadly addressed whether
changes in a debtor's creditworthiness after incurrence of a liability should be reflected in
measuring its fair value. Pending resolution of the broad issue of the effect of a debtor's
creditworthiness on the fair value of its liabilities, the Board decided to use the definition in
Statement 125 but not to provide additional guidance on reflecting the effects of changes in
creditworthiness.
Valuation of Deposit Liabilities
317. The guidance in Statement 107 precludes an entity from reflecting a long-term relationship
with depositors, commonly known as a core deposit intangible, in determining the fair value of a
deposit liability. Paragraph 12 of Statement 107 states, in part:
In estimating the fair value of deposit liabilities, a financial entity shall not
take into account the value of its long-term relationships with depositors,
commonly known as core deposit intangibles, which are separate intangible
assets, not financial instruments. For deposit liabilities with no defined
maturities, the fair value to be disclosed under this Statement is the amount
payable on demand at the reporting date.
Some respondents to the Exposure Draft requested that this Statement permit the fair value of
deposit liabilities to reflect the effect of the core deposit intangible. The Board decided to make
Page 132
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
no change to the guidance in Statement 107 on that issue because it will be addressed as part of
the Board's current project on measuring financial instruments at fair value. Issues of whether
the fair values of certain liabilities (or assets) should reflect their values as if they were settled
immediately or whether they should be based on their expected settlement dates, as well as
issues of whether or when it would be appropriate to measure portfolios of assets or liabilities
rather than individual items in those portfolios, are central to that project.
Other Fair Value Measurement Guidance
318. Statement 107 requires disclosure of the fair value of financial instruments "for which it is
practicable to estimate that value" (emphasis added). Unlike Statement 107, this Statement
provides no practicability exception that would permit an entity to avoid the required fair value
measurements. The Board believes that prudent risk management generally would require an
entity to measure the fair value of any derivative that it holds as well as any item (or the portion
of the item attributable to the identified risk) designated as being hedged in a fair value hedge.
319. This Statement requires that in measuring the change in fair value of a forward contract by
discounting future cash flows, the estimate of future cash flows be based on changes in forward
rates rather than spot rates. Thus, the gain or loss on, for example, a foreign currency forward
contract would be based on the change in the forward rate, discounted to reflect the time value of
money until the settlement date. The Board notes that the accounting literature in effect before
the issuance of this Statement discusses different methods of estimating the value of a foreign
currency forward contract. The Board decided that the valuation of a foreign currency forward
contract should consider that (a) currencies will be exchanged at a future date, (b) relative
interest rates determine the difference between spot and forward rates, and (c) valuation is
affected by the time value of money. The net present value technique is the only method that
considers all three items as well as the current settlement of present gains or losses that arise
from changes in the spot rate.
Demand for Hedge Accounting
320. The Report on Deliberations describes hedge accounting as a "special accounting treatment
that alters the normal accounting for one or more components of a hedge so that
counterbalancing changes in the fair values of hedged items and hedging instruments, from the
date the hedge is established, are not included in earnings in different periods" (paragraph 28).
Demand for special accounting for hedges of the fair value exposure associated with assets and
liabilities arises, in part, because of accounting anomalies—that is, differences in the way hedged
items and hedging instruments are recognized and measured. Recognition anomalies arise
because some assets and liabilities are recognized in the statement of financial position, while
others, such as many firm commitments, are not. Measurement anomalies arise because existing
accounting standards use different measurement attributes for different assets and liabilities.
Some assets and liabilities are measured based on historical costs, others are measured based on
current values, and still others are measured at the lower of cost or market value, which is a
Page 133
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
combination of historical costs and current values. Accounting recognition and measurement
decisions generally have been made independently for each kind of asset or liability without
considering relationships with other assets or liabilities. Hedge accounting for assets and
liabilities initially arose as a means of compensating for situations in which measurement
anomalies between a hedged item and hedging instrument result in recognizing offsetting gains
and losses in earnings in different periods.
Hedges of Fair Value Exposures
321. For hedges of fair value exposures, this Statement provides for certain gains and losses on
designated assets and liabilities to be recognized in earnings in the same period as the losses and
gains on the related derivative hedging instrument. Accounting for all financial instruments at
fair value with all changes in fair value recognized similarly, such as in earnings, would
eliminate the need for special accounting to accommodate the current mixed-attribute
measurement model for fair value hedges of financial assets and liabilities. Fair value
accounting for all financial instruments would not, however, affect either the perceived need for
special accounting for fair value hedges of nonfinancial assets and liabilities or constituents'
desire for special accounting for cash flow hedges of forecasted transactions.
Hedges of Cash Flow Exposures
322. Although accounting anomalies do not exist for cash flow hedges of forecasted
transactions, many constituents want special accounting for transactions designed to manage
cash flow risk associated with forecasted transactions. Entities often hedge the cash flow risk of
forecasted transactions by using a derivative to "lock in" or "fix" the price of the future
transaction, or to mitigate the cash flow risk for a certain period of time. They want to recognize
the gain or loss on the derivative hedging instrument in earnings in the period or periods in
which the forecasted transaction will affect earnings. If the hedging instrument is held until the
forecasted transaction occurs, that accounting would base the earnings effect of the transaction
on the "fixed price."
323. Some constituents suggested that there is little distinction between forecasted transactions
and firm commitments and, consequently, that hedges of forecasted transactions should be
accounted for in the same way as hedges of firm commitments. They said that (a) some
forecasted transactions may be as probable as, if not more probable than, some firm
commitments, (b) it is often difficult to distinguish between forecasted transactions and firm
commitments, and (c) entities do not view forecasted transactions and firm commitments
separately for risk management purposes.
324. The Board believes there are several differences between firm commitments and forecasted
transactions, irrespective of the probability of occurrence, that make it possible to distinguish
between them. Firm commitments and forecasted transactions create different exposures to risk.
Firm commitments are fixed-price contracts that expose an entity to a risk of a change in fair
value. For example, an increase in the market price of a commodity will not affect the cash to be
Page 134
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
paid to purchase that commodity under a firmly committed contract; however, it will affect the
value of that contract. In contrast, forecasted transactions do not have a fixed price and do
expose an entity to a risk of a change in the cash to be paid to purchase the commodity in the
future. Because firm commitments and forecasted transactions give rise to different exposures,
different hedging strategies must be used. For example, an entity that hedges a firm commitment
to purchase an item (a long position) would generally enter into a derivative to "undo" that fixed
price (such as an offsetting short position). In contrast, an entity that hedges a forecasted
purchase of an item would generally enter into a derivative (such as a contract to purchase the
item—a long position) to "fix" the price.
325. Although many firm commitments are not recognized in financial statements, they qualify
as assets or liabilities with determinable values, which makes them different from forecasted
transactions. The value of a firm commitment is equal to the unrealized gain or loss on the
commitment. In contrast, a forecasted transaction has no value and cannot give rise to a gain or
loss. Regardless of their probability of occurrence, forecasted transactions are not present rights
or obligations of the entity.
326. The Board recognizes that hedging is used to cope with uncertainty about the future and
that the risks associated with forecasted transactions may appear to be similar to those associated
with assets and liabilities, including firm commitments. However, the fundamental purpose of
financial statements is to present relevant measures of existing assets and liabilities and changes
in them. The Board believes there is no conceptual justification for providing special accounting
for the effects of transactions that have already occurred based solely on management's
assertions about other transactions expected to occur in the future. The Board believes it would
be conceptually preferable to provide descriptive information about intended links between
current and forecasted future transactions in accompanying notes than to let those intended links
directly affect the financial statements. As indicated by the Board's third fundamental decision,
deferring a derivative gain or loss as a separate asset or liability in the statement of financial
position is conceptually inappropriate because the gain or loss neither is itself a liability or an
asset nor is it associated with the measurement of another existing asset or liability.
327. To the extent that hedge accounting is justifiable conceptually, it is for the purpose of
dealing with anomalies caused by the mixed-attribute accounting model. The lack of an
associated asset, liability, gain, or loss to be recognized in the financial statements means that
there are no measurement anomalies for a forecasted transaction. Gains and losses on derivative
instruments designated as hedges of forecasted transactions can be distinguished from gains and
losses on other derivatives only on the basis of management intent. That makes hedge
accounting for forecasted transactions problematic from a practical, as well as a conceptual,
perspective. Furthermore, it generally is more difficult to assess the effectiveness of a hedge of a
forecasted transaction than of a hedge of an existing asset or liability, because a forecasted
transaction reflects expectations and intent, not measurable present rights or obligations.
328. Regardless of those conceptual and practical questions, the Board decided to accommodate
Page 135
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
certain hedges of forecasted transactions because of the current widespread use of and demand
for special accounting for forecasted transactions. However, because the Board does not
consider hedge accounting for forecasted transactions to be conceptually supportable, the Board
chose to impose limits on that accounting, as discussed further in paragraphs 382 and 383.
329. This Statement provides for gains and losses on derivatives designated as cash flow hedges
of forecasted transactions to be initially recognized in other comprehensive income and
reclassified into earnings in the period(s) that the forecasted transaction affects earnings. As the
Board pursues its long-term objective of measuring all financial instruments at fair value in the
statement of financial position, it will reconsider whether special accounting for hedges of
forecasted transactions should continue to be permitted. Special accounting for hedges of
forecasted financial instrument transactions would serve no purpose if all financial instruments
were measured at fair value both at initial recognition and subsequently, with changes in fair
value reported in earnings. This Statement consequently prohibits hedge accounting for the
acquisition or incurrence of financial instruments that will be subsequently measured at fair
value, with changes in fair value reported in earnings.
Hedge Accounting Approaches Considered
330. Over its six years of deliberations, the Board considered four broad approaches, and
combinations of those approaches, in addition to the one proposed in the Exposure Draft, as a
way to resolve issues related to hedge accounting. Those four broad approaches are discussed
below. The hedge accounting approach proposed in the Exposure Draft is discussed in
conjunction with the hedge accounting adopted in this Statement (which is discussed beginning
at paragraph 351).
Measure All Financial Instruments at Fair Value
331. Consistent with its conclusion that fair value is the most relevant measure for all financial
instruments, the Board considered measuring all financial instruments at fair value. Using that
single measurement attribute for initial recognition and subsequent measurement would have
resolved problems caused by the current mixed-attribute measurement model, at least for
financial instruments, and would have been relatively simple and more readily understandable to
financial statement users. It also would have increased comparability for identical balance sheet
positions between entities, and it would have obviated the need for special accounting for hedges
of financial instruments.
332. Several respondents to the Exposure Draft said that fair value measurement should be
expanded to all financial instruments, and a few respondents suggested expanding fair value
measurement to all assets and liabilities. Some respondents said that it is inconsistent or
inappropriate to expand fair value measurement to derivatives before it is expanded to all
financial instruments. Other respondents said that fair value measurement for all financial
instruments is not a desirable goal.
Page 136
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
333. The Board believes changing the accounting model so that all financial instruments are
measured at fair value in the statement of financial position is the superior conceptual solution to
hedging issues. However, the Board decided that it was not appropriate at this time to require
fair value measurement for all financial instruments. Board members decided that they must first
deliberate and reach agreement on conceptual and practical issues related to the valuation of
certain financial instruments, including liabilities, and portfolios of financial instruments. The
Board is pursuing issues related to fair value measurement of all financial assets and liabilities in
a separate project.
334. The Board is committed to work diligently toward resolving, in a timely manner, the
conceptual and practical issues related to determining the fair values of financial instruments and
portfolios of financial instruments. Techniques for refining the measurement of the fair values of
all financial instruments continue to develop at a rapid pace, and the Board believes that all
financial instruments should be carried in the statement of financial position at fair value when
the conceptual and measurement issues are resolved. For now, the Board believes it is a
significant improvement in financial reporting that this Statement requires that all derivatives be
measured at fair value in the statement of financial position.
Mark-to-Fair-Value Hedge Accounting
335. Having concluded that its long-term objective of measuring all financial instruments at fair
value was not attainable at this time, the Board decided that it needed to permit some form of
hedge accounting. One alternative, termed mark-to-fair-value hedge accounting, would have
required that an entity measure both the derivative and the hedged item at fair value and report
the changes in the fair value of both items in earnings as they occur. Similar to measuring all
financial instruments at fair value, that approach would have accommodated a wide variety of
risk management strategies and would have overcome the problems attributable to the
mixed-attribute measurement model by using a common measurement attribute for both the
derivative and the hedged item. Additionally, that approach would have been relatively easy for
entities to apply and for financial statement users to understand because hedged items would be
reported at fair value and the net ineffectiveness of a hedge would be reported in earnings. There
would have been no need to specify which risks could be separately hedged or how to reflect
basis risk. However, like measuring all financial instruments at fair value, mark-to-fair-value
hedge accounting would not have addressed constituents' desire for special accounting for cash
flow hedges of forecasted transactions.
336. Although the Board liked the idea of extending fair value measurement by marking hedged
items to fair value with changes in fair value reported in earnings, it ultimately decided not to
adopt mark-to-fair-value hedge accounting for two main reasons. First, measuring hedged items
at fair value would have recognized, at the inception of a hedge, unrealized gains and losses on
the hedged item that occurred before the hedge period ("preexisting" gains and losses). The
Board believes that preexisting gains and losses on the hedged item are unrelated to the hedge
Page 137
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
and should not provide earnings offset for derivative gains and losses (consistent with its second
fundamental decision [paragraphs 220–228]). Recognizing those gains and losses at the
inception of a hedge would result in recognizing a gain or loss simply because the hedged item
was designated as part of a hedge. That ability to selectively recognize preexisting gains and
losses caused some Board members to reject the mark-to-fair-value approach.
337. Another reason the Board rejected that approach is that constituents objected to its effect
on earnings—that is, earnings would have reflected changes in the fair value of a hedged item
unrelated to the risk being hedged. For example, a hedge of one risk (such as interest rate risk)
could have caused recognition in earnings of gains and losses from another risk (such as credit
risk) because the mark-to-fair-value approach would have required recognition of the full change
in fair value of the hedged item, including the changes in fair value attributable to risk
components not being hedged. The hedge accounting approach proposed in the Exposure Draft
also could have resulted in recognition of the change in fair value of a hedged item attributable
to risk components not being hedged. However, the approach in the Exposure Draft would have
(a) limited how much of those fair value changes were recognized in earnings and (b) prevented
the change in the fair value of the hedged item that is not offset by the change in fair value on the
hedging instrument from being recognized in earnings.
Comprehensive Income Approach
338. The Board considered another hedge accounting approach, referred to as the
comprehensive income approach, that would have required that derivatives be measured at fair
value and classified in one of two categories, trading or risk management. Gains and losses on
derivatives classified as trading would be recognized in earnings in the periods in which they
occur. Unrealized gains and losses on risk management derivatives would be reported as a
component of other comprehensive income until realized. Realized gains and losses on risk
management derivatives would be reported in earnings.
339. That approach would have been relatively easy to apply, it would have made derivatives
and related risks transparent, and it would have accommodated some risk management strategies.
Hedges of assets, liabilities, and some forecasted transactions would have been accommodated if
the duration of the derivative was structured by management to achieve recognition, in the
desired period, of any realized gains or losses. Also, because the approach would not have
permitted deferral of derivative gains or losses as liabilities or assets, it would not have violated
the fundamental decision that only assets and liabilities should be reported as such.
340. The Board rejected the comprehensive income approach for three main reasons. First, the
Board does not believe that the distinction between realized and unrealized gains and losses that
is the basis for the comprehensive income approach is relevant for financial instruments. The
Board acknowledges that the current accounting model often distinguishes between realized and
unrealized gains and losses. That distinction, however, is inappropriate for financial instruments.
The occurrence of gains and losses on financial instruments—not the act of settling
Page 138
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
them—affects an entity’s economic position and thus should affect its reported financial
performance. The Board is concerned that the comprehensive income approach would provide
an opportunity for an entity to manage its reported earnings, per-share amounts, and other
comprehensive income. Financial instruments generally are liquid, and an entity can easily sell
or settle a financial instrument, realize a gain or loss, and maintain the same economic position
as before the sale by reacquiring the same or a similar instrument.
341. Second, under the comprehensive income approach, offsetting gains and losses often would
not have been reported in earnings at the same time. For example, if an entity used a series of
short-term derivatives as a fair value hedge of a long-term fixed-rate loan, the gains and losses
on the derivatives would have been recognized in earnings over the life of the loan each time an
individual derivative expired or was terminated. However, the offsetting unrealized losses and
gains on the loan would not have been recognized in those same periods. Similarly, offsetting
gains and losses on a derivative and a nonfinancial asset or liability would have been recognized
together in earnings only if both transactions were specially structured to be realized in the same
period. The Board decided on the approach in this Statement, in part, because offsetting gains
and losses on fair value hedges would be recognized in earnings in the same period.
342. The third reason the Board did not adopt the comprehensive income approach is that all
unrealized gains and losses on derivatives classified as risk management would have been
reported in other comprehensive income without offsetting losses or gains, if any, on the hedged
item. Thus, the resulting other comprehensive income could have implied a change in net assets
when net assets did not change or when they changed in the opposite direction. For example, a
$1,000 increase in the fair value of a derivative would have increased other comprehensive
income and the carrying amount of the derivative by $1,000. If there was also an offsetting
$1,000 loss on the hedged asset or liability, which would not have been reflected in other
comprehensive income, the change in other comprehensive income would have implied that net
assets had increased by $1,000 when there had been no real change.
343. The hedge accounting approach in this Statement also may result in reporting some
derivative gains and losses in other comprehensive income. However, the Board notes that the
approach in this Statement limits the amounts reported in other comprehensive income to gains
and losses on derivatives designated as hedges of cash flow exposures. The transactions that will
give rise to cash flow exposures do not provide offsetting changes in fair value when the related
price or rate changes. Consequently, the gains and losses reported in other comprehensive
income under this Statement are a faithful representation of the actual volatility of
comprehensive income. The Board's reasoning for recognizing in other comprehensive income
gains and losses on derivatives designated as hedges of cash flow exposures is further discussed
in paragraph 377.
344. Only a few respondents to the Exposure Draft advocated the comprehensive income
approach. Although they did not specifically comment on that approach, many respondents
objected to recognizing derivative gains and losses in earnings in a period other than the one in
Page 139
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
which the hedged item affects earnings. Some opposed reporting derivative gains and losses in
other comprehensive income because of the potential for volatility in reported stockholders'
equity or net assets, which they considered undesirable.
Full-Deferral Hedge Accounting
345. The Board considered maintaining the approach outlined in Statement 80. Statement 80
permitted deferral of the entire change in the fair value of a derivative used as a hedging
instrument by adjusting the basis of a hedged asset or liability, or by recognizing a separate
liability or asset associated with a hedge of an unrecognized firm commitment or a forecasted
transaction, if the appropriate hedge criteria were met. Many respondents to the Exposure Draft
advocated a full-deferral approach. They noted that a full-deferral approach would have been
familiar to entities that have applied hedge accounting in the past. That approach also would
have provided a mechanism to moderate the earnings "mismatch" that is attributable to the
mixed-attribute measurement model. By deferring the earnings recognition of a derivative's gain
or loss until the loss or gain on the hedged item has been recognized, offsetting gains or losses
on the derivative and hedged item would be recognized in earnings at the same time.
346. However, the full-deferral approach goes beyond correcting for the anomalies created by
using different attributes to measure assets and liabilities. The Board rejected that approach for
three reasons. First, full-deferral hedge accounting inappropriately permits gains or losses on
derivatives designated as hedging the cash flow exposure of forecasted transactions to be
reported as separate liabilities or assets in the statement of financial position. Those gains and
losses do not represent probable future sacrifices or benefits, which are necessary characteristics
of liabilities and assets. Thus, reporting deferred gains or losses as separate liabilities or assets is
inconsistent with the Board's conceptual framework.
347. Second, a full-deferral approach is inconsistent with the Board's long-term goal of
reporting all financial instruments at fair value in the statement of financial position. For fair
value hedges, a full-deferral approach could only have been described as deferring the derivative
gain or loss as an adjustment of the basis of the hedged item. For a cash flow hedge of a
forecasted purchase of an asset or incurrence of an obligation, a full-deferral approach would
have resulted in systematically adjusting the initial carrying amount of the acquired asset or
incurred liability away from its fair value.
348. Finally, the full-deferral approach permits a derivative's gain or loss for a period to be
deferred regardless of whether there is a completely offsetting decrease or increase in the fair
value of the hedged item for that period. The Board believes it is inappropriate to treat that
portion of a hedge that does not achieve its objective as if it had been effective.
Synthetic Instrument Accounting
349. A number of respondents to the Exposure Draft suggested that a different kind of special
accounting be provided for "synthetic instrument" strategies. Synthetic instrument accounting,
Page 140
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
which evolved in practice, views two or more distinct financial instruments (generally a cash
instrument and a derivative instrument) as having synthetically created another single cash
instrument. The objective of synthetic instrument accounting is to present those multiple
instruments in the financial statements as if they were the single instrument that the entity sought
to create. Some respondents to the Exposure Draft advocated a synthetic instrument accounting
approach for interest rate swaps that are used to modify the interest receipts or payments
associated with a hedged financial instrument. That approach, which its advocates also refer to
as "the accrual approach," would require the accrual of only the most imminent net cash
settlement on the swap. It would not require recognition of the swap itself in the financial
statements.
350. The Board decided not to allow synthetic instrument accounting because to do so would be
inconsistent with (a) the fundamental decision to report all derivatives in the financial
statements, (b) the fundamental decision to measure all derivatives at fair value, (c) the Board's
objective to increase the transparency of derivatives and derivative activities, and (d) the Board's
objective of providing consistent accounting for all derivative instruments and for all hedging
strategies. Synthetic instrument accounting also is not conceptually defensible because it results
in netting assets against liabilities (or vice versa) for no reason other than an asserted
"connection" between the netted items.
Hedge Accounting in This Statement
351. The hedge accounting approach in this Statement combines elements from each of the
approaches considered by the Board. The Board believes the approach in this Statement is
consistent with all four of its fundamental decisions and is a significant improvement in financial
reporting. It is also more consistent than the approach in the Exposure Draft with what many
respondents said was necessary to accommodate their risk management strategies.
352. Some respondents suggested that the financial statement results of applying this Statement
will not reflect what they perceive to be the economics of certain hedging and risk management
activities. However, there is little agreement about just what the "economics" of hedging and
risk management activities are. Because entities have different and often conflicting views of
risk and manage risk differently, the Board does not think that a single approach to hedge
accounting could fully reflect the hedging and risk management strategies of all entities. The
Board also believes that some aspects of "risk management" are hard to distinguish from
speculation or "position taking" and that speculative activities should not be afforded special
accounting. Thus, providing hedge accounting to the whole range of activities undertaken by
some under the broad heading of "risk management" would be inconsistent with improving the
usefulness and understandability of financial reporting.
Exposures to Changes in Fair Value or Changes in Cash Flow
353. The accounting prescribed by this Statement is based on two types of risk exposures. One
Page 141
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
reflects the possibility that a change in price will result in a change in the fair value of a
particular asset or liability—a fair value exposure. The other reflects the possibility that a
change in price will result in variability in expected future cash flows—a cash flow exposure.
354. Fair value exposures arise from existing assets or liabilities, including firm commitments.
Fixed-rate financial assets and liabilities, for example, have a fair value exposure to changes in
market rates of interest and changes in credit quality. Nonfinancial assets and liabilities, on the
other hand, have a fair value exposure to changes in the market price of a particular item or
commodity. Some assets and liabilities have fair value exposures arising from more than one
type of risk.
355. Some cash flow exposures relate to forecasted transactions. For example, a change in the
market price of an asset will change the expected cash outflows for a future purchase of the asset
and may affect the subsequent earnings impact from its use or sale. Similarly, a change in
market interest rates will change the expected cash flows for the future interest payments
resulting from the forecasted issuance of fixed-rate debt (for which the interest rate has not yet
been fixed). Other cash flow exposures relate to existing assets and liabilities. For example, a
change in market interest rates will affect the future cash receipts or payments associated with a
variable-rate financial asset or liability.
