Archive for março \20\+00:00 2008

Lei Contábil e Normas Internacionais

março 20, 2008
Lei contábil está próxima do padrão internacional

Gazeta Mercantil 20/3/2008
São Paulo, 20 de Março de 2008 – O processo de convergência das padrões brasileiros aos princípios contábeis internacionais está avançado no Brasil. A afirmação foi feita pelo especialista sênior em gestão financeira do Banco Mundial, Henri Fortin, na abertura do evento organizado pela consultoria Hirashima & Associados e pelo Ibracon (Instituto dos Auditores Independentes do Brasil), para o lançamento do relatório do Banco Mundial sobre o Cumprimento de Normas e Códigos Contábeis no Brasil.

Fortin também anunciou que o Banco Mundial realizará em El Salvador, no próximo mês, uma reunião com cinco países – o Brasil foi convidado – para discutir a adaptação ao princípio internacional, IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards). “O Banco Mundial apoia a adaptação dos princípios contábeis de 30 países”, conforme Fortin.

O relatório refere-se à situação do Brasil em 2005 e aponta questões (que precisavam de aperfeiçoamento contábil) que já foram resolvidas desde então. Um exemplo, é o caso da contabilização das operações de leasing.

A Lei 11.638/07, que entrou em vigor este ano, reduziu a distância entre o padrão contábil brasileiro e o internacional, disse. Precisam cumprir a lei contábil brasileira – que agora se aproxima, mas não é igual ao IFRS – companhias abertas e de grande porte (ativos de R$ 240 milhões ou receitas de R$ 300 milhões). Só as companhias abertas estarão obrigadas a fazer suas demonstrações contábeis em IFRS, a partir de 2010, conforme determinação da CVM ( Comissão de Valores Mobiliários). Nesse sentido, a CVM e o CPC (Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis) tem emitido normas que tem traduzido a lei seguindo o IFRS. As empresas de grande porte terão que auditar seu balanços de acordo com a contabilidade brasileira.

As pequenas e médias empresas não estão sujeitas às exigências das lei. Suas balanços atendem apenas as exigências do fisco. No mercado europeu, as pequenas e médias empresas também não fazem suas demonstrações contábeis pelo IFRS.

(Gazeta Mercantil/Finanças & Mercados – Pág. 2)(Lucia Rebouças)

Empreendedores brasileiros

março 19, 2008

Betting the fazenda

Mar 6th 2008 | SÃO PAULO
The Economist print edition

A different kind of risk-taking

SETTLE down at one of São Paulo’s sushi bars and before long you will overhear a discussion about a start-up business making energy from obscure weeds, or some other bright idea for relieving members of the country’s growing middle class of their disposable income. A field study of this kind displays a strong sample bias, but the point is clear: Brazil does not lack go-getters. Yet according to a more thorough survey backed by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a sister organisation of the World Bank, Brazilian entrepreneurs are a strikingly different breed to their peers in Russia and China.

Overall, some 82% of entrepreneurs in all three countries came from families with at least one other entrepreneur. They also tended to be taller than the average. But there the similarities end. In particular, Brazilian entrepreneurs seem to have a much lower appetite for risk.

The researchers measured this by offering interviewees hypothetical bets of varying risk and reward, and offering a choice between cash now or more money at a later date. The entrepreneurs in the sample were no more risk-taking than other Brazilians, and were also more likely to retire if offered a windfall than their peers elsewhere.

Perhaps this lack of staying power is because there are many more pleasant things to do in Brazil than work. But why should Brazilians be so risk-averse? Simeon Djankov, one of the study’s authors, hypothesises that in real life Brazilian entrepreneurs run bigger risks than those elsewhere. Starting a business takes 152 days and requires 18 different procedures, according to the IFC‘s annual worldwide “Doing Business” study. It