356. Fair value exposures and cash flow exposures often are mutually exclusive, and hedging to
reduce one exposure generally increases the other. For example, hedging the variability of
interest receipts on a variable-rate loan with a receive-fixed, pay-variable swap "fixes" the
interest receipts on the loan and eliminates the exposure to risk of a change in cash flows, but it
creates an exposure to the risk of a change in the fair value of the swap. The net cash flows on
the loan and the swap will not change (or will change minimally) with market rates of interest,
but the combined fair value of the loan and the swap will fluctuate. Additionally, the changes in
the fair value of an asset or liability are inseparable from its expected cash flows because those
cash flows are a major factor in determining fair value.
Hedge Accounting in This Statement and Risk Reduction
357. The Board believes that entity-wide risk reduction should be a criterion for hedge
accounting; it therefore would have preferred to require an entity to demonstrate that a derivative
reduces the risk to the entity as a criterion for hedge accounting. However, requiring that a
derivative contribute to entity-wide risk reduction would necessitate a single, restrictive
definition of risk, such as either fair value risk or cash flow risk. Actions to mitigate the risk of a
change in fair value generally exacerbate the variability of cash flows. Likewise, actions to
mitigate the variability of cash flows of existing assets and liabilities necessitate "fixing" cash
flows, which in turn generally exacerbates an entity's exposure to changes in fair value. Because
this Statement provides hedge accounting for both fair value risk and cash flow risk, an objective
assessment of entity-wide risk reduction would be mechanically impossible in most situations.
Therefore, the Board did not continue the requirement in Statement 80 that a hedging transaction
Page 142
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
must contribute to reducing risk at the entity-wide level to qualify for hedge accounting.
358. As discussed in paragraph 322, a hedge of a forecasted transaction can be described as
"fixing" the price of the item involved in the transaction if the hedging instrument is held until
the hedged transaction occurs. "Fixing" the price of an expected future transaction is a form of
risk management on an individual-transaction basis. The Exposure Draft would have provided
cash flow hedge accounting only for derivative instruments with a contractual maturity or
repricing date that was on or about the date of the hedged forecasted transaction. However, as
discussed further in paragraph 468, the Board removed that criterion for cash flow hedge
accounting principally because of respondents' objections to it. This Statement also places no
limitations on an entity's ability to prospectively designate, dedesignate, and redesignate a
qualifying hedge of the same forecasted transaction. The result of those provisions is that this
Statement permits an entity to exclude derivative gains or losses from earnings and recognize
them in other comprehensive income even if its objective is to achieve a desired level of risk
based on its view of the market rather than to reduce risk. If an entity enters into and then
discontinues a derivative transaction designated as a hedge of a forecasted transaction for which
the exposure has not changed, one of those actions—either the hedge or the discontinuance of
it—must increase, rather than reduce, risk.
359. The considerations just discussed, together with the intense focus on the part of many
investors on earnings as a measure of entity performance, lead some Board members to prefer
that the gain or loss on a derivative designated as a hedge of a forecasted transaction but not
intended to be held until the transaction occurs be recognized directly in earnings. However,
those Board members also consider comprehensive income to be a measure of an entity's
financial performance that is at least as, if not more, important as earnings. Consequently, those
Board members found it acceptable to recognize in other comprehensive income the gain or loss
on a derivative designated as a hedge of a forecasted transaction, regardless of whether that
derivative is held until the hedged transaction occurs. Those Board members observe, however,
that recognizing such gains and losses in other comprehensive income rather than in earnings
creates additional pressure concerning the method and prominence of the display of both the
items in other comprehensive income and total comprehensive income.
A Compound Derivative May Not Be Separated into Risk Components
360. The Exposure Draft would have prohibited separating a derivative into either separate
proportions or separate portions and designating any component as a hedging instrument or
designating different components as hedges of different exposures. Some respondents objected
to both prohibitions. They said that either a pro rata part of a derivative, such as 60 percent, or a
portion of a derivative, such as the portion of the change in value of a combined interest rate and
currency swap deemed to be attributable to changes in interest rates, should qualify for separate
designation as a hedging instrument. The Board decided to permit designation of a pro rata part
of a derivative as a hedge. Example 10 in Appendix B illustrates that situation.
Page 143
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
361. The Board decided to retain the prohibition against separating a compound derivative into
components representing different risks. This Statement permits separation of a hedged item or
transaction by risk and also places the burden on management to design an appropriate
effectiveness test, including a means of measuring the change in fair value or cash flows
attributable to the risk being hedged. In view of those requirements, the Board decided that it
was especially important that, to the extent possible, the gain or loss on the derivative be an
objectively determined market-based amount rather than an amount "separated out" of an overall
gain or loss on the derivative as a whole. Otherwise, even for a derivative for which a quoted
price is available, the effectiveness test would compare two computed amounts of gain or loss
deemed to be "attributable to the risk being hedged" with no tie to a total gain or loss separately
observable in the market, which would make the effectiveness test less meaningful. To permit
that would have required that the Board provide guidance on how to compute the fair value of
the "synthetic" derivative that is separated out of a compound derivative, both at inception and
during the term of the hedge. That would have added complexity to the requirements in this
Statement without, in the Board's view, adding offsetting benefits to justify the additional
complexity. However, the Board decided to permit separation of the foreign currency
component of a compound derivative at the date of initial application of this Statement, as
discussed in paragraph 524.
Fair Value Hedges
362. As discussed in paragraph 320, the demand for special accounting for hedges of existing
assets and liabilities, including unrecognized firm commitments, arises because of differences in
the way derivatives and hedged assets and liabilities are measured. This Statement requires
derivatives designated as part of a fair value hedge to be measured at fair value with changes in
fair value reported in earnings as they occur. Without special accounting, the gain or loss on a
derivative that hedges an item not measured at fair value would be reported in earnings without
also reporting the potentially offsetting loss or gain on the item being hedged. Those who
engage in hedging transactions do not consider that result to appropriately reflect the relationship
between a derivative and hedged item or how they manage risk. Accordingly, this Statement
permits gains and losses on designated assets and liabilities to be recognized in earnings in the
same period as the losses and gains on related derivative hedging instruments.
Accelerated Recognition of the Gain or Loss on a Hedged Item
363. Similar to the Exposure Draft, this Statement (a) requires that the gains or losses on a
derivative used as a fair value hedging instrument be recognized in earnings as they occur and
(b) permits earnings offset by accelerating the recognition of the offsetting losses or gains
attributable to the risk being hedged and adjusting the carrying amount of the hedged item
accordingly. That notion is consistent with part of the Board's second fundamental decision,
namely, that adjustments to the carrying amount of hedged items should reflect offsetting
changes in their fair value arising while the hedge is in effect. This Statement modifies the
proposals in the Exposure Draft for recognizing the gains and losses on the hedged item in two
ways, which are explained below.
Page 144
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Attributable to the risk being hedged
364. The Exposure Draft proposed that the gain or loss on the hedged item that would be
recognized under fair value hedge accounting incorporate all risk factors and, therefore, reflect
the full change in fair value of the hedged item to the extent of an offsetting gain or loss on the
hedging instrument. That focus was intended to prevent a hedged asset or liability from being
adjusted farther away from its fair value than it was at inception of the hedge. For example, if
the fair value of a hedged asset increased due to a change in interest rates but simultaneously
decreased due to a change in credit quality, the Exposure Draft would have prevented an entity
that was hedging only interest rate risk from accelerating recognition of the interest rate gain
without also effectively accelerating the credit quality loss. Accelerating only the interest rate
gain would adjust the hedged asset away from its fair value.
365. Respondents to the Exposure Draft opposed the proposed approach for the very reason that
the Board originally favored it—the approach would not have segregated the sources of the
change in a hedged item's fair value. Respondents focused on the earnings impact and expressed
concern about recognizing in earnings the fair value changes on the hedged item related to an
unhedged risk. They said that recognizing the changes in fair value of the hedged item
attributable to all risks would cause unrepresentative earnings volatility and would be misleading
in reflecting the results of the entity's hedging activities.
366. The Board believes that the earnings effect of the approach proposed in the Exposure Draft
would have reflected an exacerbation of the mixed-attribute measurement model, rather than
"unrepresentative earnings volatility." However, because of the concerns expressed by
respondents, the Board reconsidered the proposed requirements. The Board generally focuses on
the appropriate recognition and measurement of assets and liabilities in developing accounting
standards. However, the principal purpose of providing special accounting for hedging activities
is to mitigate the effects on earnings of different existing recognition and measurement
attributes. Consequently, in this instance, the Board found the focus of respondents on the
earnings impact of the approach to hedge accounting to be persuasive and decided to modify the
Exposure Draft to focus on the risk being hedged. The Board decided to adopt an approach that
accelerates the earnings recognition of the portion of the hedged item's gain or loss attributable
to the risk being hedged for the following reasons:
a. It provides the matching of gains and losses on the hedging instrument and the hedged item
that respondents desire.
b. It accounts for all or a portion of the change in fair value of the hedged item, and,
consequently, it is not inconsistent with the Board's long-term objective of measuring all
financial instruments at fair value.
Entire gain or loss attributable to risk being hedged
367. The Exposure Draft proposed that the gain or loss on the hedged item be recognized in
Page 145
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
earnings only to the extent that it provided offset for the loss or gain on the hedging instrument.
Under that proposal, earnings would have reflected hedge ineffectiveness to the extent that the
derivative gain or loss exceeded an offsetting loss or gain on the hedged item. It would not have
reflected hedge ineffectiveness to the extent that the gain or loss on the derivative was less than
the loss or gain on the hedged item. For example, ineffectiveness of $10 would have been
recognized if the gain on the derivative was $100 and the corresponding loss on the hedged item
was $90, but not if the gain on the derivative was $90 and the loss on the hedged item was $100.
The Board would have preferred to reflect all hedge ineffectiveness in earnings. However, the
Exposure Draft did not propose that the excess gain or loss on the hedged item be reflected in
earnings because that could have resulted in reporting in earnings a gain or loss on the hedged
item attributable to changes in unhedged risks.
368. When the Board modified the Exposure Draft to focus only on the gain or loss on the
hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged, it decided to report all hedge ineffectiveness in
earnings. Recognizing the hedged item's gain or loss due only to the hedged risk will not result
in earnings recognition of gains or losses related to unhedged risks.
Measurement of Hedged Item's Gain or Loss
369. In this Statement, the gain or loss on the hedged item that is accelerated and recognized in
earnings is the portion of the gain or loss that is attributable to the risk being hedged. Although
the Board considered several approaches to measuring the gain or loss attributable to the risk
being hedged, it decided not to provide detailed guidance on how that gain or loss should be
measured. The Board believes that the appropriate measurement of the gain or loss on a hedged
item may depend on how an entity manages the hedged risk. Consistent with its decision to
require an entity to define at inception how it will assess hedge effectiveness, the Board decided
that an entity also should define at inception how it will measure the gain or loss on a hedged
item attributable to the risk being hedged. The measurement of that gain or loss should be
consistent with the entity's approach to managing risk, assessing hedge effectiveness, and
determining hedge ineffectiveness. It follows that the gain or loss on the hedged item
attributable to the risk being hedged can be based on the loss or gain on the derivative, adjusted
in certain ways that will be identified during the assessment of hedge effectiveness. Both
Section 2 of Appendix A and Appendix B discuss and illustrate situations in which the gain or
loss on a hedging derivative must be adjusted to measure the loss or gain on the hedged item.
The Exposure Draft's Exception for Certain Firm Commitments
370. The Exposure Draft proposed a specific exception for a derivative that hedges the foreign
currency exposure of a firm commitment to purchase a nonfinancial asset for a fixed amount of
foreign currency. That exception would have permitted an entity to consider separately the
financial aspect and the nonfinancial aspect of the firm commitment for purposes of designating
the hedged item and thus to record the purchased asset at a fixed-dollar (or other functional
currency) equivalent of the foreign currency price. The exception is no longer necessary because
this Statement permits separate consideration of financial and nonfinancial risks for all fair value
Page 146
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
hedges of firm commitments.
Cash Flow Hedges
371. As discussed in paragraphs 322–329, the Board decided to permit hedge accounting for
certain hedges of forecasted transactions because of the widespread use of and demand for that
accounting. The "need" for special accounting for cash flow hedges arises because the hedged
transactions are recognized in periods after the one in which a change in the fair value of the
derivative occurs and is recognized. Without special accounting, gains and losses on derivatives
would be reported in a period different from the earnings impact of the hedged transaction or the
related asset acquired or liability incurred.
372. In developing a hedge accounting approach for hedges of cash flow exposures, the Board
identified four objectives: (a) to avoid the recognition of the gain or loss on a derivative hedging
instrument as a liability or an asset, (b) to make gains and losses not yet recognized in earnings
visible, (c) to reflect hedge ineffectiveness, and (d) to limit the use of hedge accounting for cash
flow hedges.
First Two Objectives—Avoid Conceptual Difficulties and Increase Visibility
373. The Board believes that recognizing gains or losses on derivatives in other comprehensive
income, rather than as liabilities or assets, best meets the first two objectives. Many respondents
to the Exposure Draft objected to that approach because of the potential for volatility in reported
equity. Instead, they advocated reporting a derivative's gain or loss as a freestanding liability or
asset. The Board did not change its decision for several reasons. First, the Board believes that
reporting a derivative's gain or loss as a liability or an asset is inappropriate and misleading
because a gain is not a liability and a loss is not an asset. Second, the Board believes the
volatility in other comprehensive income that results from gains and losses on derivatives that
hedge cash flow exposures properly reflects what occurred during the hedge period. There are
no gains or losses to offset the losses or gains on the derivatives that are reported in other
comprehensive income because the hedged transaction has not yet occurred. Third, the Board
believes the advantages of reporting all derivatives at fair value, together with recognizing gains
and losses on derivatives that hedge cash flow exposures in other comprehensive income,
outweigh any perceived disadvantages of potential equity volatility.
Third and Fourth Objectives—Reflect Ineffectiveness and Impose Limitations
374. The Board proposed in the Exposure Draft that the best way to meet the last two objectives
(reflect ineffectiveness and impose limitations) would be to reclassify a gain or loss on a
derivative designated as a hedging instrument into earnings on the projected date of the hedged
forecasted transaction. Effectiveness thus would have been reflected at the date the forecasted
transaction was projected to occur. In addition, there would have been little, if any, opportunity
for earnings management because gains and losses would not have been reclassified into
earnings when realized, when a forecasted transaction actually occurs, or when a forecasted
transaction's occurrence is no longer considered probable. The Exposure Draft explained that
Page 147
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
requiring recognition at the date the forecasted transaction is initially expected to occur
emphasizes the importance of carefully evaluating and forecasting future transactions before
designating them as being hedged with specific derivatives.
375. Respondents generally opposed the approach in the Exposure Draft because it often would
not have matched the derivative gain or loss with the earnings effect of the forecasted
transaction, thereby making earnings appear volatile. Respondents generally advocated
recognizing a derivative gain or loss in earnings in the same period or periods as the earnings
effect of (a) the forecasted transaction (such as a forecasted sale) or (b) the subsequent
accounting for the asset acquired or liability incurred in conjunction with the forecasted
transaction. To accomplish that result, many respondents advocated deferring the gain or loss on
the derivative beyond the date of the forecasted transaction as an adjustment of the basis of the
asset acquired or liability incurred in the forecasted transaction.
376. The Board considered two approaches that would have provided basis adjustment for assets
acquired or liabilities incurred in conjunction with a forecasted transaction. One approach would
have initially deferred a derivative gain or loss as a separate (freestanding) liability or asset and
later reported it as an adjustment of the basis of the acquired asset or incurred liability when it
was recorded. The Board rejected that approach because a deferred loss is not an asset and a
deferred gain is not a liability; reporting them as if they were would be misleading. The other
approach would have initially recognized the derivative gain or loss in other comprehensive
income and later reported it as an adjustment of the basis of the acquired asset or incurred
liability when it was recorded. The Board rejected that approach because it would have distorted
reported periodic comprehensive income. For example, removing a gain from other
comprehensive income and reporting it as an adjustment of the basis of an acquired asset would
result in a decrease in periodic comprehensive income (and total stockholders' equity) caused
simply by the acquisition of an asset at its fair value—a transaction that should have no effect on
comprehensive income. Additionally, both approaches would have systematically measured the
acquired asset or incurred liability at an amount other than fair value at the date of initial
recognition. That is, the adjustment would have moved the initial carrying amount of the
acquired asset or incurred liability away from its fair value.
377. The Board decided to require that the gain or loss on a derivative be reported initially in
other comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings when the forecasted transaction
affects earnings. That requirement avoids the problems caused by adjusting the basis of an
acquired asset or incurred liability and provides the same earnings impact. The approach in this
Statement, for example, provides for (a) recognizing the gain or loss on a derivative that hedged
a forecasted purchase of a machine in the same periods as the depreciation expense on the
machine and (b) recognizing the gain or loss on a derivative that hedged a forecasted purchase of
inventory when the cost of that inventory is reflected in cost of sales.
378. The Board was concerned that recognizing all derivative gains and losses in other
comprehensive income and reclassifying them into earnings in the future, perhaps spread out
Page 148
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
over a number of years, would not meet its third objective of reflecting hedge ineffectiveness, if
any. The Board therefore decided to require that, in general, the ineffective part of a cash flow
hedge be immediately recognized in earnings.
Measure of hedge ineffectiveness
379. The Board believes that, in principle, earnings should reflect (a) the component of a
derivative gain or loss that is excluded from the defined assessment of hedge effectiveness and
(b) any hedge ineffectiveness. However, the Board had concerns about the effect of that
approach on other comprehensive income and earnings for a period in which the change in the
present value of the future expected cash flows on the hedged transaction exceeds the change in
the present value of the expected cash flows on the derivative. In that circumstance, the result
would be to defer in other comprehensive income a nonexistent gain or loss on the derivative and
to recognize in earnings an offsetting nonexistent loss or gain. For example, if the derivative
hedging instrument had a $50 loss for a period in which the change in the present value of the
expected cash flows on the hedged transaction was a $55 gain, an approach that reflected all
hedge ineffectiveness in earnings would result in reflecting a $55 loss in other comprehensive
income and reporting a $5 gain in earnings.
380. To avoid that result, the Board decided that only ineffectiveness due to excess expected
cash flows on the derivative should be reflected in earnings. The Board discussed whether that
approach should be applied period by period or cumulatively and decided that the ineffectiveness
of a cash flow hedge should be determined on a cumulative basis since the inception of the
hedge.
381. To illustrate the difference between the period-by-period and cumulative approaches,
consider a derivative that had gains (expected cash inflows) of $75 in period 1 and $70 in period
2. The derivative hedges a forecasted transaction for which expected cash outflows increased by
$70 and $75 in the same periods, respectively. At the end of period 2, the changes in expected
cash flows on the hedge are completely offsetting on a cumulative basis. That is, the derivative
has expected cash inflows of $145 and the hedged transaction has an offsetting increase in
expected cash outflows of $145. If hedge ineffectiveness is measured and accounted for on a
cumulative basis, the $5 excess derivative gain reported in earnings in period 1 would be
reversed in period 2. At the end of period 2, retained earnings would reflect zero gain or loss,
and comprehensive income would reflect $145 of derivative gain. However, measuring and
accounting for hedge ineffectiveness on a period-by-period basis would give a different result
because earnings and comprehensive income would be affected for the $5 excess derivative gain
in period 1 but not the $5 excess hedged transaction loss in period 2. As a result, at the end of
period 2, retained earnings would reflect a $5 gain, even though actual ineffectiveness since
hedge inception was a zero gain or loss. Other comprehensive income would reflect a gain of
$140, even though the derivative's actual effectiveness since the inception of the hedge was a
gain of $145. Thus, in a situation like the one illustrated, retained earnings under the cumulative
approach will more accurately reflect total hedge ineffectiveness since the inception of the
Page 149
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
hedge, and comprehensive income will more accurately reflect total hedge effectiveness for the
hedge period. The Board rejected a period-by-period approach because, under that approach,
retained earnings would not reflect total hedge ineffectiveness, and comprehensive income
would not reflect total hedge effectiveness. Section 2 of Appendix A provides some examples of
how the ineffective portion of a derivative gain or loss might be estimated, and Section 1 of
Appendix B further illustrates application of the cumulative approach.
Limitations on cash flow hedges
382. Because hedge accounting for forecasted transactions is not conceptually supportable and
is not necessary to compensate for recognition or measurement anomalies, the Board decided
that this Statement should provide only limited hedge accounting for hedges of forecasted
transactions (the Board's fourth objective). In the Exposure Draft, the Board concluded that the
best way to limit hedge accounting for a hedge of a forecasted transaction was to require that the
gain or loss on a derivative that hedges a forecasted transaction be reclassified into earnings on
the projected date of the forecasted transaction and to limit hedge accounting to the life of the
hedging instrument. In formulating this Statement, the Board decided that, because of current
practice, it was acceptable to provide for an earnings effect that is more consistent with the
entity's objective in entering into a hedge. Consequently, the Board decided to provide
limitations on hedges of forecasted transactions through the criteria for qualification for cash
flow hedge accounting. The Board believes the criteria discussed in paragraphs 458–473
provide sufficient limitations.
383. The Board also considered limiting hedge accounting for hedges of cash flow exposures
based on pragmatic, but arbitrary, limitations. The pragmatic approaches that were considered
included limitations based on the length of time until the expected occurrence of the forecasted
transaction, the amount of the gain or loss reflected in other comprehensive income, and specific
linkage to existing assets or liabilities. For example, a limitation might have required that cash
flows occur within five years to qualify as hedgeable. The Board decided that it was more
appropriate to rely on specified criteria for cash flow hedges than to apply arbitrary, pragmatic
limitations.
General Criteria to Qualify for Designation as a Hedge
384. This Statement requires that certain criteria be met for a hedge to qualify for hedge
accounting. The criteria are intended to ensure that hedge accounting is used in a reasonably
consistent manner for transactions and exposures that qualify as hedgeable pursuant to this
Statement. The criteria discussed in this section are required for both fair value hedges and cash
flow hedges. Criteria that are unique to either fair value hedges or cash flow hedges are
discussed separately.
Designation, Documentation, and Risk Management
385. The Board decided that concurrent designation and documentation of a hedge is critical;
Page 150
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
without it, an entity could retroactively identify a hedged item, a hedged transaction, or a method
of measuring effectiveness to achieve a desired accounting result. The Board also decided that
identifying the nature of the risk being hedged and using a hedging derivative consistent with an
entity's established policy for risk management are essential components of risk management and
are necessary to add verifiability to the hedge accounting model.
Highly Effective in Achieving Offsetting Changes in Fair Values or Cash Flows
386. To qualify for hedge accounting, this Statement requires that an entity must expect a
hedging relationship to be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes in fair value or cash
flows for the risk being hedged. That requirement is consistent with the Board's fourth
fundamental decision, which is that one aspect of qualification for special hedge accounting
should be an assessment of the effectiveness of a derivative in offsetting the entity's exposure to
changes in fair value or variability of cash flows. This Statement does not specify how
effectiveness should be assessed; assessment of effectiveness should be based on the objective of
management's risk management strategy. However, this Statement does require that the method
of assessing effectiveness be reasonable and that the same method be used for similar hedges
unless different methods are explicitly justified. The Board considers it essential that an entity
document at the inception of the hedge how effectiveness will be assessed for each hedge and
then apply that effectiveness test on a consistent basis for the duration of the designated hedge.
However, if an entity identifies an improved method for assessing effectiveness, it may
discontinue the existing hedging relationship and then designate and document a new hedging
relationship using the improved method prospectively.
387. In formulating this Statement, the Board would have preferred specific effectiveness tests
for fair value hedges and for cash flow hedges to (a) provide limitations on hedge accounting, (b)
result in consistent application of hedge accounting guidance, and (c) increase the comparability
of financial statements. The Exposure Draft therefore proposed specific effectiveness tests that
would have required an expectation that the changes in fair value or net cash flows of the
derivative would "offset substantially all" of the changes in fair value of the hedged item or the
variability of cash flows of the hedged transaction attributable to the risk being hedged. Those
proposed offset tests were intended to be similar to, though more stringent than, the related
requirements of Statement 80:
At the inception of the hedge and throughout the hedge period, high
correlation of changes in (1) the market value of the futures contract(s) and (2) the
fair value of, or interest income or expense associated with, the hedged item(s)
shall be probable so that the results of the futures contract(s) will substantially
offset the effects of price or interest rate changes on the exposed item(s).
[Paragraph 4(b); footnote reference omitted.]
388. Respondents to the Exposure Draft commented that the proposed effectiveness tests for fair
value and cash flow hedges would have precluded certain risk management strategies from
Page 151
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
qualifying for hedge accounting because those tests were based on singular objectives for fair
value and cash flow hedges. For example, the effectiveness tests in the Exposure Draft would
have prohibited delta-neutral hedging strategies, partial-term hedging strategies, rollover hedging
strategies, and hedging based on changes in the intrinsic value of options. Respondents also
noted that risk management objectives and strategies differ between entities as well as between
different types of hedges within an entity. Based on those concerns, the Board reconsidered the
effectiveness tests proposed in the Exposure Draft.
389. The Board attempted to develop a workable effectiveness test that would appropriately deal
with the variety of risk management objectives and strategies that exist in practice. It ultimately
decided to remove the specific effectiveness tests and, instead, to require that a hedge be
expected to be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes in either fair value or cash flows,
consistent with an entity's documented risk management objectives and strategy. The Board
intends "highly effective" to be essentially the same as the notion of "high correlation" in
Statement 80.
390. Because that modification places more emphasis on each entity's approach to risk
management, the Board decided to require an expanded description and documentation of an
entity's risk management objectives and strategy, including how a derivative's effectiveness in
hedging an exposure will be assessed. It also decided that the description of how an entity plans
to assess effectiveness must (a) include identification of whether all of the gain or loss on the
derivative hedging instrument will be included in the assessment and (b) have a reasonable basis.
Those limitations, along with examples of different ways to assess hedge effectiveness in a
variety of circumstances, are discussed in Section 2 of Appendix A. The Board may need to
revisit the idea of more specific effectiveness tests if an evaluation of the application of this
Statement indicates either too great a disparity in the techniques used for assessing effectiveness
or widespread abuse of the flexibility provided.
Basis Swaps
391. Basis swaps are derivative instruments that are used to modify the receipts or payments
associated with a recognized, variable-rate asset or liability from one variable amount to another
variable amount. They do not eliminate the variability of cash flows; instead, they change the
basis or index of variability. The Exposure Draft would have required that an entity expect the
net cash flows of a derivative to "offset substantially all" of the variability of cash flows
associated with the asset or liability to qualify for cash flow hedge accounting. That requirement
would have precluded basis swaps from qualifying as hedging instruments.
392. Some respondents to the Exposure Draft criticized its prohibition of hedge accounting for
basis swaps. They commented that it should not matter whether an interest rate swap, for
example, is used to change the interest receipts or payments associated with a hedged asset or
liability from fixed to variable, variable to fixed, or variable to variable. They noted that the fair
value and cash flow criteria accommodated only fixed-to-variable and variable-to-fixed swaps.
Additionally, some respondents commented that basis swaps should be eligible for hedge
Page 152
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
accounting treatment because they are an effective means of creating comparable asset-liability
positions. For example, if an entity holds a variable-rate, LIBOR-based asset and a variable-rate,
prime-based liability, an easy way to match that asset and liability position is to "swap" either
the LIBOR asset to prime or the prime liability to LIBOR.
393. Many respondents advocating the use of basis swaps as hedging instruments suggested
accommodating basis swaps by accounting for all swaps on a synthetic instrument basis. For the
reasons discussed in paragraphs 349 and 350, the Board decided not to provide special
accounting based on the creation of synthetic instruments. The Board recognizes, however, that
basis swaps can provide offsetting cash flows when they are used to hedge a combined
asset-liability position in which the asset and liability have different rate bases. For that reason,
this Statement provides an exception for a basis swap that is highly effective as a link between
an asset (or group of similar assets) with variable cash flows and a liability (or a group of similar
liabilities) with variable cash flows.
394. Some respondents to the Task Force Draft objected to what they saw as stricter
requirements for a basis swap to qualify for hedge accounting than for other derivatives. They
noted that to qualify for hedge accounting, other strategies need not link an asset and a liability.
The Board notes that the requirement that a basis swap link the cash flows of an asset and a
liability is necessary for a basis swap to qualify under the general criterion that a derivative must
provide offsetting cash flows to an exposure to qualify for cash flow hedge accounting. That is,
one leg of the basis swap that links an asset and a liability will provide offsetting cash flows for
the asset, and the other leg will provide offsetting cash flows for the liability. Thus, the criteria
for basis swaps are essentially the same as—not stricter than—the criteria for other strategies to
qualify for hedge accounting.
395. To ensure that a basis swap does, in fact, result in offsetting cash flows, this Statement also
requires that the basis of one leg of the swap be the same as the basis of the identified asset and
that the basis of the other leg of the swap be the same as the basis of the identified liability.
Some respondents to the Task Force Draft suggested that the only requirement should be that
one leg of the basis swap be highly effective in offsetting the variable cash flows of the asset and
the other leg be highly effective in offsetting the variable cash flows of the liability. The Board
noted that such a provision could have an additive effect if neither leg is entirely effective. The
sum of the two amounts of ineffectiveness might not satisfy the effectiveness test that other
derivatives must meet to qualify for hedge accounting. The Board therefore decided to retain the
requirement that the basis of one leg of the basis swap be the same as that of a recognized asset
and that the basis of the other leg be the same as that of a recognized liability. Section 2 of
Appendix A provides an example of assessing the effectiveness of a hedge with a basis swap.
Written Options
396. A written option exposes its writer to the possibility of unlimited loss but limits the gain to
the amount of premium received. The Board is concerned about permitting written options to be
designated as hedging instruments because a written option serves only to reduce the potential
Page 153
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
for gain in the hedged item or hedged transaction. It leaves the potential for loss on the hedged
item or hedged transaction unchanged except for the amount of premium received on the written
option. Consequently, on a net basis, an entity may be worse off as a result of trying to hedge
with a written option. Because of those concerns, the Exposure Draft proposed prohibiting a
written option from being eligible for designation as a hedging instrument.
397. Respondents to the Exposure Draft objected to categorically prohibiting written options
from being designated as hedging instruments. A number of respondents specifically referred to
the use of a written option to hedge the call option feature in a debt instrument. They explained
that it may be more cost-effective to issue fixed-rate, callable debt and simultaneously enter into
a receive-fixed, pay-variable interest rate swap with an embedded written call option than to
directly issue variable-rate, noncallable debt. The Board agreed that hedge accounting should be
available for that use of written options. Consequently, this Statement permits designation of a
written option as hedging the purchased option embedded in a financial instrument. The Board
notes that if the option features in both instruments are exactly opposite, any gains or losses on
the two options generally will offset. Section 2 of Appendix A includes an example illustrating
such a strategy.
398. The requirements in this Statement for hedge accounting for strategies that use written
options are based on symmetry of the gain and loss potential of the combined hedged position.
To qualify for hedge accounting, either the upside and downside potential of the net position
must be symmetrical or the upside potential must be greater than the downside potential. That is,
the combination of the hedged item and the written option must result in a position that provides
at least as much potential for gains (or favorable cash flows) as exposure to losses (or
unfavorable cash flows). Evaluation of the combined position's relative potential for gains and
losses is based on the effect of a favorable or unfavorable change in price of a given percentage.
For example, a 25 percent favorable change in the fair value of the hedged item must provide a
gain on the combined position that is at least as large as the loss on that combined position that
would result from a 25 percent unfavorable change in the fair value of the hedged item.
399. This Statement does not permit hedge accounting for "covered call" strategies—strategies
in which an entity writes an option on an asset that it owns (unless that asset is a call option that
is embedded in another instrument). In that strategy, any loss on the written option will be
covered by the gain on the owned asset. However, a covered call strategy will not qualify for
hedge accounting because the risk profile of the combined position is asymmetrical (the
exposure to losses is greater than the potential for gains). In contrast, the risk profile of the asset
alone is "symmetrical or better" (the potential for gains is at least as great as the exposure to
losses).
400. The symmetry requirement for hedges with written options described in paragraph 398 is
intended to preclude a written option that is used to sell a portion of the gain potential on an asset
or liability from being eligible for hedge accounting. For example, assume that an entity has an
investment in equity securities that have a current fair value of $150 per share. To sell some, but
Page 154
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
not all, of the upside potential of those securities, the entity writes a call option contract to sell
the securities for $150 per share and purchases a call option contract to buy the same securities at
$160 per share. On a net basis, the entity still has unlimited upside potential because there are
infinite possible outcomes above $160 per share, but its downside risk is limited to $150 per
share. Without the requirement to compare increases and decreases of comparable percentages,
an entity could assert that its written option strategy warrants hedge accounting because, after
entering into the written and purchased option contracts, there is still more potential for gains
than for losses from its combined position in the equity securities and option contracts. The
Board decided that hedge accounting should not be available for a transaction that merely "sells"
part of the potential for gain from an existing asset.
401. This Statement does not require that a written option be entered into at the same time the
hedged item is issued or acquired because the combined position is the same regardless of when
the position originated (assuming, of course, that the price of the hedged item is the same as the
underlying for the option at the time the hedge is entered into). In addition, the Board decided
not to limit the items that may be hedged with written options to financial instruments. The
Board decided that this Statement's provisions for hedging with written options should
accommodate similar risk management strategies regardless of the nature of the asset or liability
that is the hedged item.
Exposures to Changes in Fair Value or Cash Flows That Could Affect Reported Earnings
402. This Statement requires that a hedged item or hedged forecasted transaction embody an
exposure to changes in fair value or variations in cash flow, for the risk being hedged, that could
affect reported earnings. That is, a change in the fair value of a hedged item or variation in the
cash flow of a hedged forecasted transaction attributable to the risk being hedged must have the
potential to change the amount that could be recognized in earnings. For example, the future
sale of an asset or settlement of a liability that exposes an entity to the risk of a change in fair
value may result in recognizing a gain or loss in earnings when the sale or settlement occurs.
Changes in market price could change the amount for which the asset or liability could be sold or
settled and, consequently, change the amount of gain or loss recognized. Forecasted transactions
that expose an entity to cash flow risk have the potential to affect reported earnings because the
amount of related revenue or expense may differ depending on the price eventually paid or
received. Thus, an entity could designate the forecasted sale of a product at the market price at
the date of sale as a hedged transaction because revenue will be recorded at that future sales
price.
403. Some respondents to the Exposure Draft asked the Board to permit some transactions that
create an exposure to variability in cash flows to qualify as hedgeable transactions even though
they could not affect reported earnings. They asserted that hedges of those transactions
successfully reduce an entity's cash flow exposure. The Board decided to retain the criterion of
an earnings exposure because the objective of hedge accounting is to allow the gain or loss on a
hedging instrument and the loss or gain on a designated hedged item or transaction to be
Page 155
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
recognized in earnings at the same time. Moreover, without an earnings exposure, there would
be no way to determine the period in which the derivative gain or loss should be included in
earnings to comply with this Statement.
404. The earnings exposure criterion specifically precludes hedge accounting for derivatives
used to hedge (a) transactions with stockholders as stockholders, such as projected purchases of
treasury stock or payments of dividends, (b) intercompany transactions (except for
foreign-currency-denominated forecasted intercompany transactions, which are discussed in
paragraphs 482–487) between entities included in consolidated financial statements, and (c) the
price of stock expected to be issued pursuant to a stock option plan for which recognized
compensation expense is not based on changes in stock prices after the date of grant. However,
intercompany transactions may present an earnings exposure for a subsidiary in its freestanding
financial statements; a hedge of an intercompany transaction would be eligible for hedge
accounting for purposes of those statements.
The Hedged Item or Transaction Is Not Remeasured through Earnings for the Hedged Risk
405. Special hedge accounting is not necessary if both the hedged item and the hedging
instrument are measured at fair value with changes in fair value reported in earnings as they
occur because offsetting gains and losses will be recognized in earnings together. The Board
therefore decided to specifically prohibit hedge accounting if the related asset or liability is, or
will be, measured at fair value, with changes in fair value reported in earnings when they occur.
That prohibition results from the Board's belief that a standard on hedge accounting should not
provide the opportunity to change the accounting for an asset or liability that would otherwise be
reported at fair value with changes in fair value reported in earnings. Thus, for a fair value
hedge, the prohibition is intended to prevent an entity from recognizing only the change in fair
value of the hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged rather than its entire change in fair
value. For a cash flow hedge, the prohibition is intended to prevent an entity from reflecting a
derivative's gain or loss in accumulated other comprehensive income when the related asset or
liability will be measured at fair value upon acquisition or incurrence.
406. The Exposure Draft would have excluded from its scope all of the assets and liabilities of
an entity that follows specialized industry practice under which it measures substantially all of
its assets at fair value and recognizes changes in those fair values in earnings. That exclusion
was aimed at preventing those entities from avoiding fair value accounting. Respondents to the
Exposure Draft noted that exclusion also would have prohibited those entities from applying
hedge accounting to hedged assets or liabilities that are not measured at fair value, such as
long-term debt. The Board decided to remove the exclusion and instead focus on assets and
liabilities that are reported at fair value because that approach would (a) be consistent with the
notion that eligibility for hedge accounting should be based on the criteria in this Statement, (b)
provide consistent fair value accounting for all derivatives, and (c) be responsive to the concerns
of constituents.
Page 156
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
407. The criteria in this Statement also preclude hedge accounting for an asset or a liability that
is remeasured for changes in price attributable to the risk being hedged, with those changes in
value reported currently in earnings. The criteria therefore preclude fair value or cash flow
hedge accounting for foreign currency risk associated with any asset or liability that is
denominated in a foreign currency and remeasured into the functional currency under Statement
52. The Board believes that special accounting is neither appropriate nor necessary in that
situation because the transaction gain or loss on the foreign-currency-denominated asset or
liability will be reported in earnings along with the gain or loss on the undesignated derivative.
The criteria also preclude a cash flow hedge of the forecasted acquisition or incurrence of an
item that will be denominated in a foreign currency and remeasured into the functional currency
each period after acquisition or incurrence. However, the criteria do not preclude a cash flow
hedge of the foreign currency exposure associated with the forecasted purchase of a
nonmonetary item for a foreign currency, even if the purchase will be on credit, because
nonmonetary items are not subsequently remeasured into an entity's functional currency. Nor do
the criteria preclude hedging the forecasted sale of a nonmonetary asset for a foreign currency,
even if the sale will be on credit.
Risks That May Be Designated as Being Hedged
408. The Board recognizes that entities are commonly exposed to a variety of risks in the course
of their activities, including interest rate, foreign exchange, market price, credit, liquidity, theft,
weather, health, catastrophe, competitive, and business cycle risks. The Exposure Draft did not
propose detailed guidance on what risks could be designated as being hedged, other than to note
in the basis for conclusions that special hedge accounting for certain risk management
transactions, such as hedges of strategic risk, would be precluded. In redeliberating the issue of
risk, the Board reaffirmed that hedge accounting cannot be provided for all possible risks and
decided to be more specific about the risks for which hedge accounting is available.
409. Because this Statement, unlike the Exposure Draft, bases the accounting for a hedged item
in a fair value hedge on changes in fair value attributable to the risk being hedged, the Board
decided that it needed to limit the types of risks that could be designated as being hedged. The
absence of limits could make meaningless the notion of hedge effectiveness by ignoring the
consequence of basis or other differences between the hedged item or transaction and the
hedging instrument in assessing the initial and continuing qualification for hedge accounting.
410. For example, an entity using a LIBOR-based interest rate futures contract as a hedge of a
prime-based asset might assert that the risk being hedged is the fair value exposure of the
prime-based asset to changes in LIBOR. Because that designation would ignore the basis
difference between the prime-based hedged asset and the LIBOR-based derivative hedging
instrument, it could result in asserted "automatic" compliance with the effectiveness criterion.
That type of designation might also lead an entity to assert that the amount of the change in the
hedged item's fair value attributable to the hedged risk corresponds to the change in the fair
value of the hedging derivative and, therefore, to erroneously conclude that the derivative's
Page 157
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
change in fair value could be used as a surrogate for changes in the fair value of the hedged item
attributable to the hedged risk. Such a designation also would remove any possibility that actual
ineffectiveness of a hedge would be measured and reflected in earnings in the period in which it
occurs.
Financial Assets and Liabilities
411. For financial instruments, this Statement specifies that hedge accounting is permitted for
hedges of changes in fair value or variability of future cash flows that result from changes in four
types of risk. As indicated in paragraph 21(f), those four risks also apply to fair value hedges of
firm commitments with financial components.
a. Market price risk. A fair value hedge focuses on the exposure to changes in the fair value of
the entire hedged item. The definition of fair value requires that the fair value of a hedged
item be based on a quoted market price in an active market, if available. Similarly, a cash
flow hedge focuses on variations in cash flows, for example, the cash flows stemming from
the purchase or sale of an asset, which obviously are affected by changes in the market price
of the item. The Board therefore concluded that the market price risk of the entire hedged
item (that is, the risk of changes in the fair value of the entire hedged item) should be
eligible for designation as the hedged risk in a fair value hedge. Likewise, variable cash
flows stemming from changes in the market price of the entire item are eligible for
designation as the hedged risk in a cash flow hedge.
b. Market interest rate risk. For financial assets and liabilities, changes in market interest rates
may affect the right to receive (or obligation to pay or transfer) cash or other financial
instruments in the future or the fair value of that right (or obligation). The time value of
money is a broadly accepted concept that is incorporated in generally accepted accounting
principles (for example, in APB Opinion No. 21, Interest on Receivables and Payables, and
FASB Statement No. 91, Accounting for Nonrefundable Fees and Costs Associated with
Originating or Acquiring Loans and Initial Direct Costs of Leases). Because the
marketplace has developed techniques to delineate and extract interest rate risk from
financial instruments, the Board decided that the risk that changes in market interest rates
will affect the fair value or cash flows of the hedged item warrants being identified as a risk
that may be designated as being hedged.
c. Foreign exchange risk. The fair value (expressed in the entity's functional currency) of an
asset such as a foreign debt or equity security that is classified as available for sale, as well
as the fair value of the financial component of a firm commitment that is denominated in a
currency other than the entity's functional currency, generally is exposed to changes in
foreign exchange rates. Similarly, the cash flows of a forecasted transaction generally are
exposed to changes in foreign exchange rates if the transaction will be denominated in a
foreign currency. Statement 52 specifies special accounting for reflecting the effects of
changes in foreign exchange rates, and this Statement continues much of that accounting.
The Board therefore decided that the risk of changes in foreign exchange rates on the fair
value of certain hedged items and on the cash flows of hedged transactions warrants being
Page 158
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
identified as a risk that may be designated as being hedged.
d. Default (credit) risk. A financial asset embodies a right to receive cash or another financial
instrument from a counterparty. A financial asset thus embodies a risk that the counterparty
will fail to perform according to the terms of the contract; that risk generally is referred to as
credit risk. Because that risk affects the fair value of a financial asset, as well as the related
cash flows, the Board decided that the risk of the counterparty's default on its obligation is a
risk that may be designated as being hedged.
Focusing on those four risks is consistent with the belief that the largest amount of present
hedging activity is aimed at protecting against market price, credit, foreign exchange, or interest
rate risk. Those also were the risks generally accommodated by special hedge accounting before
this Statement. Focusing on those four risks also is consistent with responses to the Exposure
Draft. Although the notice for recipients did not ask respondents to comment on the type of risks
that should be eligible for hedge accounting, respondents generally discussed hedging
transactions in terms of those four risks.
412. This Statement also focuses on those four specified risks because a change in the price
associated with one of those risks ordinarily will directly affect the fair value of an asset or
liability or the cash flows of a future transaction in a determinable or predictable manner. Price
changes associated with other risks may not be as direct. For example, price changes associated
with "strategic risk" exposures do not have a direct impact on the fair value of a hedged item or
cash flow of a forecasted transaction and thus may not be designated as the risk being hedged.
Strategic hedges are described in paragraph 231.
413. This Statement does not permit designating a subcomponent of market price, market
interest rate, foreign exchange, or credit risk as the risk being hedged. However, some of those
subcomponents may be embodied in a separable portion of a financial instrument. For example,
prepayment risk is a subcomponent of market interest rate risk, but the prepayment risk in a
financial asset stems from the embedded written call option. An entity may hedge prepayment
risk by separately designating a hedge of the embedded call option. Even though this Statement
does not require an embedded prepayment option to be accounted for separately because it is
deemed to be clearly and closely related to the host contract, that embedded call option still is a
derivative. Because this Statement does not permit a compound derivative to be separated into
risk components for hedge accounting purposes, only the market price risk of the entire option
qualifies as the hedged risk. Hedge effectiveness therefore must be measured based on changes
in the fair value of the option.
414. Measuring the effectiveness of a fair value hedge requires determining whether a gain or
loss on a hedging derivative offsets the loss or gain in the value of the hedged item that is
attributable to the risk being hedged. Once the change in the value of a hedged item attributable
to a particular risk has been offset by the change in value of a hedging derivative, a second,
identical derivative cannot also be an effective hedge of that same risk. Similarly, an embedded
derivative in a hedged item will modify the nature of the risk to which that item is exposed.
Page 159
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Thus, all embedded derivatives relating to the same risk class (that is, market prices, market
interest rates, foreign exchange rates, or credit) in a hedged item must be considered together in
assessing the effectiveness of an additional (freestanding) derivative as the hedging instrument.
415. For example, an entity might enter into a firm commitment to purchase an asset for
1,000,000 Deutsche marks (DM), with a provision that caps the U.S. dollar equivalent price at
$600,000. A hedge of the foreign currency risk in that commitment cannot be effective unless it
takes into account the effect of the cap. Similarly, a hedge of the effect on the holder of changes
in market interest rates on the unconditional receivable component of a prepayable bond cannot
ignore the effect of the embedded prepayment option. To disregard the effects of embedded
derivatives related to the same risk class could result in a designated hedge that is not effective at
achieving offsetting changes in fair value attributable to the risk being hedged.
Nonfinancial Assets and Liabilities
416. The Board decided to limit fair value and cash flow hedge accounting for hedges of
nonfinancial assets and liabilities (other than recognized loan servicing rights and nonfinancial
firm commitments with financial components) to hedges of the risk of changes in the market
price of the entire hedged item in a fair value hedge or the entire asset to be acquired or sold in a
hedged forecasted transaction, with one exception. The risk of changes in the
functional-currency-equivalent cash flows attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates may
be separately hedged in a cash flow hedge of the forecasted purchase or sale of a nonfinancial
item. The Board decided not to permit the market price risk of only a principal ingredient or
other component of a nonfinancial hedged item to be designated as the risk being hedged
because changes in the price of an ingredient or component of a nonfinancial item generally do
not have a predictable, separately measurable effect on the price of the item that is comparable to
the effect of, say, a change in market interest rates on the price of a bond.
417. For example, if an entity wishes to enter into a cash flow hedge of the variability in cash
inflows from selling tires, the market price risk of rubber alone could not be designated as the
risk being hedged. There is no mechanism in the market for tires to directly relate the amount or
quality of rubber in a tire to the price of the tire. Similarly, if a derivative is used in a fair value
hedge to hedge the exposure to changes in the fair value of tires held in inventory, the entity
could not designate the market price of rubber as the hedged risk even though rubber is a
component of the tires. The fair value of the tire inventory is based on the market price of tires,
not rubber, even though the price of rubber may have an effect on the fair value of the tires.
Permitting an entity to designate the market price of rubber as the risk being hedged would
ignore other components of the price of the tires, such as steel and labor. It also could result in
automatic compliance with the effectiveness test even though the price of rubber may not be
highly correlated with the market price of tires. As discussed in the effectiveness examples in
Section 2 of Appendix A, the use of a rubber-based derivative as a fair value hedge of the tire
inventory or a cash flow hedge of its sale or purchase may qualify for hedge accounting. To do
so, however, the entire change in the fair value of the derivative and the entire change in the fair
value of the hedged item must be expected to be highly effective at offsetting each other, and all
Page 160
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
of the remaining hedge criteria must be met. Any ineffectiveness must be included currently in
earnings.
418. Some respondents to the Task Force Draft objected to this Statement's different provisions
about risks that may be hedged in financial versus nonfinancial items. They asserted that an
entity also should be permitted to separate a nonfinancial item into its principal components for
hedge accounting purposes. The Board considers those differing requirements to be an
appropriate consequence of the nature of the items being hedged.
419. For example, the effect of changes in market interest rates qualifies for designation as the
hedged risk in a financial item but not in a nonfinancial item. An increase in market interest
rates will result in a decrease in the fair value of a fixed-rate financial asset because the market
rate of interest directly affects the present value computation of the item's future cash flows.
Similarly, an increase in market interest rates will result in an increase in the cash flows of a
variable-rate financial asset. For both fixed- and variable-rate financial assets, the effect of a
change in market interest rates is not only direct but also predictable and separately
determinable. For instance, holding factors like credit risk constant, it is relatively easy to
calculate the effect of a 100-basis-point increase in market interest rates on the market price of a
fixed-rate bond with a specified interest rate and specified time to maturity. It is even easier to
determine the effect of a 100-basis-point increase in interest rates on the cash flows stemming
from a variable-rate bond. In contrast, although an increase of 100 basis points in market interest
rates may affect the market price of a residential building, techniques do not currently exist to
isolate and predict that effect.
420. The effect of changes in interest rates on the market price of residential real estate is much
less direct than the effect of interest rate changes on financial items. Interest rates may indirectly
affect the market price of a single-family house because of the effect of a change in market
interest rates on consumer buying behavior or rental rates. For example, an increase in market
interest rates may lead to decreased consumer demand for real estate mortgage loans and, in turn,
for real estate purchases. Enticing consumers to purchase real estate in a higher interest-rate
environment may necessitate lower prices. However, a myriad of other factors may affect the
price of residential real estate, and any effect of interest rates is not predictable, immediate, or
subject to isolation.
421. Unlike a change in market interest rates, it may be possible to isolate the effect of a change
in foreign exchange rates on the functional currency cash flows stemming from a nonfinancial
item. For example, an entity with a U.S. dollar functional currency owns residential real estate
located in France with a market price of FF5,000,000. If the price of residential real estate in
France and the U.S. dollar–French franc exchange rate are not correlated, an increase of $0.01 in
the value of the franc will increase the U.S. dollar equivalent of the sales price of the real estate
by $50,000 (FF5,000,000 × 0.01). This Statement thus permits the effect of changes in foreign
exchange rates to be designated as the hedged risk in a cash flow hedge of a forecasted
transaction involving a nonfinancial item.
Page 161
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Simultaneous Hedges of Fair Value and Cash Flow Exposures
422. The Exposure Draft would have prohibited the simultaneous designation of an asset or
liability as a fair value hedged item and that asset's or liability's cash flows as a hedged
forecasted transaction. The Board had previously concluded that, in certain circumstances, if an
entity were permitted to apply hedge accounting at the same time for hedges of both the fair
value and the cash flow variability of a single item, the results would be questionable because
the entity may be hedging some (if not all) of the same cash flows twice. For example,
simultaneous hedging of both the fair value of 1,000 barrels of existing crude oil inventory in a
fair value hedge and the forecasted sale of refined oil from those 1,000 barrels of oil in a cash
flow hedge would change the nature of the entity's exposure to oil price movements. The two
hedges would take the entity from a net long position to a net short position; together they would
not necessarily neutralize risk.
423. The Board decided to remove the restriction on simultaneous fair value and cash flow
hedges. That change was made, in part, because of the change to base both the assessment of
hedge effectiveness and hedge accounting on the change in fair value or cash flows attributable
to the risk being hedged. The Board believes this Statement can accommodate simultaneous fair
value and cash flow hedging in certain situations if different risk exposures are being hedged
because hedge accounting in this Statement accounts for each risk exposure separately. For
example, an entity might designate both a cash flow hedge of the interest rate risk associated
with a variable-rate financial asset and a fair value hedge of the credit risk on that asset.
424. Removing the restriction on simultaneous fair value and cash flow hedges is not, however,
intended to permit simultaneous hedges of the same risk, such as credit risk or market price risk,
with both a fair value hedge and a cash flow hedge. For example, the Board does not consider
the simultaneous hedge of the fair value of crude oil and the cash flows from selling a product
made from that oil described in paragraph 422 to be consistent with the requirements of this
Statement because the crude oil and the refined product do not present separate earnings
exposures. The entity cannot sell both the crude oil and a refined product made from the same
oil—it can only do one or the other. Regardless of how it intends to use the crude oil, the entity
can choose to hedge its exposure to changes in the price of a specific amount of crude oil as
either a fair value exposure or a cash flow exposure, but not as both.
425. Some respondents to the Exposure Draft opposed the prohibition on simultaneous hedges
because it would preclude swapping foreign-currency-denominated variable-rate debt to U.S.
dollar fixed-rate debt. That strategy was not eligible for hedge accounting under the Exposure
Draft because the variable interest rate exposure is a cash flow exposure and the foreign currency
exposure was deemed to be a fair value exposure. Even though this Statement no longer
includes a restriction on simultaneous hedges, the foreign currency aspect of that strategy is not
hedgeable under this Statement because the debt will be remeasured into the entity's functional
currency under Statement 52, with the related transaction gain or loss reported in earnings. An
Page 162
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
entity might, however, be able to achieve income statement results similar to hedge accounting
using separate interest rate and foreign currency derivatives and designating only the interest rate
derivative as a hedging instrument. Income statement offset would be achieved for the foreign
currency aspect because the change in fair value of the undesignated foreign currency derivatives
will flow through earnings along with the remeasurement of the debt into the functional
currency.
Prohibition against Hedge Accounting for Hedges of Interest Rate Risk of Debt Securities Classified
as Held-to-Maturity
426. This Statement prohibits hedge accounting for a fair value or cash flow hedge of the
interest rate risk associated with a debt security classified as held-to-maturity pursuant to
Statement 115. During the deliberations that preceded issuance of Statement 115, the Board
considered whether such a debt security could be designated as being hedged for hedge
accounting purposes. Although the Board's view at that time was that hedging debt securities
classified as held-to-maturity is inconsistent with the basis for that classification, Statement 115
did not restrict hedge accounting of those securities because constituents argued that the
appropriateness of such restrictions should be considered in the Board's project on hedging.
427. The Exposure Draft proposed prohibiting a held-to-maturity debt security from being
designated as a hedged item, regardless of the risk being hedged. The Exposure Draft explained
the Board's belief that designating a derivative as a hedge of the changes in fair value, or
variations in cash flow, of a debt security that is classified as held-to-maturity contradicts the
notion of that classification. Respondents to the Exposure Draft objected to the proposed
exclusion, asserting the following: (a) hedging a held-to-maturity security does not conflict with
an asserted intent to hold that security to maturity, (b) a held-to-maturity security contributes to
interest rate risk if it is funded with shorter term liabilities, and (c) prohibiting hedge accounting
for a hedge of a held-to-maturity security is inconsistent with permitting hedge accounting for
other fixed-rate assets and liabilities that are being held to maturity.
428. The Board continues to believe that providing hedge accounting for a held-to-maturity
security conflicts with the notion underlying the held-to-maturity classification in Statement 115
if the risk being hedged is the risk of changes in the fair value of the entire hedged item or is
otherwise related to interest rate risk. The Board believes an entity's decision to classify a
security as held-to-maturity implies that future decisions about continuing to hold that security
will not be affected by changes in market interest rates. The decision to classify a security as
held-to-maturity is consistent with the view that a change in fair value or cash flow stemming
from a change in market interest rates is not relevant for that security. In addition, fair value
hedge accounting effectively alters the traditional income recognition pattern for that debt
security by accelerating gains and losses on the security during the term of the hedge into
earnings, with subsequent amortization of the related premium or discount over the period until
maturity. That accounting changes the measurement attribute of the security away from
amortized historical cost. The Board also notes that the rollover of a shorter term liability that
funds a held-to-maturity security may be eligible for hedge accounting. The Board therefore
Page 163
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
decided to prohibit both a fixed-rate held-to-maturity debt security from being designated as a
hedged item in a fair value hedge and the variable interest receipts on a variable-rate
held-to-maturity security from being designated as hedged forecasted transactions in a cash flow
hedge if the risk being hedged includes changes in market interest rates.
429. The Board does not consider it inconsistent to prohibit hedge accounting for a hedge of
market interest rate risk in a held-to-maturity debt security while permitting it for hedges of other
items that an entity may be holding to maturity. Only held-to-maturity debt securities receive
special accounting (that is, being measured at amortized cost when they otherwise would be
required to be measured at fair value) as a result of an asserted intent to hold them to maturity.
430. The Board modified the Exposure Draft to permit hedge accounting for hedges of credit
risk on held-to-maturity debt securities. It decided that hedging the credit risk of a
held-to-maturity debt security is not inconsistent with Statement 115 because that Statement
allows a sale or transfer of a held-to-maturity debt security in response to a significant
deterioration in credit quality.
431. Some respondents to the Task Force Draft said that a hedge of the prepayment risk in a
held-to-maturity debt security should be permitted because it does not contradict the entity's
stated intention to hold the instrument to maturity. The Board agreed that in designating a
security as held-to-maturity, an entity declares its intention not to voluntarily sell the security as
a result of changes in market interest rates, and "selling" a security in response to the exercise of
a call option is not a voluntary sale. Accordingly, the Board decided to permit designating the
embedded written prepayment option in a held-to-maturity security as the hedged item.
Although prepayment risk is a subcomponent of market interest rate risk, the Board notes that
prepayments, especially of mortgages, occur for reasons other than changes in interest rates. The
Board therefore does not consider it inconsistent to permit hedging of prepayment risk but not
interest rate risk in a held-to-maturity security.
Additional Qualifying Criteria for Fair Value Hedges
Specific Identification
432. This Statement requires specific identification of the hedged item. The hedged item must
be (a) an entire recognized asset or liability, or an unrecognized firm commitment, (b) a portfolio
of similar assets or similar liabilities, or (c) a specific portion of a recognized asset or liability,
unrecognized firm commitment, or portfolio of similar items. If an entity hedges a specified
portion of a portfolio of similar assets or similar liabilities, that portion should relate to every
item in the portfolio. If an entity wishes to hedge only certain similar items in a portfolio, it
should first identify a smaller portfolio of only the items to be hedged.
433. The Exposure Draft would not have permitted designation of a portion of an asset or a
Page 164
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
liability as a hedged item. Under the Exposure Draft, those items could only have been hedged
in their entirety or on a percentage basis. Some respondents to the Exposure Draft objected to
that limitation because it precluded identification of only selected contractual cash flows as the
item being hedged (referred to as partial-term hedging for a debt security). For example, it
would have prohibited identification of the interest payments for the first two years of a
four-year fixed-rate debt instrument as the hedged item and, therefore, would have precluded
hedge accounting for a hedge of that debt with a two-year interest rate swap.
434. The Board was reluctant to permit identification of a selected portion (rather than
proportion) of an asset or liability as the hedged item because it believes that, in many cases,
partial-term hedge transactions would fail to meet the offset requirement. For example, the
changes in the fair value of a two-year interest rate swap cannot be expected to offset the
changes in fair value attributable to changes in market interest rates of a four-year fixed-rate debt
instrument. For offset to be expected, a principal repayment on the debt (equal to the notional
amount on the swap) would need to be expected at the end of year two. The Board decided to
remove the prohibition against partial-term hedging and other designations of a portion of an
asset or liability to be consistent with the modification to the Exposure Draft to require an entity
to define how the expectation of offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows would be assessed.
However, removal of that criterion does not necessarily result in qualification for hedge
accounting for partial-term or other hedges of part of an asset or a liability.
435. The criterion in paragraph 21(a) that permits a hedged item in a fair value hedge to be a
designated portion of an asset or liability (or a portfolio of similar assets or similar liabilities)
makes the following eligible for designation as a hedged item:
a. A percentage of the entire asset or liability (or of the entire portfolio)
b. One or more selected contractual cash flows (such as the asset or liability representing the
interest payments in the first two years of a four-year debt instrument) 32
c. A put option, a call option, an interest rate cap, or an interest rate floor embedded in an
existing asset or liability that is not an embedded derivative accounted for separately under
this Statement
d. The residual value in a lessor's net investment in a direct-financing or sales-type lease.
If the entire asset or liability is a variable-rate instrument, the hedged item cannot be a
fixed-to-variable interest rate swap (or similar instrument) perceived to be embedded in a
fixed-rate host contract. The Board does not intend for an entity to be able to use the provision
that a hedged item may be a portion of an asset or liability to justify hedging a contractual
provision that creates variability in future cash flows as a fair value hedge rather than as a cash
flow hedge. In addition, all other criteria, including the criterion that requires a hedge to be
expected to be highly effective at achieving offset, must still be met for items such as the above
to be designated and to qualify for hedge accounting.
436. As discussed in paragraphs 414 and 415, in designating a hedge of a component of an asset
Page 165
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
or liability, an entity must consider the effect of any derivatives embedded in that asset or
liability related to the same risk class. To disregard the effects of an embedded derivative related
to the same risk class could result in a designated hedge that is not effective at achieving
offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows. The same unacceptable result would occur if a
freestanding derivative that was accounted for as hedging a particular item was ignored in
considering whether another derivative would qualify as a hedge of the same risk in that item.
Recognized Asset or Liability or Unrecognized Firm Commitment
437. This Statement requires that the item designated as hedged in a fair value hedge be a
recognized asset or liability or an unrecognized firm commitment. The Board decided that an
unrecognized asset or liability that does not embody a firm commitment should not be eligible
for designation as a hedged item because applying fair value hedge accounting to such an
unrecognized asset or liability would result in recognizing a portion of it. For example, fair
value hedge accounting for an unrecognized intangible asset, such as an internally generated core
deposit intangible, would have the effect of recognizing the change in the present value of the
intangible asset. The Board believes a change to require or permit recognition of certain
intangible assets or potential liabilities that are not now recognized should be made only after
careful consideration of the related conceptual and practical issues rather than being a by-product
of hedge accounting.
438. This Statement permits an unrecognized firm commitment, including one that is embodied
in an unrecognized asset or liability such as an operating lease with substantial cancellation
penalties, to be designated as the hedged item in a fair value hedge. The Board recognizes that
permitting certain such firm commitments to be designated as hedged items may be viewed as
inconsistent with not permitting other unrecognized assets and liabilities to be hedged items.
The Board considered limiting the firm commitments that can be hedged items, for example, to
those for which there is no explicit authoritative accounting requirement that precludes
recognition of the related asset or liability. However, the Board was unable to identify a specific
limitation that would be both workable and equitable. Moreover, the Board notes that a firm
commitment as defined in this Statement must have a fixed price and a disincentive for
nonperformance sufficiently large to make performance probable (discussed further in
paragraphs 440 and 441), which makes hedging a firm commitment less problematic than
hedging an unrecognized item such as an internally generated intangible asset. Accordingly,
with the limited exceptions discussed in paragraphs 455 and 456, the Board decided to permit all
firm commitments as defined in this Statement to qualify as hedged items in fair value hedges.
439. This Statement requires that hedge accounting adjustments to the carrying amount of
hedged assets and liabilities be subsequently reported in earnings in the same manner as other
adjustments of the carrying amount of the hedged item. For example, gains and losses on an
interest-bearing debt instrument that are attributable to interest rate risk generally would be
amortized over the life of the instrument as a yield adjustment. For some unrecognized firm
commitments, such as a firm commitment to purchase inventory, the nature of the hedged item
Page 166
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
will clearly specify a basis for recognizing hedge accounting adjustments in income. For others,
such as the operating lease discussed in paragraph 438, there will be no obvious pattern of
income recognition for hedge accounting adjustments. This Statement requires that an entity
specify as part of its initial hedge designation how hedge accounting adjustments will be
subsequently recognized in income. The Board believes that such designation at inception of a
hedge is consistent with other provisions in this Statement that prohibit retroactive decisions
after the results of a hedge are known.
Definition of a Firm Commitment
440. Because this Statement provides fair value hedge accounting for hedges of unrecognized
firm commitments, a definition of firm commitment is necessary. For purposes of this Statement,
a firm commitment is defined as:
An agreement with an unrelated party, binding on both parties and usually
legally enforceable, with the following characteristics:
a. The agreement specifies all significant terms, including the quantity to be exchanged, the
fixed price, and the timing of the transaction. The fixed price may be expressed as a
specified amount of an entity's functional currency or of a foreign currency. It also may be
expressed as a specified interest rate or specified effective yield.
b. The agreement includes a disincentive for nonperformance that is sufficiently large to make
performance probable.
That definition is based on the definition of a firm commitment in Statements 52 and 80.
441. Some respondents to the Exposure Draft focused more on the "probability" aspect of the
definition than on the requirements that the agreement be binding on both parties and that it
specify the significant terms of the transaction, including the price. For example, some
respondents wanted to treat as a firm commitment for hedge accounting purposes a group of
contracts that are binding on one party but not on the other. They said that if the entity is a party
to a sufficient number of those contracts, sufficient evidence would be available to permit a
reasonable estimate of the number of transactions that would be consummated under the
agreements. The Board notes that an agreement that is binding on one party but not on the other
is an option rather than a firm commitment. In developing hedge accounting requirements, the
Board believes that the fundamental nature of a financial instrument should not be ignored.
442. The definition of a firm commitment in this Statement requires that the fixed price be
specified in terms of a currency (or an interest rate) rather than an index or in terms of the price
or a number of units of an asset other than a currency, such as ounces of gold. A price that
varies with the market price of the item that is the subject of the firm commitment cannot qualify
as a "fixed" price. For example, a price that is specified in terms of ounces of gold would not be
a fixed price if the market price of the item to be purchased or sold under the firm commitment
varied with the price of gold. To avoid such a situation, the Board decided that it was necessary
Page 167
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
to require that the fixed price in a firm commitment be specified in terms of a currency or a rate.
A similar situation can exist for a firm commitment that is denominated in a foreign currency if
the price of the item to be purchased or sold varies with changes in exchange rates. The Board
accepted that possibility because it had been accepted under Statement 52, and it did not want to
undertake a complete reconsideration of the hedging provisions of that Statement at this time.
Therefore, the price may be specified in any currency—it need not be in the entity's functional
currency.
Single Asset or Liability or a Portfolio of Similar Assets or Similar Liabilities
443. This Statement retains the provision from the Exposure Draft that prohibits a portfolio of
dissimilar items from being designated as a hedged item. Many respondents said that hedge
accounting should be extended to hedges of portfolios of dissimilar items (often called macro
hedges) because macro hedging is an effective and efficient way to manage risk. To qualify for
designation as a hedged item on an aggregate rather than individual basis, the Exposure Draft
would have required that individual items in a portfolio of similar assets or liabilities be expected
to respond to changes in a market variable in an equivalent way. The Exposure Draft also
included a list of specific characteristics to be considered in determining whether items were
sufficiently similar to qualify for hedging as a portfolio. Respondents said that, taken together,
the list of characteristics and the "equivalent way" requirement would have meant that individual
items could qualify as "similar" only if they were virtually identical.
444. To deal with the concerns of respondents, the Board modified the Exposure Draft in two
ways. First, the Board deleted the requirement that the value of all items in a portfolio respond
in an equivalent way to changes in a market variable. Instead, this Statement requires that the
items in a portfolio share the risk exposure for which they are designated as being hedged and
that the fair values of individual items attributable to the hedged risk be expected to respond
proportionately to the total change in fair value of the hedged portfolio. The Board intends
proportionately to be interpreted strictly, but the term does not mean identically. For example, a
group of assets would not be considered to respond proportionately to a change in interest rates if
a 100-basis-point increase in interest rates is expected to result in percentage decreases in the fair
values of the individual items ranging from 7 percent to 13 percent. However, percentage
decreases within a range of 9 percent to 11 percent could be considered proportionate if that
change in interest rates reduced the fair value of the portfolio by 10 percent.
445. The second way in which the Board modified the Exposure Draft was to delete the
requirement to consider all specified risk characteristics of the items in a portfolio. The Board
considered completely deleting the list of risk characteristics included in the Exposure Draft, and
the Task Force Draft did not include that list. However, respondents to that draft asked for
additional guidance on how to determine whether individual assets or liabilities qualify as
"similar." In response to those requests, the Board decided to reinstate the list of characteristics
from the Exposure Draft. The Board intends the list to be only an indication of factors that an
entity may find helpful.
Page 168
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
446. Those two changes are consistent with other changes to the Exposure Draft to focus on the
risk being hedged and to rely on management to define how effectiveness will be assessed. It is
the responsibility of management to appropriately assess the similarity of hedged items and to
determine whether the derivative and a group of hedged items will be highly effective at
achieving offset. Those changes to the Exposure Draft do not, however, permit aggregation of
dissimilar items. Although the Board recognizes that certain entities are increasingly disposed
toward managing specific risks within portfolios of assets and liabilities, it decided to retain the
prohibition of hedge accounting for a hedge of a portfolio of dissimilar items for the reasons
discussed in the following paragraphs.
447. Hedge accounting adjustments that result from application of this Statement must be
allocated to individual items in a hedged portfolio to determine the carrying amount of an
individual item in various circumstances, including (a) upon sale or settlement of the item (to
compute the gain or loss), (b) upon discontinuance of a hedging relationship (to determine the
new carrying amount that will be the basis for subsequent accounting), and (c) when other
generally accepted accounting principles require assessing that item for impairment. The Board
decided that a hedge accounting approach that adjusts the basis of the hedged item could not
accommodate a portfolio of dissimilar items (macro hedging) because of the difficulties of
allocating hedge accounting adjustments to dissimilar hedged items. It would be difficult, if not
impossible, to allocate derivative gains and losses to a group of items if their values respond
differently (both in direction and in amount) to a change in the risk being hedged, such as market
interest rate risk. For example, some components of a portfolio of dissimilar items may increase
in value while other components decrease in value as a result of a given price change. Those
allocation difficulties are exacerbated if the items to be hedged represent different exposures,
that is, a fair value risk and a cash flow risk, because a single exposure to risk must be chosen to
provide a basis on which to allocate a net amount to multiple hedged items.
448. The Board considered alternative approaches that would require amortizing the hedge
accounting adjustments to earnings based on the average holding period, average maturity or
duration of the items in the hedged portfolio, or in some other manner that would not allocate
adjustments to the individual items in the hedged portfolio. The Board rejected those approaches
because determining the carrying amount for an individual item when it is (a) impaired or (b)
sold, settled, or otherwise removed from the hedged portfolio would ignore its related hedge
accounting adjustment, if any. Additionally, it was not clear how those approaches would work
for certain portfolios, such as a portfolio of equity securities.
449. Advocates of macro hedging generally believe that it is a more effective and efficient way
of managing an entity's risk than hedging on an individual-item basis. Macro hedging seems to
imply a notion of entity-wide risk reduction. The Board also believes that permitting hedge
accounting for a portfolio of dissimilar items would be appropriate only if risk were required to
be assessed on an entity-wide basis. As discussed in paragraph 357, the Board decided not to
include entity-wide risk reduction as a criterion for hedge accounting.
Page 169
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
450. Although this Statement does not accommodate designating a portfolio of dissimilar items
as a hedged item, the Board believes that its requirements are consistent with (a) the hedge
accounting guidance that was in Statements 52 and 80, (b) what the Board generally understands
to have been current practice in accounting for hedges not addressed by those Statements, and (c)
what has been required by the SEC staff. The Board's ultimate goal of requiring that all financial
instruments be measured at fair value when the conceptual and measurement issues are resolved
would better accommodate risk management for those items on a portfolio basis. Measuring all
financial instruments at fair value with all gains or losses recognized in earnings would, without
accounting complexity, faithfully represent the results of operations of entities using
sophisticated risk management techniques for hedging on a portfolio basis.
Items the Exposure Draft Prohibited from Designation as Hedged Items in Fair Value Hedges
451. The Exposure Draft proposed to prohibit the following from being designated as a hedged
item in a fair value hedge:
a. Oil or gas that has not yet been produced, unmined mineral ore, an agricultural product in
process of growing, and similar items
b. An intangible asset
c. An investment accounted for by the equity method
d. Mortgage servicing rights not recognized as assets in accordance with FASB Statement No.
122, Accounting for Mortgage Servicing Rights
e. A lease, as defined in FASB Statement No. 13, Accounting for Leases
f. A liability for insurance contracts written, as defined and discussed in FASB Statements No.
60, Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises, No. 97, Accounting and Reporting
by Insurance Enterprises for Certain Long-Duration Contracts and for Realized Gains and
Losses from the Sale of Investments, and No. 113, Accounting and Reporting for
Reinsurance of Short-Duration and Long-Duration Contracts, except for a financial
guarantee.
The Board proposed those exclusions, in part, because of concerns about the reliability of
available measures of fair values for those items. However, this Statement focuses on changes in
the fair value of a hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged, rather than the entire change
in the fair value of a hedged item. That shift in focus somewhat mitigated the Board's concerns
about determining changes in fair value for those hedged items. The Board agrees with
respondents to the Exposure Draft that eligibility for designation as a hedged item should rely on
the fair value hedge criteria. Consequently, the Board decided to remove the prohibitions
proposed in the Exposure Draft, some of which are discussed further in the following
paragraphs. The Board notes, however, that some intangible assets would fail to qualify for
hedge accounting because they are neither recognized assets nor firm commitments and would
not meet the criterion that requires that the hedged item embody an exposure that could affect
reported earnings.
Page 170
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Oil or Gas That Has Not Been Produced and Similar Items
452. The Board decided to permit designating as a hedged item in a fair value hedge oil or gas
that has not been produced, unmined mineral ore, agricultural products in process of growing,
and similar items. In reconsidering whether to specifically prohibit such items from hedge
accounting, the Board addressed issues such as (a) whether the costs capitalized to extract,
harvest, or mine those items would qualify as a "recognized" asset (one of the criteria for a fair
value hedge), (b) whether the amounts recognized for those items bear a close relationship to
their fair values, and (c) whether the offset test could ever be met because, for example,
extracting and otherwise turning unproduced oil or gas into a salable product would require
significant costs. The unproduced oil or gas thus is a different asset from the product upon
which a forward sales contract would be based. The Board also considered limiting qualification
as a "recognized asset or liability" to those assets and liabilities whose initial recorded amounts
represent their fair value at acquisition or incurrence.
453. The Board ultimately decided that hedge accounting qualification for oil or gas that has not
been produced, unmined mineral ore, agricultural products in process of growing, and similar
items should be consistent—that is, all of them should be either eligible or ineligible for
designation as a hedged item. It decided that such items should be eligible for designation,
subject to the other criteria for hedge accounting. However, the Board has significant
reservations about how the fair value of such items would be determined and how the
effectiveness of a fair value hedge of such items would be assessed. It notes that oil or gas that
has not yet been produced, unmined mineral ore, agricultural products in the process of growing,
and similar items are not final, salable products. Consequently, a derivative based on a final,
salable product has a different basis than the hedged item and may not be highly effective at
providing offsetting changes in fair value. It would be more likely that such a derivative would
be highly effective at providing offsetting cash flows for the forecasted sale of a product made
from oil in the ground, for example. Section 2 of Appendix A provides additional discussion and
examples on assessing offset for agricultural products in the process of growing and similar
items.
Leases
454. In developing the Exposure Draft, the Board had concerns about the consistency of
permitting fair value hedge accounting of a specific risk inherent in a lessor's net investment in a
direct financing, sales-type, or leveraged lease (for example, the interest rate risk associated with
the minimum lease payments but not the unguaranteed residual value). Under Statement 13, the
unguaranteed residual value is viewed simply as a final payment on which income is earned
during the lease term. The Board ultimately decided to make all recognized assets and liabilities
and unrecognized firm commitments related to leases eligible for designation as hedged items in
fair value hedges because it believes that the modification to the Exposure Draft to permit
designation of a portion of an item as being hedged would enable a lessor to split out the residual
value from its net investment in identifying the hedged item. However, an entity may not
designate an operating lease that does not qualify under this Statement's definition of a firm
Page 171
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
commitment as a hedged item in a fair value hedge because a hedged item must be either a
recognized asset or liability or a firm commitment as defined in this Statement.
Investment Accounted for by the Equity Method
455. The Board decided to retain the prohibition in the Exposure Draft from designating an
investment accounted for by the equity method as a hedged item to avoid conflicts with the
existing accounting requirements for that item. Providing fair value hedge accounting for an
equity method investment conflicts with the notion underlying APB Opinion No. 18, The Equity
Method of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock. Opinion 18 requires an investor in
common stock and corporate joint ventures to apply the equity method of accounting when the
investor has the ability to exercise significant influence over the operating and financial policies
of the investee. Under the equity method of accounting, the investor generally records its share
of the investee's earnings or losses from its investment. It does not account for changes in the
price of the common stock, which would become part of the basis of an equity method
investment under fair value hedge accounting. Changes in the earnings of an equity method
investee presumably would affect the fair value of its common stock. Applying fair value hedge
accounting to an equity method investment thus could result in some amount of double counting
of the investor's share of the investee's earnings. The Board believes that result would be
inappropriate. In addition to those conceptual issues, the Board was concerned that it would be
difficult to develop a method of implementing fair value hedge accounting, including measuring
hedge ineffectiveness, for equity method investments and that the results of any method would
be difficult to understand. For similar reasons, this Statement also prohibits fair value hedge
accounting for an unrecognized firm commitment to acquire or dispose of an investment
accounted for by the equity method.
Other Exclusions
456. For reasons similar to those discussed above, the Board also decided to specifically
prohibit designation of (a) a minority interest in one or more consolidated subsidiaries and (b) an
equity investment in a consolidated subsidiary as the hedged item in a fair value hedge. Those
assets do not qualify for designation as a hedged item in a fair value hedge, and a forecasted
transaction to acquire or sell them does not qualify as a hedged transaction in a cash flow hedge.
Thus, a firm commitment to acquire or sell one of them also does not qualify as a hedged item in
a fair value hedge. For the same reason, a firm commitment to enter into a business combination
does not qualify as a hedged item in a fair value hedge.
457. This Statement also specifically prohibits an equity instrument classified by an entity in its
stockholders' equity in the statement of financial position from being designated as a hedged
item. That prohibition is consistent with the requirements that (a) a hedged item be a recognized
asset or liability and (b) the hedged item present an exposure to changes in fair value that could
affect reported earnings. That prohibition does not, of course, apply to the holder of an equity
instrument. Paragraph 286 discusses the application of this Statement to obligations (or rights)
that may be settled in an entity's own stock but that are indexed to something other than that
Page 172
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
stock.
Additional Qualifying Criteria for Cash Flow Hedges
Specific Identification
458. To qualify for cash flow hedge accounting, this Statement requires that an entity
specifically identify the forecasted transaction that gives rise to the cash flow exposure. That
information is necessary to (a) assess the likelihood that the transaction will occur, (b) determine
if the cumulative cash flows of the designated derivative are expected to be highly effective at
offsetting the change in expected cash flow of the forecasted transaction attributable to the risk
being hedged, and (c) assess the hedge's effectiveness on an ongoing basis. The expected market
price of the transaction, both at inception of the hedge and subsequently, is necessary
information to determine the change in expected cash flows. Because the circumstances of each
entity and transaction are different, the information needed to assess the expected offset may
vary.
Single Transaction or Group of Individual Transactions
459. The Exposure Draft would have required that an entity be able to predict the date on which
a forecasted transaction will occur for it to qualify for cash flow hedge accounting. The
Exposure Draft also would have required the gain or loss on a derivative that hedges a forecasted
transaction to be reclassified into earnings on the date that the forecasted transaction was
expected to occur. This Statement instead requires the gain or loss on a hedge of a forecasted
transaction to be reclassified into earnings in the same period(s) that the hedged transaction
affects earnings. That change makes it less important for an entity to be able to predict the exact
date on which a hedged forecasted transaction will occur. The Board decided to require an entity
to identify the hedged forecasted transaction with sufficient specificity to make it clear whether
a particular transaction is a hedged transaction when it occurs. An entity should not be able to
choose when to reclassify into earnings a gain or loss on a hedging instrument in accumulated
other comprehensive income after the gain or loss has occurred by asserting that the instrument
hedges a transaction that has or has not yet occurred. However, the Board does not consider it
necessary to require that an entity be able to specify at the time of entering into a hedge the date
on which the hedged forecasted transaction will occur to prevent such after-the-fact designation.
460. The following example illustrates the requirement for specific identification of the hedged
transaction. Company A determines with a high degree of probability that it will issue
$5,000,000 of fixed-rate bonds with a 5-year maturity sometime during the next 6 months, but it
cannot predict exactly when the debt issuance will occur. That situation might occur, for
example, if the funds from the debt issuance are needed to finance a major project to which
Company A is already committed but the precise timing of which has not yet been determined.
To qualify for cash flow hedge accounting, Company A might identify the hedged forecasted
transaction as, for example, the first issuance of five-year, fixed-rate bonds that occurs during the
Page 173
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
next six months.
461. The Board understands that it sometimes will be impractical (perhaps impossible) and not
cost-effective for an entity to identify each individual transaction that is being hedged. An
example is a group of sales or purchases over a period of time to or from one or more parties.
The Board decided that an entity should be permitted to aggregate individual forecasted
transactions for hedging purposes in some circumstances. As for a hedge of a single forecasted
transaction, an entity must identify the hedged transactions with sufficient specificity that it is
possible to determine which transactions are hedged transactions when they occur. For example,
an entity that expects to sell at least 300,000 units of a particular product in its next fiscal quarter
might designate the sales of the first 300,000 units as the hedged transactions. Alternatively, it
might designate the first 100,000 sales in each month as the hedged transactions. It could not,
however, simply designate any sales of 300,000 units during the quarter as the hedged
transaction because it then would be impossible to determine whether the first sales transaction
of the quarter was a hedged transaction. Similarly, an entity could not designate the last 300,000
sales of the quarter as the hedged transaction because it would not be possible to determine
whether sales early in the quarter were hedged or not.
462. To qualify for hedging as a group rather than individually, the aggregated transactions must
share the risk exposure for which they are being hedged. If a forecasted transaction does not
share the risk exposure for which the group of items is being hedged, it should not be part of the
group being hedged. The Board considers that requirement to be necessary to ensure that a
single derivative will be effective as a hedge of the aggregated transactions. To illustrate, under
the guidance in this Statement, a single derivative of appropriate size could be designated as
hedging a given amount of aggregated forecasted transactions such as the following:
a. Forecasted sales of a particular product to numerous customers within a specified time
period, such as a month, a quarter, or a year
b. Forecasted purchases of a particular product from the same or different vendors at different
dates within a specified time period
c. Forecasted interest payments on several variable-rate debt instruments within a specified
time period.
However, the transactions in each group must share the risk exposure for which they are being
hedged. For example, the interest payments in group (c) above must vary with the same index to
qualify for hedging with a single derivative. In addition, a forecasted purchase and a forecasted
sale cannot both be included in the same group of individual transactions. Although they may be
based on the same underlying, they have opposite exposures.
Probability of a Forecasted Transaction
463. The Board concluded that, similar to Statement 80, changes in the fair value of a derivative
should be excluded from current earnings only if the related forecasted transaction is probable.
An assessment of the likelihood that a forecasted transaction will take place should not be based
Page 174
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
solely on management's intent because intent is not verifiable. The transaction's probability
should be supported by observable facts and the attendant circumstances. Consideration should
be given to the following circumstances in assessing the likelihood that a transaction will occur.
a. The frequency of similar past transactions
b. The financial and operational ability of the entity to carry out the transaction
c. Substantial commitments of resources to a particular activity (for example, a manufacturing
facility that can be used in the short run only to process a particular type of commodity)
d. The extent of loss or disruption of operations that could result if the transaction does not
occur
e. The likelihood that transactions with substantially different characteristics might be used to
achieve the same business purpose (for example, an entity that intends to raise cash may
have several ways of doing so, ranging from a short-term bank loan to a common stock
offering).
464. The term probable is used in this Statement consistent with its use in paragraph 3 of FASB
Statement No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies, which defines probable as an area within a
range of the likelihood that a future event or events will occur confirming the fact of the loss.
That range is from probable to remote, as follows:
Probable. The future event or events are likely to occur.
Reasonably possible. The chance of the future event or events occurring is more
than remote but
less than likely.
Remote. The chance of the future event or events occurring is slight.
The term probable requires a significantly greater likelihood of occurrence than the phrase more
likely than not.
465. In addition, the Board believes that both the length of time until a forecasted transaction is
projected to occur and the quantity of the forecasted transaction are considerations in
determining probability. Other factors being equal, the more distant a forecasted transaction is,
the less likely it is that the transaction would be considered probable and the stronger the
evidence that would be needed to support an assertion that it is probable. For example, a
transaction forecasted to occur in five years may be less likely than a transaction forecasted to
occur in one year. However, forecasted interest payments for the next 20 years on variable-rate
debt typically would be probable if supported by an existing contract. Additionally, other factors
being equal, the greater the physical quantity or future value of a forecasted transaction, the less
likely it is that the transaction would be considered probable and the stronger the evidence that
would be required to support an assertion that it is probable. For example, less evidence
generally would be needed to support forecasted sales of 100,000 units in a particular month than
would be needed to support forecasted sales of 950,000 units in that month by an entity, even if
its sales have averaged 950,000 units per month for the past 3 months.
Page 175
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Contractual Maturity
466. When an entity enters into a hedge that uses a derivative with a maturity that extends
approximately to the date the forecasted transaction is expected to occur, the derivative "locks
in" a price or rate for the entire term of the hedge, provided that the hedging instrument is held to
its maturity. Consistent with that view, the Exposure Draft proposed that, to qualify for hedge
accounting, the contractual maturity or repricing date of the derivative must be on or about the
same date as the projected date of the hedged forecasted transaction.
467. Respondents to the Exposure Draft objected to that requirement because it would have
precluded rollover strategies and hedges of a portion of the term of a forecasted transaction from
qualifying for hedge accounting. A rollover strategy involves establishing over time a series of
short-term futures, options, or both in consecutive contract months to hedge a forecasted
transaction. In a rollover strategy, the complete series of derivatives is not acquired at the
inception of the hedge; rather, short-term derivatives are initially acquired as part of a plan to
replace maturing derivatives with successive new short-term hedging derivatives. The Exposure
Draft explained the Board's belief that, even though an entity may ultimately achieve the same or
similar result with a series of short-term contracts, a single short-term derivative by itself does
not lock in a price or rate for the period until the forecasted transaction is expected to occur.
468. The Board decided to remove the maturity criterion and thus to permit hedge accounting
for rollover strategies. Respondents asserted that those strategies are a common, cost-effective,
risk management practice that may achieve results similar to the results of using a single
long-term derivative as the hedging instrument. Although the Board notes that a rollover
strategy or other hedge using a derivative that does not extend to the transaction date does not
necessarily "fix" the price of a forecasted transaction, it decided to accede to respondents'
requests to permit hedge accounting for rollover strategies. The Board also decided that
removing the maturity criterion was acceptable because it makes the qualifying requirements for
fair value and cash flow hedge accounting more consistent. Prohibiting hedges of a portion of a
forecasted transaction term from qualifying for cash flow hedge accounting would have been
inconsistent with permitting fair value hedge accounting for hedges of a portion of the life of a
hedged asset or liability.
Transaction with External Third Party
469. The Exposure Draft proposed that, to qualify for hedge accounting, a hedged forecasted
exposure must be a transaction, which Concepts Statement 6 defines as an external event
involving transfer of something of value (future economic benefit) between two (or more)
entities. That definition was intended to clearly distinguish a transaction from an internal cost
allocation or an event that happens within an entity. The Exposure Draft explained that the
Board considers hedge accounting to be appropriate only when there is a hedgeable risk arising
from a transaction with an external party. Accounting allocations and intercompany
transactions, in and of themselves, do not give rise to economic exposure.
Page 176
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
470. A number of respondents to the Exposure Draft objected to the requirement that a
hedgeable transaction be with an external party because it prohibited an intercompany
transaction, including one denominated in a foreign currency, from being designated as a
forecasted transaction and afforded hedge accounting.
471. Although the requirements of this Statement are not described in terms of the Concepts
Statement 6 definition of a transaction, the requirements for hedges of other than foreign
currency risk are the same as in the Exposure Draft. As discussed in paragraphs 482–487, the
Board decided to accommodate cash flow hedges of the foreign currency risk in forecasted
intercompany foreign currency transactions. However, for other than foreign currency hedges,
this Statement requires that a forecasted transaction be with a party external to the reporting
entity to qualify as a hedged transaction, which is consistent with the Exposure Draft. Therefore,
depreciation expense, cost of sales, and similar internal accounting allocations do not qualify as
hedgeable forecasted transactions. Forecasted transactions between members of a consolidated
entity, except for intercompany transactions denominated in a foreign currency, are not
hedgeable transactions except for purposes of separate stand-alone subsidiary financial
statements. Thus, a consolidated entity cannot apply hedge accounting to forecasted
intercompany transactions, unless the risk being hedged is a foreign currency exposure. A
subsidiary could, however, apply hedge accounting to a hedge of a forecasted intercompany
transaction in its separate, stand-alone financial statements because those transactions are with a
party "external to" the reporting entity in those stand-alone statements.
Forecasted Transactions Prohibited from Designation as the Hedged Item in a Cash Flow Hedge
72. This Statement prohibits cash flow hedge accounting for forecasted transactions involving
(a) an entity's interests in consolidated subsidiaries, (b) minority interests in consolidated
subsidiaries, (c) investments accounted for by the equity method, or (d) an entity's own equity
instruments classified in stockholders' equity. The reasons for those prohibitions are similar to
those for prohibiting the same items from being hedged items in fair value hedges, as discussed
in paragraphs 455–457. In addition, the Board noted that implementing cash flow hedge
accounting for those items could present significant practical and conceptual problems, such as
determining when to transfer to earnings amounts accumulated in other comprehensive income.
Finally, certain of those items, such as issuances and repurchases of an entity's own equity
instruments, would not qualify for hedge accounting because they do not present a cash flow risk
that could affect earnings.
473. Prohibiting the forecasted purchase of a consolidated subsidiary from being the hedged
item in a cash flow hedge effectively prohibits cash flow hedge accounting for a forecasted
business combination to be accounted for as a purchase, and paragraph 29(f) of this Statement
makes that prohibition explicit. The Board noted that the current accounting for a business
combination is based on considering the combination as a discrete event at the consummation
date. Applying cash flow hedge accounting to a forecasted business combination would be
Page 177
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
inconsistent with that current accounting. It also would be, at best, difficult to determine when
to reclassify the gain or loss on the hedging derivative to earnings.
Foreign Currency Hedges
474. The Board's objectives in providing hedge accounting for hedges of foreign currency
exposures are the following:
a. To continue to permit hedge accounting for the types of hedged items and hedging
instruments that were permitted hedge accounting under Statement 52
b. To increase the consistency of hedge accounting guidance for foreign currency hedges and
other types of hedges by broadening the scope of foreign currency hedges that are eligible
for hedge accounting, as necessary.
Carried Forward from Statement 52
475. Because the scope of this project did not include a comprehensive reconsideration of
accounting for foreign currency translation, this Statement makes two exceptions to retain
certain provisions of Statement 52. The Board decided to make those exceptions to the hedge
accounting requirements in this Statement because of the accounting anomalies that otherwise
would be created by this Statement and the existing guidance in Statement 52.
476. Although the Board decided not to extend hedge accounting to nonderivative instruments
used as hedging instruments, as discussed in paragraphs 246 and 247, it decided to permit an
entity to designate a nonderivative financial instrument denominated in a foreign currency as a
hedge of a firm commitment. It did so for practical reasons. The Board understands that such
hedges are extensively used in practice, and it does not think constituents would understand why
that practice should be prohibited now, given the acceptance of it in Statement 52.
477. This Statement also makes an exception to permit an entity to designate a financial
instrument denominated in a foreign currency (derivative or nonderivative) as a hedge of the
foreign currency exposure of a net investment in a foreign operation. Net investment hedges are
subject only to the criteria in paragraph 20 of Statement 52. The net investment in a foreign
operation can be viewed as a portfolio of dissimilar assets and liabilities that would not meet the
criterion in this Statement that the hedged item be a single item or a group of similar items.
Alternatively, it can be viewed as part of the fair value of the parent's investment account. Under
either view, without a specific exception, the net investment in a foreign operation would not
qualify for hedging under this Statement. The Board decided, however, that it was acceptable to
retain the current provisions of Statement 52 in that area. The Board also notes that, unlike other
hedges of portfolios of dissimilar items, hedge accounting for the net investment in a foreign
operation has been explicitly permitted by the authoritative literature.
478. The Exposure Draft would have retained the approach required by paragraph 20 of
Page 178
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Statement 52 for measuring the effective portion of a foreign currency forward contract that is
designated as a hedge of the net investment in a foreign operation. The resulting difference
between the effective portion and the change in fair value of the hedging derivative would have
been reported currently in earnings. The approach in Statement 52 was appropriate given how
forward contracts were measured under that Statement. Unlike Statement 52, this Statement
requires that forward contracts be measured at fair value, which incorporates discounting future
cash flows. Accordingly, the Exposure Draft's requirements would have always produced an
amount to be recognized in earnings that would have been of opposite sign to the effective
portion recognized in the cumulative translation adjustment component of other comprehensive
income. That amount could have been explained only in terms of the arithmetic process that
produced it. The Board therefore decided that the effective portion of a forward contract that is a
hedge of a net investment should be determined not by looking only to changes in spot rates but
should include the effects of discounting in the same way as for forward contracts used in other
foreign currency hedges.
Fair Value Hedges of Foreign Currency Risk in Available-for-Sale Securities
479. This Statement permits the portion of the change in value of foreign-currency-denominated
debt securities and certain foreign marketable equity securities classified as available-for-sale
that is attributable to foreign exchange risk to qualify for fair value hedge accounting. The
requirements of this Statement in that area are generally consistent with the provisions of EITF
Issues No. 96-15, "Accounting for the Effects of Changes in Foreign Currency Exchange Rates
on Foreign-Currency-Denominated Available-for-Sale Debt Securities," and No. 97-7,
"Accounting for Hedges of the Foreign Currency Risk Inherent in an Available-for-Sale
Marketable Equity Security." However, unlike those EITF Issues, this Statement does not
permit a nonderivative instrument to be used as the hedging instrument in a hedge of an
available-for-sale security.
480. Foreign available-for-sale debt securities give rise to hedgeable foreign exchange risk
because they embody cash flows denominated in a foreign currency. The cash flows embodied
in an investment in a marketable equity security, on the other hand, are not inherently
"denominated" in a particular currency. Therefore, both the EITF and the Board concluded that
a marketable equity security has hedgeable foreign exchange risk only if both of the following
criteria are met:
a. The marketable equity security (or an instrument that represents an interest in it, such as an
American Depository Receipt) is not traded on an exchange (or other established
marketplace) on which trades are denominated in the investor's functional currency.
b. The dividends or other cash flows to be received by the investor are all denominated in the
same foreign currency as the currency expected to be received upon sale of the security.
Regardless of the country in which the issuer of an equity security is domiciled, that security
presents no discernible foreign exchange risk to a holder who may trade the security for a price
denominated in its functional currency. For example, for an investor with a U.S. dollar
Page 179
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
functional currency, its foreign exchange risk related to the equity securities of a multinational
company domiciled in Italy that trade on a U.S. exchange is essentially the same as its foreign
exchange risk in the equity securities of a U.S. company with significant foreign operations in
Italy. In both situations, the investor's foreign exchange risk is indirect and not reliably
measurable. The operations of the issuer rather than the prices in which trades in its equity
securities are denominated are the source of the investor's foreign exchange risk.
Broadening of Statement 52
481. Unlike Statement 52, this Statement permits hedge accounting for hedges of forecasted
foreign currency transactions, including intercompany transactions. Because this Statement
permits hedge accounting for hedges of forecasted interest rate, credit, and market price
exposures, the Board considered it appropriate to include foreign currency exposures as well.
Forecasted intercompany foreign currency transactions are discussed in the following
paragraphs.
Forecasted Intercompany Foreign Currency Transactions
482. This Statement permits an entity to designate the foreign currency exposure of a forecasted
foreign-currency-denominated intercompany transaction as a hedged transaction in a cash flow
hedge. The Exposure Draft proposed that, in general, forecasted transactions between members
of a consolidated group would not qualify as hedgeable exposures in the consolidated financial
statements. However, if costs are incurred in one currency and the third-party revenues for
recovering those costs are generated in another currency, the Exposure Draft would have
permitted the entity that incurred the costs to designate the forecasted third-party revenues as a
hedged transaction. The Exposure Draft would have required a direct, substantive relationship
between the costs incurred and the recovery of those costs from the outside third party. For
example, the Exposure Draft would have permitted an English subsidiary that incurs
manufacturing costs in pounds sterling to hedge the ultimate sale of that product for French
francs by its affiliated French subsidiary to an unrelated third party. The Board proposed that
exception because it considered those transactions to be, in substance, direct foreign export sales.
483. A number of respondents said that the guidance provided in the Exposure Draft was unduly
restrictive because forecasted intercompany royalties and licensing fees, which are based on
third-party sales and remitted from foreign subsidiaries to a parent company, would not be
afforded cash flow hedge accounting. Respondents also took exception to the requirement that
there be a "direct, substantive relationship" between costs incurred and recovery of those costs.
484. The Board decided to remove the restrictions on hedge accounting for hedges of forecasted
intercompany foreign currency transactions because, pursuant to Statement 52 as amended by
this Statement, an intercompany transaction that is denominated in a currency other than the
entity's functional currency gives rise to a transaction gain or loss if exchange rates change. A
forecasted intercompany transaction that is expected to be denominated in a foreign currency can
be viewed as giving rise to the same kind of foreign currency risk. Therefore, pursuant to this
Page 180
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Statement, a forecasted intercompany transaction that presents an exposure to foreign currency
risk and that otherwise satisfies the criteria for a foreign currency cash flow hedge is eligible for
designation as a hedged transaction.
485. As with other hedges of forecasted transactions, amounts accumulated in other
comprehensive income for a forecasted foreign currency transaction are to be recognized in
earnings in the same period or periods that the hedged transaction affects earnings. Because an
intercompany dividend does not affect earnings, a forecasted intercompany dividend cannot
qualify as a hedgeable forecasted transaction. In essence, a hedge of a forecasted intercompany
dividend expected to be paid from future earnings is a hedge of those future earnings. This
Statement prohibits hedge accounting for hedges of future earnings.
486. The Board also made an exception for forecasted intercompany foreign currency
transactions because hedging foreign currency intercompany cash flows with foreign currency
options is a common practice among multinational companies—a practice that was permitted in
specified circumstances under EITF Issue No. 91-1, "Hedging Intercompany Foreign Currency
Risks." This Statement modifies Issue 91-1 to permit hedge accounting for intercompany
transactions using other derivatives, such as forward contracts, as the hedging instrument and
expands the situations in which hedge accounting may be applied because the Board believes the
accounting for all derivative instruments should be the same.
487. For a hedge of a forecasted foreign currency transaction to qualify for hedge accounting,
this Statement requires that the component of the entity that has the foreign currency exposure be
a party to the hedging transaction. That requirement is necessary because, under the functional
currency approach in Statement 52, all foreign currency exposures exist only in relation to an
entity's functional currency. Thus, for example, a U.S. parent company cannot directly hedge the
foreign currency risk in its French franc subsidiary's U.S.-dollar-denominated export sales
because the U.S. parent has no exposure to exchange risk for dollar-denominated sales.
However, one component of a consolidated entity, such as a central treasury operation, can
effectively take on another component's exchange risk by means of an intercompany transaction.
For example, the U.S. parent (or a centralized treasury operation with a U.S. dollar functional
currency) might enter into a forward contract to buy dollars from its French subsidiary in
exchange for francs. The French subsidiary could designate that intercompany forward contract
(in which the French subsidiary sells dollars for francs) as a hedge of its forecasted
U.S.-dollar-denominated sales. The U.S. parent then would enter into a sell dollars–buy francs
forward contract with an unaffiliated third party to offset its foreign exchange risk on the
intercompany forward contract. That third-party transaction is required for the previous
intercompany arrangement to qualify in the consolidated financial statements as a hedge of the
French subsidiary's forecasted dollar sales. (As noted in paragraph 471, a parent company is a
"third party" in a subsidiary's separate financial statements. Thus, the French subsidiary could
designate the intercompany derivative as a hedge of its U.S. dollar sales in its stand-alone
financial statements regardless of whether the parent has entered into an offsetting contract with
an outside party.)
Page 181
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Discontinuing Hedge Accounting
488. This Statement requires that an entity discontinue hedge accounting prospectively if the
qualifying criteria are no longer met; if a derivative expires or is sold, terminated, or exercised;
or if the entity removes the designation of the hedge. The Board believes hedge accounting is no
longer appropriate in those circumstances. This Statement also requires certain modifications to
hedge accounting for the interim reporting period in which a discontinuance occurs in
circumstances discussed below.
Discontinuing Fair Value Hedge Accounting
489. The Board is concerned that a fair value hedge that no longer qualifies as being highly
effective at achieving offsetting changes in fair value for the risk being hedged may continue to
receive hedge accounting simply because an entity fails to assess compliance with that
effectiveness criterion on a sufficiently frequent basis. If an entity determines at the end of a
period that a hedge is no longer effective, it is likely that it was also ineffective during a portion
of that period. To minimize the possibility of providing hedge accounting for hedges that do not
qualify as highly effective, the Board decided that fair value hedge accounting should not be
provided from the point at which the hedge ceased to qualify. It believes that an entity will be
able to determine the point at which a hedge became ineffective if it assesses compliance with
the effectiveness criterion at the inception of the hedge, on a recurring basis, and whenever
something happens that could affect the hedging relationship. The Board believes that
immediate evaluation of the effect of relevant changes in circumstances on a hedge's
qualification for hedge accounting should be an integral aspect of an ongoing assessment of
compliance.
490. The Board expects that entities entering into hedging transactions that do not qualify for an
assumption of automatic effectiveness and zero ineffectiveness under the criteria discussed in
Appendix A will monitor hedge effectiveness frequently—often daily. However, the Board
recognizes that it may not be cost-effective for some entities to assess compliance with the
effectiveness criterion on a daily or weekly basis. It therefore decided that compliance should be
assessed no less frequently than quarterly. However, if the event or change in circumstances that
caused the hedging relationship to cease to qualify cannot be identified, the entity is prohibited
from applying hedge accounting from the date at which compliance was last assessed and
satisfied. Otherwise, a hedging relationship that does not satisfy the conditions for fair value
hedge accounting might nevertheless receive such accounting.
491. For hedges of firm commitments, the Board decided that if hedge accounting is
discontinued because the hedged item no longer meets the definition of a firm commitment, an
entity should derecognize any previously recognized asset or liability and recognize a
corresponding loss or gain in earnings. That accounting is appropriate because the asset or
liability that represented the value of the firm commitment no longer exists if the hedged
Page 182
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
transaction no longer qualifies as a firm commitment, for example, because performance is no
longer probable. The Board believes those circumstances should be rare. A pattern of
discontinuing hedge accounting and derecognizing firm commitments would call into question
the "firmness" of future hedged firm commitments and the entity's accounting for future hedges
of firm commitments.
Discontinuing Cash Flow Hedge Accounting
492. The Exposure Draft proposed that if cash flow hedge accounting is discontinued, the
derivative gain or loss accumulated in other comprehensive income to the date of discontinuance
would be recognized in earnings on the originally projected date of the hedged forecasted
transaction. That proposed requirement was intended to instill discipline in the accounting for
cash flow hedges and reduce the possibility for managing of earnings. Respondents to the
Exposure Draft disagreed with that provision as it related to discontinuances that resulted from a
change in probability. They said that gains and losses previously recognized in other
comprehensive income should be reclassified into earnings on the date it is decided that the
forecasted transaction is no longer considered probable.
493. The Board considers it inappropriate to defer a gain or loss on a derivative that arises after
a hedged forecasted transaction is deemed no longer probable. However, if the occurrence of the
forecasted transaction is still reasonably possible, the Board considers it appropriate to continue
to include in accumulated other comprehensive income the gain or loss that arose before the date
the forecasted transaction is deemed no longer probable. The Board also was concerned that
requiring a gain or loss in accumulated other comprehensive income to be reported in earnings
when a forecasted transaction is no longer probable but still is reasonably possible (paragraph
464 describes the range of probability) would provide an entity with the opportunity to manage
earnings by changing its estimate of probability. For those reasons, the Board decided to require
earnings recognition of a related gain or loss in accumulated other comprehensive income only
when an entity determines it is probable that the transaction will not occur.
494. A pattern of determining that hedged forecasted transactions probably will not occur would
call into question both an entity's ability to accurately predict forecasted transactions and the
propriety of using hedge accounting in the future for similar forecasted transactions.
Interaction with Standards on Impairment
495. A hedged item may be reported at fair value as a consequence of applying the provisions of
this Statement. That would occur if the carrying amount of the hedged item equaled its fair
value at the inception of a hedge and all changes in the fair value of a hedged item were
recognized as a result of hedge accounting. However, that is not the same as continuous
measurement at fair value. Therefore, accounting for changes in the fair value of a hedged item
attributable to the risk being hedged does not exempt the hedged item from accounting
provisions of other Statements that apply to assets or liabilities that are not measured at fair
Page 183
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
value. For example, a loan that is designated as a hedged item but is not otherwise measured at
fair value or lower of cost or market value is subject to the impairment provisions of Statement
114.
496. Respondents to the Exposure Draft questioned whether the carrying amount of a derivative
should be considered in assessing impairment of a related asset or liability, if any. (In this
Statement, the term impairment includes the recognition of an increase in a liability as well as a
decrease in an asset.) The related asset or liability would be either an existing asset or liability or
an asset or liability that was acquired or incurred as a result of a hedged forecasted transaction.
497. The Board decided that it would be inappropriate to consider the carrying amount of a
derivative hedging instrument in an assessment of impairment of a related asset or liability in
either a fair value hedge or a cash flow hedge. To do so would be inconsistent with the fact that
the derivative is a separate asset or liability.
498. This Statement provides that a derivative gain or loss recognized in accumulated other
comprehensive income as a hedge of a variable cash flow on a forecasted transaction is to be
reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods as the offsetting loss or gain on the
hedged item. For example, a derivative gain that arose from a cash flow hedge of a purchase of
equipment used in operations is to be included in earnings in the same periods that depreciation
on the equipment is recognized. The net effect on earnings should be the same as if the
derivative gain or loss had been included in the basis of the asset or liability to which the hedged
forecasted transaction relates. To be consistent with that provision, the Board decided that a
derivative gain that offsets part or all of an impairment loss on a related asset or liability should
be reclassified into earnings in the period that an impairment loss is recognized. Similarly, a
related derivative loss, if any, in accumulated other comprehensive income should be reclassified
into earnings in the same period that a recovery of a previous impairment loss is recognized.
The Board decided that the reason that a loss or gain on a hedged asset or liability is recognized
in income—for example, whether through an ordinary depreciation charge or an impairment
write-down—should not affect the reclassification into earnings of a related offsetting gain or
loss in accumulated other comprehensive income.
Current Earnings Recognition of Certain Derivative Losses
499. The Board sees no justification for delaying recognition in earnings of a derivative loss that
the entity does not expect to recover through revenues related to the hedged transaction.
Accordingly, this Statement prohibits continuing to report a loss in accumulated other
comprehensive income if the entity expects that doing so would lead to recognizing a net loss on
the combined hedging instrument and the hedged transaction in a future period(s). For example,
a loss on a derivative designated as a hedge of the forecasted purchase of inventory should be
recognized in earnings immediately to the extent that the loss is not expected to be recovered
through future sales of the inventory. Statements 52 and 80 included the same requirement.
Page 184
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Accounting by Not-for-Profit Organizations and Other Entities That Do Not Report
Earnings
500. This Statement applies to all entities, including not-for-profit organizations, defined benefit
pension plans, and other entities that do not report earnings as a separate caption in a statement
of financial performance. For example, a not-for-profit entity reports the total change in net
assets during a period, which is analogous to total comprehensive income for a business
enterprise. The Exposure Draft indicated that cash flow hedge accounting would not be
available to an entity that does not report earnings. A few respondents objected to what they
interpreted as the Exposure Draft's unequal treatment of not-for-profit and other entities that do
not report earnings. They did not consider it fair to deny those entities access to hedge
accounting for hedges of forecasted transactions.
501. The effect of cash flow hedge accounting is to report a derivative gain or loss in other
comprehensive incomet—that is, outside earnings—in the period in which it occurs and then to
reclassify that gain or loss into earnings in a later period. It thus would be mechanically
impossible for an entity that only reports an amount comparable to total comprehensive income
to apply cash flow hedge accounting. For this Statement to permit a not-for-profit entity, for
example, to apply cash flow hedge accounting, the Board would first have to define a
subcomponent of the total change in net assets during a period that would be analogous to
earnings for a business enterprise. Neither Concepts Statement 6 nor Statement 117 defines such
a measure of operating performance for a not-for-profit entity, and an attempt to define that
measure was beyond the scope of the project that led to this Statement. Accordingly, the Board
decided to retain the provision that cash flow hedge accounting is not available to a not-for-profit
or other entity that does not report earnings as a separate caption in a statement of financial
performance.
Disclosures
502. This Statement supersedes Statements 105 and 119, both of which provided disclosure
guidance for derivatives and financial instruments. Consistent with its objective of making the
guidance on financial reporting related to derivatives easier to use, the Board decided that this
Statement should provide comprehensive disclosure guidance, as well as recognition and
measurement guidance, for derivatives. This Statement therefore carries forward from Statement
119 the requirement for disclosure of a description of the objectives, context, and strategies for
holding or issuing derivatives. The purpose of that disclosure is to "help investors and creditors
understand what an entity is trying to accomplish with its derivatives" (Statement 119, paragraph
58). The Board also decided to require additional qualitative disclosures describing an entity's
risk management policy and the items or transactions and the risks being hedged for each type of
hedge. The Board believes the qualitative disclosures are necessary to assist investors, creditors,
and other users of financial statements in understanding the nature of an entity's derivative
activities and in evaluating the success of those activities, their importance to the entity, and their
Page 185
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
effect on the entity's financial statements. Many respondents to the Exposure Draft supported
the qualitative disclosures.
503. This Statement modifies some of the disclosure requirements from the Exposure Draft,
mostly as a result of changes to the accounting requirements proposed in the Exposure Draft.
Notwithstanding the modifications, the Board decided to retain many of the disclosure
requirements in the Exposure Draft given the extent of use and complexity of derivatives and
hedging activities and because many users of financial statements have asked for improved
disclosures.
504. A few respondents to the Task Force Draft suggested that both the qualitative and the
quantitative disclosures should distinguish between derivatives used for risk management based
on the type of risk (for example, interest rate risk, foreign currency risk, or credit risk) being
hedged rather than based on accounting designations (for example, fair value hedges versus cash
flow hedges). Those respondents said that disclosures organized in that manner, perhaps
including even narrower distinctions such as the type of asset or liability that is hedged, would
better aid the financial statement user in understanding an entity's success in managing the
different types of risk that it encounters.
505. The Board agreed that disclosures presented in a manner that distinguishes between the
nature of the risk being hedged would provide useful information that would help users
understand management's risk management strategies. However, the Board decided not to
require that disclosures about derivative instruments be organized in the manner suggested by
those respondents. The Board made that decision somewhat reluctantly, based primarily on its
concern that it could not require such disclosures without additional study and that such a
requirement would necessitate a greater level of detail than the disclosures required by this
Statement. Distinguishing between derivatives based on their accounting designation, as this
Statement requires, helps users understand the information provided in the financial statements.
Information about derivatives used in fair value hedges, cash flow hedges, hedges of the net
investment in a foreign operation, and for other purposes likely would be needed even if the
disclosures distinguished between derivatives based on the type of risk being hedged. The result
could be a rather complicated multilevel set of disclosures. The Board also notes that this
Statement requires disclosures about the risks that management hedges with derivatives as part
of the description of the "context needed" to understand the entity's objectives for holding or
issuing those instruments. The Board encourages companies to experiment with ways in which
disclosures about derivative instruments, including how the gains and losses on them relate to
other exposures of the entity, might be presented to make them more understandable and useful.
506. In response to comments about the volume of the proposed disclosure requirements in both
the Exposure Draft and the Task Force Draft, the Board reconsidered the costs and benefits of
the proposed disclosures. In reconsidering the proposed disclosures, the Board concluded that
by eliminating certain of the requirements, it could reduce the cost of applying the Statement
without a significant reduction in the benefits to users. Consequently, the following proposed
Page 186
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
disclosures were eliminated:
a. Amount of gains and losses on hedged items and on related derivatives recognized in
earnings for fair value hedges
b. Description of where in the financial statements hedged items and the gains and losses on
those hedged items are reported
c. Cumulative net unamortized amount of gains and losses included in the carrying amount of
hedged items
d. Separate amounts for the reporting period of hedging gains and hedging losses on
derivatives not recognized in earnings for cash flow hedges
e. Description of where derivatives related to cash flow hedges are reported in the statement of
financial position
f. Separate amounts for the reporting period of gains and losses on the cash flow hedging
instrument
g. Amount of gains and losses recognized during the period on derivatives not designated as
hedges
h. Beginning and ending balances in accumulated other comprehensive income for
accumulated derivative gains and losses, and the related current period changes, separately
for the following two categories: (1) gains and losses related to forecasted transactions for
which the variability of hedged future cash flows has ceased and (2) gains and losses related
to forecasted transactions for which that variability has not ceased
i. Description of where gains and losses on derivatives not designated as hedges are reported
in the statement of income or other statement of financial performance.
In addition, the Board replaced some of the remaining proposed disclosures requiring separate
amounts of gains and losses with disclosures requiring the amount of net gain or loss.
507. The Board also modified the disclosure requirements as a result of changes to the
accounting for fair value and cash flow hedges. Those modifications include:
Modification to Hedge Accounting Resulting Modification to Disclosure
a. Require an entity to determine how to Add a requirement to disclose the net
assess hedge effectiveness and to amount of hedge ineffectiveness recognized
report all hedge ineffectiveness in in earnings and the component of the
earnings. derivative's gain or loss excluded from the
assessment of hedge effectiveness and
included directly in earnings.
b. Require gains and losses included in Replace proposed disclosure of designated
accumulated other comprehensive reporting periods in which forecasted
income to be reclassified into earnings transactions are expected to occur and the
when the forecasted transaction affects amounts to be reclassified into earnings in
Page 187
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
earnings. those periods with a description of the
transactions or other events that will result
in reclassification into earnings of gains and
losses that are reported in accumulated other
comprehensive income and the estimated net
amount of existing gains or losses at the
reporting date that is expected to be
reclassified into earnings within the next 12
months.
c. Require gain or loss included in Require disclosure of gross gains and losses
accumulated other comprehensive reclassified into earnings as a result of the
income to be reclassified into earnings discontinuance of cash flow hedges because
when it is probable that a hedged it is probable that the forecasted transactions
forecasted transaction will not occur. will not occur.
508. Certain respondents were concerned that some of the cash flow hedge disclosures would
reveal proprietary information that could be used by competitors and market participants, putting
the disclosing entity at a competitive disadvantage. The Board carefully considered those
concerns and decided that the ability of traders and competitors to use the cash flow hedge
disclosures to determine an entity's competitively sensitive positions would be significantly
limited by an entity's ability to designate and dedesignate derivative instruments as cash flow
hedges during the reporting period, the aggregate nature of the cash flow hedging disclosures,
and the timing and frequency of those disclosures. Notwithstanding that conclusion, the Board
notes that the following modifications to the disclosures proposed in the Exposure Draft and the
Task Force Draft are directly responsive to the competitive harm concerns raised by some
respondents:
a. Elimination of the proposed disclosure of the separate amounts for the reporting period of
hedging gains and hedging losses on the derivatives not recognized in earnings
b. Replacement of the proposed disclosure of the designated reporting periods in which the
forecasted transactions are expected to occur and the amounts of gains and losses to be
reclassified to earnings in those periods with a description of the transactions or other events
that will result in the reclassification into earnings of gains and losses that are reported in
accumulated other comprehensive income, and the estimated net amount of the existing
gains or losses at the reporting date that is expected to be reclassified into earnings within
the next 12 months
c. Elimination of the proposed disclosure of the separate amounts for the reporting period of
gains and losses on the cash flow hedging instruments
d. Elimination of the proposed disclosure of the beginning and ending balances in accumulated
other comprehensive income for accumulated derivative gains and losses, and the related
current period changes, separately for the following two categories: gains and losses related
Page 188
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
to forecasted transactions for which the variability of hedged future cash flows has ceased
and gains and losses related to forecasted transactions for which the variability of hedged
future cash flows has not ceased
e. Replacement of some of the remaining proposed disclosures of separate amounts of gains
and losses with disclosure of the amount of net gain or loss.
The Board believes the required cash flow hedge disclosures, as modified, provide necessary
information in helping financial statement users assess the effect on the financial statements of
an entity's cash flow hedge strategies.
509. This Statement also amends Statement 107 to carry forward the provision in Statement 119
that encourages disclosure of quantitative information about market risk. That provision has
been revised to clarify that it applies to all financial instruments—not just to derivatives. The
Board believes that disclosure will provide useful information to users of financial statements
about the overall market risk of an entity's financial instruments. The Board is encouraging,
rather than requiring, that information because it continues to believe that ". . . the continuing
evolution of approaches to risk management limits the ability to clearly define the most useful
approach to disclosing quantitative information about market risks" (Statement 119, paragraph
72). The Board observes that the SEC issued final rules 33 in January 1997 that require certain
registrants to make quantitative disclosures of market risk similar to those encouraged by
Statement 119.
510. The Board decided that disclosures about concentrations of credit risk previously included
in Statement 105 should continue to be required because a number of constituents, including
some regulators, have commented on their usefulness. The purpose of those disclosures is to
allow "investors, creditors, and other users to make their own assessments of the credit risk
associated with the area of concentration" (Statement 105, paragraph 100). The Board decided
to modify the disclosure about concentrations of credit risk to require that the amount disclosed
be based on the gross fair value of the financial instruments rather than the "amount of the
accounting loss" (described in Statement 105, paragraph 20(b)). Preparers found "the amount of
the accounting loss" to be confusing, and users of financial statements have stated that fair value
information provides a better indication of the credit exposure arising from financial instruments.
The disclosure was also modified to require information about an entity's master netting
arrangements and their effect on the maximum amount of loss due to credit risk. The Board
believes that information provides users with important insight into the potential impact of those
arrangements on concentrations of credit risk of an entity.
511. The Board considered either leaving the disclosures about concentrations of credit risk in
Statement 105 or including them in this Statement. The Board decided not to retain them in
Statement 105 because this Statement supersedes all other guidance in that Statement. The
Board decided not to include those disclosures in this Statement because they refer to all
financial instruments and this Statement addresses derivative instruments. The Board decided
instead to amend Statement 107 to include those disclosures so that all disclosure requirements
Page 189
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
that apply to all financial instruments will be available in one place.
512. Certain other requirements from Statements 105 and 119 have been deleted, including
disclosure of the "face or contract amount" for all derivative financial instruments held at the
balance sheet date (Statement 105, paragraph 17, and Statement 119, paragraph 8). The Board
originally required that disclosure, in part, to provide users with "information [that] conveys
some of the same information provided by amounts recognized for on-balance-sheet
instruments" (Statement 105, paragraph 89). That disclosure also provided an indication "of the
volume of derivative activity" (Statement 119, paragraph 79). This Statement's requirement that
all derivatives be recognized in the statement of financial position at fair value lessens the
usefulness of the disclosure of the face or contract amount. For example, reporting all
derivatives as assets or liabilities in the statement of financial position will provide an indication
of the use of derivatives. More important, although the face or contract amount of derivative
instruments held provides some indication of derivatives activity, their usefulness for that
purpose may be suspect given that some derivatives are commonly neutralized either by
canceling the original derivative—which lowers the reported amount—or by acquiring or issuing
an offsetting derivative—which increases the reported amount. The Exposure Draft would have
required the disclosure only when necessary to enable investors and creditors to understand what
an entity is trying to accomplish with its derivatives. Some respondents were concerned that
provision would not have been operational. The Board agreed and decided that disclosure of the
face or contract amount should no longer be required.
513. Also deleted is the requirement to disclose the average fair value of derivative financial
instruments held for trading purposes (Statement 119, paragraph 10(a)). The Board originally
required that disclosure to provide users "with a better indication of the level of risk assumed by
an entity when holding or issuing derivative financial instruments for trading purposes"
(Statement 119, paragraph 50). The Board had noted that "trading positions typically fluctuate,
and the ending balance may not always be representative of the range of balances and related
risks that an entity has assumed during a period" (Statement 119, paragraph 50). The Board had
also indicated that it did not extend the disclosure to derivatives used for other than trading
purposes because "the necessary data may be less likely to be available for derivative financial
instruments held or issued for purposes other than trading" (Statement 119, paragraph 54).
Because this Statement eliminates the distinction between derivatives held for trading purposes
and those held for purposes other than trading and because of the Board's continuing concerns
about the availability of that information, particularly for nonfinancial entities, the Board decided
to eliminate that disclosure.
Effective Date and Transition
514. This Statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 1999. Recognizing
derivatives as assets and liabilities and measuring them at fair value is a primary objective of this
Statement, and the Board considers it important to achieve the objective as early as is reasonably
possible following the issuance of this Statement. However, many respondents indicated that
Page 190
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
they would need more than a year following the issuance of this Statement to make the systems
changes necessary to implement it. The Board notes that an effective date of years beginning
after June 15, 1999 will provide an implementation period of at least a year for all entities. That
should be adequate time for entities to assimilate and develop the information required by this
Statement. The Board also decided to permit an entity to adopt the provisions of this Statement
as of the beginning of any fiscal quarter that begins after issuance of this Statement. The Board
recognizes that the financial statements of an entity that adopts this Statement during a fiscal
year will be based on differing measurement principles and hedge accounting requirements for
derivative instruments. The Board decided that the urgency of providing improved information
about derivatives outweighed concerns about the resulting potential lack of consistency within
that year's financial statements.
515. Because hedge accounting is based on an entity's intent at the time a hedging relationship is
established, the Board decided that retroactive application of the provisions of this Statement
was not appropriate. Accordingly, changes in the fair value of derivatives that arose before
initial application of this Statement and were previously recognized in net income, added to the
carrying amount of hedged assets or liabilities, or included in other comprehensive income as
part of a hedge of a net investment in a foreign entity are not to be included in transition
adjustments. However, the Board decided that hedging relationships that existed before the date
of initial application are relevant in determining other transition adjustments. Basing the
transition adjustments on past hedging relationships also should prevent an entity from
selectively affecting the transition adjustments by changing previously designated hedging
relationships.
516. The Board considered whether past changes in the fair values of derivatives that were
deferred as separate assets or liabilities in the statement of financial position rather than being
added to the carrying amount of hedged assets or liabilities, such as those related to hedged
forecasted transactions, should continue to be deferred at the date of initial application.
Continued deferral of those gains and losses would be consistent with the continued deferral of
amounts that were previously added to the carrying amount of hedged assets or liabilities.
However, separately deferred losses and gains do not represent assets or liabilities and thus are
different from amounts that adjusted the basis of an asset or liability or otherwise represent
assets or liabilities. Continuing to report them in the statement of financial position would be
inconsistent with the Board's fundamental decision to recognize in the statement of financial
position only items that are assets or liabilities (paragraph 229). The Board concluded that gains
and losses separately characterized as liabilities and assets in the statement of financial position
should be removed and reported in a manner consistent with the requirements of this Statement.
517. The adjustments to recognize all derivatives as assets or liabilities at fair value and to
reverse certain deferred gains and losses will affect net income or other comprehensive income
at the date of initial application. Consequently, the Board decided also to require that an entity
recognize concurrently the effect of any preexisting offsetting differences between the carrying
amount and the fair value of hedged items; that is, differences that arose before the date of initial
Page 191
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
application. The Board noted that reporting offsetting unrealized gains and losses on hedged
items is consistent with the notion in this Statement of accelerating gains and losses on hedged
items to provide income statement offset.
Transition Provisions for Embedded Derivatives
518. Paragraphs 12–16 of this Statement require that certain embedded derivatives be separated
from their host contracts and accounted for as derivative instruments under this Statement. The
Board considered how that requirement for separate accounting should apply to hybrid
instruments outstanding at the date of initial application of this Statement. In considering that
issue, the Board first considered two alternative ways in which an embedded derivative could be
separated from the host contract after the date of acquisition or issuance:
a. Based on the fair values of the embedded derivative and the host contract at the date of
initial application
b. Based on the fair values of the embedded derivative and the host contract at the date of
initial acquisition or issuance.
The choice between those two methods determines the carrying amount of the host contract after
separation of the embedded derivative. It also significantly affects the difficulty of obtaining the
necessary information needed to separate an embedded derivative from the host contract after the
date of initial acquisition or incurrence.
519. Separating a hybrid instrument into its host contract and its embedded derivative based on
fair values at the date of initial adoption would be the simpler method. Under that method, the
fair value of all of an entity's host contracts and embedded derivatives would be determined as of
the same date, based on information current as of that date. In contrast, basing the separation of
an embedded derivative on fair values at the date a hybrid instrument was acquired or incurred
would necessitate calculations as of multiple past dates. For an entity with many hybrid
instruments, some of which may have been initiated a decade or more in the past, separation
based on fair values at dates of acquisition or incurrence could be a significant effort.
520. Although separation based on fair values at the date of initial application of this Statement
would be the easier method, its results could be questionable. Many host contracts will be
interest-bearing financial instruments, and separating the value of their embedded derivatives
will affect both the carrying amounts of the host contracts and their effective interest rates.
Determining the carrying amount of such a host contract based on the value of an embedded
derivative at a date significantly later than acquisition or issuance of the instrument could result
in a substantial discount or premium to be amortized as an adjustment of interest income or
expense. For example, several years before it adopts this Statement, an entity might have
purchased an equity-indexed note in which the principal is linked to the S&P 500 index. If the
S&P 500 index is, say, 60 percent higher on July 1, 1999 when the entity adopts this Statement
than it was at the date the note was acquired and the embedded derivative is separated on that
basis, the carrying amount of the host contract would be artificially low, resulting in an
Page 192
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
artificially high reported interest yield. In contrast, separation based on fair values at the date the
equity-indexed note was acquired would result in carrying amounts for both components that are
determined on the same basis, and the carrying amount for the host contract need not compensate
for subsequent changes in the value of the embedded derivative.
521. For the reasons just discussed, the Board decided that separation of a hybrid instrument
into its host contract and embedded derivative instrument should be based on fair values at the
date the instrument was acquired or issued. Having made that decision, the Board decided it was
not feasible to require entities to apply the requirements of paragraphs 12–16 of this Statement to
all hybrid instruments held or owed at the date of initial adoption. However, the Board also did
not want to provide an entity with the opportunity to embed numerous derivatives in hybrid
instruments during the year or two before the effective date of this Statement for the purpose of
avoiding its requirements. Therefore, this Statement requires that a hybrid instrument acquired
or issued after December 31, 1997 be separated into its host contract and embedded derivative.
For instruments acquired or issued after that date, separation on the basis of fair values at the
date of acquisition or issuance should not be unduly burdensome.
522. The Board also considered whether an entity should be permitted to separate hybrid
instruments acquired or issued before January 1, 1998 into their host contracts and derivative
components if it wishes to do so. That alternative might be provided on either an individual
instrument or an entity-wide basis. The Board recognizes that an entity might wish to separate
the embedded derivative from a hybrid instrument and designate it as a hedging instrument.
However, the Board was concerned that providing a choice on an instrument-by-instrument basis
might have unintended consequences, such as separate accounting only for those embedded
derivatives that are in a loss position at the date of initial adoption. The Board therefore decided
to provide an entity the choice of separating out the embedded derivatives of existing hybrid
instruments, but only on an all-or-none basis. The Board also believes that providing the choice
only on an entity-wide basis will make it easier for users of financial statements to understand
the effects of an entity's choices in transition and the resulting financial information.
Transition Provisions for Compound Derivatives
523. This Statement prohibits separation of a compound derivative instrument into its
components for hedge accounting purposes (paragraph 18). The Board does not consider that
prohibition to be unduly burdensome on an ongoing basis. To qualify for hedge accounting, an
entity will simply need to obtain separate derivative instruments in some situations in which
compound derivatives may have been used in the past. However, the Board recognizes that an
entity may have entered into long-term derivative instruments combining, for example, foreign
exchange and interest rate components before it knew that only separate derivatives would
qualify for hedge accounting. The Board therefore considered whether this Statement should
include special transition provisions for compound derivatives entered into before the date of
initial adoption.
Page 193
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
524. The Board understands that many hedging relationships in which compound derivatives
were used involved hybrid instruments. For example, an entity may have entered into an interest
rate swap with an embedded equity option to hedge outstanding debt with an embedded equity
feature, such as a bond whose principal amount increases with specified percentage increases in
the S&P 500 index. The Board believes that its decision not to require separate accounting for
the derivative features of hybrid instruments acquired or issued before January 1, 1998
significantly reduces the need to permit compound derivatives outstanding at the date of initial
adoption to be separated into dissimilar components. However, this Statement prohibits hedge
accounting for the foreign exchange risk in instruments that are remeasured with changes in
carrying amounts attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates included currently in
earnings. A similar prohibition applies to cash flow hedges of the future acquisition or
incurrence of instruments that will be remeasured with changes in carrying value attributable to
changes in foreign exchange rates included in current earnings. Thus, a compound derivative
that includes a foreign exchange component rarely will qualify for use as a hedging instrument
under this Statement. The Board therefore decided to permit only the foreign exchange
component of a compound derivative entered into before this Statement is adopted to be
separated for accounting purposes. Thus, for example, a derivative that combines a foreign
currency forward contract with an interest rate swap may be separated into its components at the
date of initial adoption based on the fair values of the components at that date. In contrast, a
combined interest rate swap and equity option may not be separated into its components.
Appendix D: AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
525. This Statement supersedes the following pronouncements:
a. FASB Statement No. 80, Accounting for Futures Contracts
b. FASB Statement No. 105, Disclosure of Information about Financial Instruments with
Off-Balance-Sheet Risk and Financial Instruments with Concentrations of Credit Risk
c. FASB Statement No. 119, Disclosure about Derivative Financial Instruments and Fair
Value of Financial Instruments.
526. In paragraph 8 of Chapter 4, “Inventory Pricing,” of ARB No. 43, Restatement and
Revision of Accounting Research Bulletins, the following is inserted after the fourth sentence:
(If inventory has been the hedged item in a fair value hedge, the inventory’s “cost” basis
used in the cost-or-market-whichever-is-lower accounting shall reflect the effect of the
adjustments of its carrying amount made pursuant to paragraph 22(b) of FASB Statement
No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.)
527. FASB Statement No. 52, Foreign Currency Translation, is amended as follows:
Page 194
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
a. The following paragraph is inserted after the heading Foreign Currency Transactions and
before paragraph 15:
14A. FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, addresses the accounting for freestanding foreign currency derivatives and
certain foreign currency derivatives embedded in other instruments. This Statement does
not address the accounting for derivative instruments.
b. In the last sentence of paragraph 15, paragraphs 20 and 21 is replaced by paragraph 20 and
and foreign currency commitments is deleted.
c. In the first sentence of paragraph 16, forward exchange contracts (paragraphs 17–19) is
replaced by derivative instruments (Statement 133).
d. Paragraphs 17–19 and the heading preceding paragraph 17 are deleted.
e. Paragraph 21 is replaced by the following:
Hedges of Firm Commitments
The accounting for a gain or loss on a foreign currency transaction that is intended to
hedge an identifiable foreign currency commitment (for example, an agreement to
purchase or sell equipment) is addressed by paragraph 37 of Statement 133.
f. In the second sentence of paragraph 30, forward contracts determined in conformity with the
requirements of paragraphs 18 and 19 shall be considered transaction gains or losses is
replaced by derivative instruments shall comply with paragraph 45 of Statement 133.
g. The following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 31(b):
(Paragraph 45(c) of Statement 133 specifies additional disclosures for instruments
designated as hedges of the foreign currency exposure of a net investment in a foreign
operation.)
h. The definitions of currency swaps, discount or premium on a forward contract, forward
exchange contract, and forward rate in paragraph 162, the glossary, are deleted.
528. FASB Statement No. 60, Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises, is amended
as follows:
a. Paragraph 46, as amended by FASB Statements No. 115, Accounting for Certain
Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, and No. 124, Accounting for Certain Investments
Held by Not-for-Profit Organizations, is amended as follows:
Page 195
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
(1) The phrase except as indicated in the following sentence is added to the end of the
second sentence.
(2) The following sentence is added after the second sentence:
All or a portion of the unrealized gain or loss of a security that is designated as being
hedged in a fair value hedge shall be recognized in earnings during the period of the
hedge, pursuant to paragraph 22 of FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities.
b. In the first sentence of paragraph 50, as amended by FASB Statement No. 97, Accounting
and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises for Certain Long-Duration Contracts and for
Realized Gains and Losses from the Sale of Investments, and Statement 115, as hedges as
described in FASB Statements No. 52, Foreign Currency Translation, and No. 80,
Accounting for Futures Contracts is replaced by as either hedges of net investments in
foreign operations or cash flow hedges as described in Statement 133.
529. FASB Statement No. 65, Accounting for Certain Mortgage Banking Activities, is amended
as follows:
a. The following sentence is added after the first sentence of paragraph 4, as amended by
Statements 115 and 124:
If a mortgage loan has been the hedged item in a fair value hedge, the loan’s “cost” basis
used in lower-of-cost-or-market accounting shall reflect the effect of the adjustments of
its carrying amount made pursuant to paragraph 22(b) of FASB Statement No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.
b. In the first sentence of paragraph 9(a), as amended by Statement 115 and FASB Statement
No. 125, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of
Liabilities, the phrase commitment prices is replaced by fair values.
c. The last sentence of paragraph 9(a), which was added by Statement 115, is deleted.
d. Paragraph 9(b)(1) is deleted.
530. In the third sentence of footnote 4 of FASB Statement No. 95, Statement of Cash Flows, as
amended by FASB Statement No. 104, Statement of Cash Flows—Net Reporting of Certain Cash
Receipts and Cash Payments and Classification of Cash Flows from Hedging Transactions, the
phrase futures contracts, forward contracts, option contracts, or swap contracts that are
accounted for as hedges of identifiable transactions or events (for example, a cash payment from
a futures contract that hedges a purchase or sale of inventory), including anticipatory hedges, is
Page 196
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
replaced by derivative instruments that are accounted for as fair value hedges or cash flow
hedges under FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities. In the last sentence of footnote 4, identifiable transaction or event is replaced by
asset, liability, firm commitment, or forecasted transaction.
531. FASB Statement No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments, is
amended as follows:
a. Paragraph 4 is deleted.
b. The last sentence of paragraph 10, which was added by Statement 119, is deleted.
c. The paragraph added by Statement 119 after paragraph 13 is replaced by the following; the
related footnote is deleted:
In disclosing the fair value of a financial instrument, an entity shall not net that fair value
with the fair value of other financial instruments—even if those financial instruments are
of the same class or are otherwise considered to be related, for example, by a risk
management strategy—except to the extent that the offsetting of carrying amounts in the
statement of financial position is permitted under the general principle in paragraphs 5
and 6 of FASB Interpretation No. 39, Offsetting of Amounts Related to Certain
Contracts, or the exceptions for master netting arrangements in paragraph 10 of
Interpretation 39 and for amounts related to certain repurchase and reverse repurchase
agreements in paragraphs 3 and 4 of FASB Interpretation No. 41, Offsetting of Amounts
Related to Certain Repurchase and Reverse Repurchase Agreements.
d. The following paragraphs, with related headings and footnotes, are added after
paragraph 15:
Disclosure about Concentrations of Credit Risk of All Financial Instruments
15A. Except as indicated in paragraph 15B, an entity shall disclose all significant
concentrations of credit risk arising from all financial instruments, whether from an
individual counterparty or groups of counterparties. Group concentrations of credit risk
exist if a number of counterparties are engaged in similar activities and have similar
economic characteristics that would cause their ability to meet contractual obligations to
be similarly affected by changes in economic or other conditions. The following shall be
disclosed about each significant concentration:
a. Information about the (shared) activity, region, or economic characteristic that
identifies the concentration
b. The maximum amount of loss due to credit risk that, based on the gross fair value of
the financial instrument, the entity would incur if parties to the financial instruments
Page 197
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
that make up the concentration failed completely to perform according to the terms of
the contracts and the collateral or other security, if any, for the amount due proved to
be of no value to the entity
c. The entity's policy of requiring collateral or other security to support financial
instruments subject to credit risk, information about the entity's access to that
collateral or other security, and the nature and a brief description of the collateral or
other security supporting those financial instruments
d. The entity’s policy of entering into master netting arrangements to mitigate the credit
risk of financial instruments, information about the arrangements for which the entity
is a party, and a brief description of the terms of those arrangements, including the
extent to which they would reduce the entity’s maximum amount of loss due to credit
risk.
15B. The requirements of the preceding paragraph do not apply to the following
financial instruments, whether written or held:
a. Financial instruments of a pension plan, including plan assets, when subject to the
accounting and reporting requirements of Statement 87*
b. The financial instruments described in paragraphs 8(a), 8(c), 8(e), and 8(f) of this
Statement, as amended by FASB Statements No. 112, Employers’ Accounting for
Postemployment Benefits, No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, and
125, except for reinsurance receivables and prepaid reinsurance premiums.
Encouraged Disclosure about Market Risk of All Financial Instruments
15C. An entity is encouraged, but not required, to disclose quantitative information
about the market risks of financial instruments that is consistent with the way it manages
or adjusts those risks.
15D. Appropriate ways of reporting the quantitative information encouraged in
paragraph 15C will differ for different entities and will likely evolve over time as
management approaches and measurement techniques evolve. Possibilities include
disclosing (a) more details about current positions and perhaps activity during the period,
(b) the hypothetical effects on comprehensive income (or net assets), or annual income,
of several possible changes in market prices, (c) a gap analysis of interest rate repricing
or maturity dates, (d) the duration of the financial instruments, or (e) the entity’s value at
risk from derivatives and from other positions at the end of the reporting period and the
average value at risk during the year. This list is not exhaustive, and an entity is
encouraged to develop other ways of reporting quantitative information.
___________________________
*Financial instruments of a pension plan, other than the obligations for pension benefits, when subject to
the accounting and reporting requirements of FASB Statement No. 35, Accounting and Reporting by
Defined Benefit Pension Plans, are subject to the requirements of paragraph 15A.
Page 198
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
e. Example 1 in paragraph 31 is amended as follows:
(1) The following heading and sentence are deleted from illustrative Note V:
Interest rate swap agreements
The fair value of interest rate swaps (used for hedging purposes) is the estimated
amount that the Bank would receive or pay to terminate the swap agreements at the
reporting date, taking into account current interest rates and the current
creditworthiness of the swap counterparties.
(2) In the table, the subheading Interest rate swaps and the two following related lines (In a
net receivable position and In a net payable position) are deleted. In the second
sentence of the related footnote *, Interest rate swaps and is deleted.
532. This Statement carries forward the following amendments that Statement 119 made to
Statement 107:
a. In paragraph 10, the following footnote is added after either in the body of the financial
statements or in the accompanying notes:
*If disclosed in more than a single note, one of the notes shall include a summary table.
The summary table shall contain the fair value and related carrying amounts and
cross-references to the location(s) of the remaining disclosures required by this
Statement, as amended.
b. In paragraph 10, the following is added after the first sentence:
Fair value disclosed in the notes shall be presented together with the related carrying
amount in a form that makes it clear whether the fair value and carrying amount represent
assets or liabilities and how the carrying amounts relate to what is reported in the
statement of financial position.
533. In paragraph 28 of FASB Statement No. 113, Accounting and Reporting for Reinsurance of
Short-Duration and Long-Duration Contracts, the phrase FASB Statement No. 105, Disclosure
of Information about Financial Instruments with Off-Balance-Sheet Risk and Financial
Instruments with Concentrations of Credit Risk is replaced by paragraph 15A of FASB Statement
No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments, as amended by FASB Statement
No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.
534. FASB Statement No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity
Securities, is amended as follows:
Page 199
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
a. The following sentence is added at the end of paragraph 4, as amended by Statement 124:
This Statement does not apply to investments in derivative instruments that are subject to
the requirements of FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and
Hedging Activities. If an investment would otherwise be in the scope of this Statement
and it has within it an embedded derivative that is subject to Statement 133, the host
instrument (as described in Statement 133) remains within the scope of this Statement. A
transaction gain or loss on a held-to-maturity foreign-currency-denominated debt security
shall be accounted for pursuant to FASB Statement No. 52, Foreign Currency
Translation.
b. Paragraph 13, as amended by FASB Statement No. 130, Reporting Comprehensive Income,
is amended as follows:
(1) The phrase until realized except as indicated in the following sentence is added to the
end of the second sentence.
(2) The following sentence is added after the second sentence:
All or a portion of the unrealized holding gain and loss of an available-for-sale security
that is designated as being hedged in a fair value hedge shall be recognized in
earnings during the period of the hedge, pursuant to paragraph 22 of Statement 133.
c. In paragraph 15(b), portion of the is inserted before unrealized, and that has not been
previously recognized in earnings is added after transfer.
d. In paragraph 16, the following is inserted after the first sentence:
(If a security has been the hedged item in a fair value hedge, the security’s “amortized
cost basis” shall reflect the effect of the adjustments of its carrying amount made
pursuant to paragraph 22(b) of Statement 133.)
e. The first sentence of paragraph 19 is replaced by the following two sentences:
For securities classified as available-for-sale, all reporting enterprises shall disclose the
aggregate fair value, the total gains for securities with net gains in accumulated other
comprehensive income, and the total losses for securities with net losses in accumulated
other comprehensive income, by major security type as of each date for which a
statement of financial position is presented. For securities classified as held-to-maturity,
all reporting enterprises shall disclose the aggregate fair value, gross unrecognized
holding gains, gross unrecognized holding losses, the net carrying amount, and the gross
gains and losses in accumulated other comprehensive income for any derivatives that
hedged the forecasted acquisition of the held-to-maturity securities, by major security
Page 200
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
type as of each date for which a statement of financial position is presented.
f. In the third sentence in paragraph 20, amortized cost is replaced by net carrying amount (if
different from fair value).
g. Paragraph 21 is amended as follows:
(1) In paragraph 21(a), on those sales is replaced by that have been included in earnings as
a result of those sales
(2) In paragraph 21(b), cost was determined in computing realized gain or loss is replaced
by the cost of a security sold or the amount reclassified out of accumulated other
comprehensive income into earnings was determined
(3) Paragraph 21(d) is replaced by the following:
The amount of the net unrealized holding gain or loss on available-for-sale securities for
the period that has been included in accumulated other comprehensive income and
the amount of gains and losses reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive
income into earnings for the period
(4) Paragraph 21(e) is replaced by The portion of trading gains and losses for the period
that relates to trading securities still held at the reporting date.
h. In the first sentence of paragraph 22, amortized cost is replaced by net carrying and the net
gain or loss in accumulated other comprehensive income for any derivative that hedged the
forecasted acquisition of the held-to-maturity security, is added immediately preceding the
related realized.
i. The last four sentences of paragraph 115 are deleted.
j. The definition of fair value in paragraph 137, the glossary, is replaced by the following:
The amount at which an asset could be bought or sold in a current transaction between
willing parties, that is, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. Quoted market prices in
active markets are the best evidence of fair value and should be used as the basis for the
measurement, if available. If a quoted market price is available, the fair value is the
product of the number of trading units times that market price. If a quoted market price
is not available, the estimate of fair value should be based on the best information
available in the circumstances. The estimate of fair value should consider prices for
similar assets and the results of valuation techniques to the extent available in the
circumstances. Examples of valuation techniques include the present value of estimated
expected future cash flows using a discount rate commensurate with the risks involved,
Page 201
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
option-pricing models, matrix pricing, option-adjusted spread models, and fundamental
analysis. Valuation techniques for measuring assets should be consistent with the
objective of measuring fair value. Those techniques should incorporate assumptions that
market participants would use in their estimates of values, including assumptions about
interest rates, default, prepayment, and volatility.
535. FASB Statement No. 124, Accounting for Certain Investments Held by Not-for-Profit
Organizations, is amended as follows:
a. In paragraph 3, except as noted in paragraph 5 is added to the end of the first sentence.
b. The following is added to the end of paragraph 5:
This Statement also does not apply to investments in derivative instruments that are
subject to the requirements of FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities. If an investment would otherwise be in the scope of
this Statement and it has within it an embedded derivative that is subject to Statement
133, the host instrument (as described in Statement 133) remains within the scope of this
Statement.
c. In the second sentence of paragraph 6, No. 105, Disclosure of Information about Financial
Instruments with Off-Balance-Sheet Risk and Financial Instruments with Concentrations of
Credit Risk, and No. 119, Disclosure about Derivative Financial Instruments and Fair
Value of Financial Instruments are deleted and No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, is added to the end of the sentence.
d. In footnote 6 of paragraph 16, Paragraph 20 of Statement 105 is replaced by Paragraph 15A
of Statement 107, as amended by Statement 133.
e. The definition of fair value in paragraph 112, the glossary, is replaced by the following:
The amount at which an asset could be bought or sold in a current transaction between
willing parties, that is, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. Quoted market prices in
active markets are the best evidence of fair value and should be used as the basis for the
measurement, if available. If a quoted market price is available, the fair value is the
product of the number of trading units times that market price. If a quoted market price
is not available, the estimate of fair value should be based on the best information
available in the circumstances. The estimate of fair value should consider prices for
similar assets and the results of valuation techniques to the extent available in the
circumstances. Examples of valuation techniques include the present value of estimated
expected future cash flows using a discount rate commensurate with the risks involved,
option-pricing models, matrix pricing, option-adjusted spread models, and fundamental
analysis. Valuation techniques for measuring assets should be consistent with the
Page 202
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
objective of measuring fair value. Those techniques should incorporate assumptions that
market participants would use in their estimates of values, including assumptions about
interest rates, default, prepayment, and volatility.
536. FASB Statement No. 125, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and
Extinguishments of Liabilities, is amended as follows:
a. In paragraph 4, and that are not within the scope of FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities is added to the end of the second
sentence.
b. In paragraph 14, Except for instruments that are within the scope of Statement 133 is added
to the beginning of the first sentence.
c. In the fourth sentence of paragraph 31, derivative financial instrument is replaced by
derivative instrument.
d. In paragraph 243, the glossary, the definition of derivative financial instrument is replaced
by:
Derivative instrument
Refer to paragraphs 6–9 in FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities.
537. Paragraph 2(c) of FASB Statement No. 126, Exemption from Certain Required Disclosures
about Financial Instruments for Certain Nonpublic Entities, is replaced by the following:
The entity has no instrument that, in whole or in part, is accounted for as a derivative
instrument under FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and
Hedging Activities, during the reporting period.
538. Paragraph 6 of FASB Technical Bulletin No. 79-19, Investor’s Accounting for Unrealized
Losses on Marketable Securities Owned by an Equity Method Investee, as amended by FASB
Statement No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, is
replaced by the following:
If an investee that is accounted for by the equity method is required to include unrealized
holding gains and losses on investments in debt and equity securities in other
comprehensive income pursuant to the provisions of FASB Statement No. 115,
Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, as amended by FASB
Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, the
investor shall adjust its investment in that investee by its proportionate share of the
unrealized gains and losses and a like amount shall be included in its other
Page 203
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
comprehensive income.
Appendix E: DIAGRAM FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A CONTRACT
IS A FREESTANDING DERIVATIVE SUBJECT TO THE SCOPE OF THIS
STATEMENT
539. The following diagram depicts the process for determining whether a freestanding contract
is within the scope of this Statement. The diagram is a visual supplement to the written standards
section. It should not be interpreted to alter any requirements of this Statement nor should it be
considered a substitute for the requirements. The relevant paragraphs in the standards section
and Appendix A are identified in the parenthetical note after the question.
Page 204
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Page 205
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Appendix F: GLOSSARY
540. This appendix contains definitions of terms or phrases as used in this Statement.
Comprehensive income
The change in equity of a business enterprise during a period from transactions and other
events and circumstances from nonowner sources. It includes all changes in equity
during a period except those resulting from investments by owners and distributions to
owners (FASB Concepts Statement No. 6, Elements of Financial Statements, paragraph
70).
Derivative instrument
Refer to paragraphs 6–9.
Fair value
The amount at which an asset (liability) could be bought (incurred) or sold (settled) in a
current transaction between willing parties, that is, other than in a forced or liquidation
sale. Quoted market prices in active markets are the best evidence of fair value and
should be used as the basis for the measurement, if available. If a quoted market price is
available, the fair value is the product of the number of trading units times that market
price. If a quoted market price is not available, the estimate of fair value should be based
on the best information available in the circumstances. The estimate of fair value should
consider prices for similar assets or similar liabilities and the results of valuation
techniques to the extent available in the circumstances. Examples of valuation
techniques include the present value of estimated expected future cash flows using
discount rates commensurate with the risks involved, option-pricing models, matrix
pricing, option-adjusted spread models, and fundamental analysis. Valuation techniques
for measuring assets and liabilities should be consistent with the objective of measuring
fair value. Those techniques should incorporate assumptions that market participants
would use in their estimates of values, future revenues, and future expenses, including
assumptions about interest rates, default, prepayment, and volatility. In measuring
forward contracts, such as foreign currency forward contracts, at fair value by
discounting estimated future cash flows, an entity should base the estimate of future cash
flows on the changes in the forward rate (rather than the spot rate). In measuring
financial liabilities and nonfinancial derivatives that are liabilities at fair value by
discounting estimated future cash flows (or equivalent outflows of other assets), an
objective is to use discount rates at which those liabilities could be settled in an
arm’s-length transaction.
Financial instrument
Page 206
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Cash, evidence of an ownership interest in an entity, or a contract that both:
a. Imposes on one entity a contractual obligation* (1) to deliver cash or another
financial instrument† to a second entity or (2) to exchange other financial instruments
on potentially unfavorable terms with the second entity
b. Conveys to that second entity a contractual right‡ (1) to receive cash or another
financial instrument from the first entity or (2) to exchange other financial
instruments on potentially favorable terms with the first entity.
________________________
*Contractual obligations encompass both those that are conditioned on the occurrence of
a specified event and those that are not. All contractual obligations that are financial
instruments meet the definition of liability set forth in Concepts Statement 6, although
some may not be recognized as liabilities in financial statements—may be
"off-balance-sheet"—because they fail to meet some other criterion for recognition. For
some financial instruments, the obligation is owed to or by a group of entities rather than
a single entity.
†The use of the term financial instrument in this definition is recursive (because the term
financial instrument is included in it), though it is not circular. The definition requires a
chain of contractual obligations that ends with the delivery of cash or an ownership
interest in an entity. Any number of obligations to deliver financial instruments can be
links in a chain that qualifies a particular contract as a financial instrument.
‡Contractual rights encompass both those that are conditioned on the occurrence of a
specified event and those that are not. All contractual rights that are financial
instruments meet the definition of asset set forth in Concepts Statement 6, although some
may not be recognized as assets in financial statements—may be
“off-balance-sheet”—because they fail to meet some other criterion for recognition. For
some financial instruments, the right is held by or the obligation is due from a group of
entities rather than a single entity.
Firm commitment
An agreement with an unrelated party, binding on both parties and usually legally
enforceable, with the following characteristics:
a. The agreement specifies all significant terms, including the quantity to be exchanged,
the fixed price, and the timing of the transaction. The fixed price may be expressed
as a specified amount of an entity’s functional currency or of a foreign currency. It
may also be expressed as a specified interest rate or specified effective yield.
b. The agreement includes a disincentive for nonperformance that is sufficiently large to
make performance probable.
Forecasted transaction
A transaction that is expected to occur for which there is no firm commitment. Because
no transaction or event has yet occurred and the transaction or event when it occurs will
Page 207
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
be at the prevailing market price, a forecasted transaction does not give an entity any
present rights to future benefits or a present obligation for future sacrifices.
Notional amount
A number of currency units, shares, bushels, pounds, or other units specified in a
derivative instrument.
Underlying
A specified interest rate, security price, commodity price, foreign exchange rate, index of
prices or rates, or other variable. An underlying may be a price or rate of an asset or
liability but is not the asset or liability itself.
Page 208
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
Footnotes
FAS133, Footnote 1--Words defined in Appendix F, the glossary are set in boldface type the
first time they appear.
FAS133, Footnote 2--An unrecognized firm commitment can be viewed as an executory contract
that represents both a right and an obligation. When a previously unrecognized firm
commitment that is designated as a hedged item is accounted for in accordance with this
Statement, an asset or a liability is recognized and reported in the statement of financial position
related to the recognition of the gain or loss on the firm commitment. Consequently, subsequent
references to an asset or a liability in this Statement include a firm commitment.
FAS133, Footnote 3--Sometimes other names are used. For example, the notional amount is
called a face amount in some contracts.
FAS133, Footnote 4--The terms underlying, notional amount, payment provision, and settlement
are intended to include the plural forms in the remainder of this Statement. Including both the
singular and plural forms used in this paragraph is more accurate but much more awkward and
impairs the readability.
FAS133, Footnote 5--FASB Concepts Statement No. 5, Recognition and Measurement in
Financial Statements of Business Enterprises, states that assets that are readily convertible to
cash "have (i) interchangeable (fungible) units and (ii) quoted prices available in an active
market that can rapidly absorb the quantity held by the entity without significantly affecting the
price" (paragraph 83(a)). For contracts that involve multiple deliveries of the asset, the phrase in
an active market that can rapidly absorb the quantity held by the entity should be applied
separately to the expected quantity in each delivery.
FAS133, Footnote 6--Examples are an interest rate cap or an interest rate collar. An embedded
derivative instrument that alters net interest payments based on changes in a stock price index (or
another non-interest-rate index) is not addressed in paragraph 13.
FAS133, Footnote 7--The reference to combined instruments refers to the written option and the
hedged item, such as an embedded purchased option.
FAS133, Footnote 8--A firm commitment that represents an asset or liability that a specific
accounting standard prohibits recognizing (such as a noncancelable operating lease or an
unrecognized mortgage servicing right) may nevertheless be designated as the hedged item in a
fair value hedge. A mortgage banker’s unrecognized “interest rate lock commitment” (IRLC)
does not qualify as a firm commitment (because as an option it does not obligate both parties)
Page 209
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
and thus is not eligible for fair value hedge accounting as the hedged item. (However, a
mortgage banker’s “forward sale commitments,” which are derivatives that lock in the prices at
which the mortgage loans will be sold to investors, may qualify as hedging instruments in cash
flow hedges of the forecasted sales of mortgage loans.)
FAS133, Footnote 9--Mortgage bankers and other servicers of financial assets that designate a
hedged portfolio by aggregating servicing rights within one or more risk strata used under
paragraph 37(g) of Statement 125 would not necessarily comply with the requirement in this
paragraph for portfolios of similar assets. The risk stratum under paragraph 37(g) of Statement
125 can be based on any predominant risk characteristic, including date of origination or
geographic location.
FAS133, Footnote 10--For purposes of paragraphs 28–35, the individual cash flows related to a
recognized asset or liability and the cash flows related to a forecasted transaction are both
referred to as a forecasted transaction or hedged transaction.
FAS133, Footnote 11--The carrying basis for a nonderivative financial instrument that gives rise
to a foreign currency transaction gain or loss under Statement 52 is not addressed by this
Statement.
FAS133, Footnote 12--The foreign currency transaction gain or loss on a hedging instrument is
determined, consistent with paragraph 15 of Statement 52, as the increase or decrease in
functional currency cash flows attributable to the change in spot exchange rates between the
functional currency and the currency in which the hedging instrument is denominated.
FAS133, Footnote 13--For a compound derivative that has a foreign currency exchange risk
component (such as a foreign currency interest rate swap), an entity is permitted at the date of
initial application to separate the compound derivative into two parts: the foreign currency
derivative and the remaining derivative. Each of them would thereafter be accounted for at fair
value, with an overall limit that the sum of their fair values could not exceed the fair value of the
compound derivative. An entity may not separate a compound derivative into components
representing different risks after the date of initial application.
FAS133, Footnote 14--EITF Topic No. D-51, “The Applicability of FASB Statement No. 115 to
Desecuritizations of Financial Assets,” indicates that certain financial assets received or retained
in a desecuritization must be held to maturity to avoid calling into question the entity’s intent to
hold other debt securities to maturity in the future. In conjunction with the initial adoption of
this Statement, the held-to-maturity restriction on those financial assets held on the date of initial
application is removed, and those financial assets that had been received or retained in a previous
desecuritization are available in the future to be designated as the hedged item, or their variable
interest payments as the hedged transaction, in a hedge of the exposure to changes in market
interest rates. Consequently, the sale of those financial assets before maturity would not call into
Page 210
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
question the entity’s intent to hold other debt securities to maturity in the future.
FAS133, Appendix A, Footnote 15--Even though a contract may be a derivative as described in
paragraphs 6–10 for both parties, the exceptions in paragraph 11 apply only to the issuer of the
contract and will result in different reporting by the two parties. The exception in paragraph
10(b) also may apply to one of the parties but not the other.
FAS133, Appendix A, Footnote 16--Contracts that require delivery of securities that are not
readily convertible to cash are not subject to the requirements of this Statement unless there is a
market mechanism outside the contract to facilitate net settlement.
FAS133, Footnote 17--Contracts that require delivery of assets that are not readily convertible to
cash are not subject to the requirements of this Statement unless there is a market mechanism
outside the contract to facilitate net settlement.
FAS133, Appendix A, Footnote 18--This discussion applies only to short sales with the
characteristics described here. Some groups of transactions that are referred to as short sales
may have different characteristics. If so, a different analysis would be appropriate, and other
derivative instruments may be involved.
FAS133, Footnote 19--The use of a hedging instrument with a different underlying basis than the
item or transaction being hedged is generally referred to as a cross-hedge. The principles for
cross-hedges illustrated in this example also apply to hedges involving other risks. For example,
the effectiveness of a hedge of market interest rate risk in which one interest rate is used as a
surrogate for another interest rate would be evaluated in the same way as the natural gas
cross-hedge in this example.
FAS133, Footnote 20--The period of time over which correlation of prices should be assessed
would be based on management’s judgment in the particular circumstance.
FAS133, Appendix B, Footnote 21--A slightly different shortcut method for interest rate swaps
used as cash flow hedges is illustrated in Example 5.
FAS133, Appendix B, Footnote 22--If the hedged item were a foreign-currency-denominated
available-for-sale security instead of a firm commitment, Statement 52 would have required its
carrying value to be measured using the spot exchange rate. Therefore, the spot-forward
difference would have been recognized immediately in earnings either because it represented
ineffectiveness or because it was excluded from the assessment of effectiveness.
FAS133, Appendix B, Footnote 23--Paragraph 112 discusses the zero-coupon method.
Page 211
Copyright © 1998, Financial Accounting Standards Board Not for redistribution
FAS133, Appendix B, Foonote 24--A slightly different shortcut method for interest rate swaps
used as fair value hedges is illustrated in Example 2.
FAS133, Appendix B, Foonote 25--If the term of the fixed rate note had been longer than three
years, the amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income still would have been
reclassified into earnings over the next three years, which was the term of the designated hedging
relationship.
FAS133, Appendix B, Footnote 26--Statement 52 requires immediate recognition in earnings of
any foreign currency transaction gain or loss on a foreign-currency-denominated receivable that
is not designated as a hedging instrument. Therefore, the effect of changes in spot prices on the
royalty receivable must be recognized immediately in earnings.
FAS133, Appendix C, Footnote 27--The terms derivative instrument and derivative are used
interchangeably in this appendix.
FAS133, Appendix C, Footnote 28--Harold Bierman, Jr., L. Todd Johnson, and D. Scott
Peterson, FASB Research Report, Hedge Accounting: An Exploratory Study of the Underlying
Issues.
FAS133, Appendix C, Footnote 29--Jane B. Adams and Corliss J. Montesi, FASB Special
Report, Major Issues Related to Hedge Accounting.
FAS133, Appendix C, Footnote 30--United States General Accounting Office, Report to
Congressional Requesters, Financial Derivatives: Actions Needed to Protect the Financial
System, May 1994, 16.
FAS133, Appendix C, Footnote 31--The term underlying as used in the Exposure Draft
encompassed the asset or liability, the price of which was the underlying for the contract.
FAS133, Appendix C, Footnote 32--However, as noted in paragraph 434, it likely will be
difficult to find a derivative that will be effective as a fair value hedge of selected cash flows.
FAS133, Appendix C, Footnote 33--SEC Final Rules, Disclosure of Accounting Policies for
Derivative Financial Instruments and Derivative Commodity Instruments and Disclosure of
Quantitative and Qualitative Information about Market Risk Inherent in Derivative Financial
Page 212














FAS 133 consultant, Risk management consulting, commodities price risk advisors

Risk Limited can assist you and your organization in complying with FAS 133 requirements and developing processes and systems that meet best practices standards for FAS 133 compliance. Contact Risk Limited if you need information or if we can be of assistance to you on FAS 133 issues.


Click to go directly to the Risk Limited glossary of terminology to see other terms and definitions related to FAS 133:   Risk Limited Glossary

Click on bar below to close this FAS 133 display window.

Return to Top of FAS 133 Derivatives Reporting Accounting Page
decision support generation planning, power revenue optimization, options, risk, strategy, finance, energy, articles, library, experts, sales strategy, energy risk, risk management, conferences career and business opportunities, careers, consultants energy, specialists FAS 133, Sarbanes-Oxley, RiskAudit, auditing compliance, risk controls, governance standards, trading, risk management, commodities, hall of fame, Shannon Burchett, risk management, strategy, energy practice, career opportunity, options introduction Risk management, strategy, real options, energy sector, career opportunity, Dallas, TX, Shannon Burchett conversion factors, Risk Management, Finance, Energy & Technology, natural gas, coal, petroleum, risk management, weather derivatives, weights & measures, formulas, VaR factoids, Risk, Strategy, Energy & Technology, risk management, strategy, risk facts FAS 133, FAS 133 Accounting, FAS 133 Consulting Risk, virtual library, alliance partner, risk management & strategy reference, expertise, consultant, career opportunity Risk management, glossary of terms, strategy, finance, energy, technology, telecom, dictionary, thesaurus, VaR, technical terms, FAS 133 Specialists, career opportunity Hall of Fame, Shannon Burchett, Energy Risk magazine, expertise risk management & strategy, risk, strategy, Energy, Technology & Finance, strategic decision-making, FAS 133 pitfalls, oil & gas, Fannie Mae derivatives reporting Risk, Strategy, Finance, Energy & Technology, risk management, strategy, FAS 133, Energy M&A, Scudder Publishing,swing options, oil & gas, telecommunications, energy futures & options, Tulane University, Freeman, Thunderbird, risk magazine, quantitative, Burkenroad Reports, commodity exchange, New York Mercantile Exchange, Texas Railroad Commission,  Financial Accounting Standards Board,  Federal Communications Commission, Security & Exchange Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Risk, Strategy, Finance, Energy & Tech References, risk management, trading, capital markets, Chief Financial Officers, oil and gas, power industry, electric utility, derivatives, petrochemical, refiners, Certified Public Accountants, energy risk, cfo, risk books, institutional investor, International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Financial Accounting Standard 133, VaR, value at risk, shareware, news, entertainment, weather derivatives, hall of fame, consultant energy, FAS 133 specialists, power revenue optimization virtual library, risk management strategy, experts, rafael a. campo, energy markets, power sector, strategic planning, decision analysis, forward price curve, vinod yadav, risk presentation, news report presentations, Risk, Strategy, Finance & Energy, experts, Shannon Burchett, Rafael Campo, Valery Kholodnyi, Lawrence Kitchen, Leslie McNew, Craig Enochs, Richard Hunter, Michael Ong, Holly Arney, Kevin Rose, Vinod Kumar Yadav, swing options, credit derivatives, power & gas, credit risk, Enterprise Wide Risk Management, Forward Price Curve Development, Structured Products and Hybrid Instruments, California Electric markets, option theory, liquidation of gas contracts, OTC clearance & settlements, hedging, valuation, FAS 133 specialists, consultant energy sector, hall of fame, weather derivatives, risk management quotations, Risk Management, Strategy, & Business, leaders, factoids, risk commentary expertise, consultant energy sector, career opportunity, options introduction, risk, risk management strategy, The Desk, John Sodergreen, Dr. Melinda Bremley, Psychological Associates, Dr. Thomas H. Noe, A.B. Freeman finance Freeman School Business Tulane University, Bengt Järlsjö, Transition Planning, Strategic Planning Entergy Services, energy, technology risk, risk notes, risknotes, risk management, risk blog risk, risk tags, risktags, risk management, risk tag Risk management consulting, strategic management advisory, risk audits, risk policies & procedures, risk registers, quantitative analysis, pricing models, trading & hedging strategies, educational services, litigation support, credit risk analysis, start-up support Risk management consulting, FAS 133 experts, derivatives reporting Risk management consultants, hedge accounting experts, risk audits Risk management audits, FAS 133 consultants Risk controls, Sarbanes-Oxley compliance Risk management glossary, FAS 133 Risk management policies and procedures, governance controls compliance Risk management news, FAS 133 Energy risk management services, trading, weather derivatives Risk management, FAS 133, hedge accounting Risk management experts, weather derivatives Risk audits, compliance, risk register Risk control, governance, Sarbanes-Oxley Risk management library, glossary, energy, technology Risk management procedures and register Risk management expert witnesses, litigation support Energy risk management experts, FAS 133

©Copyright 1997-2010, Risk Limited Corporation, All Rights Reserved.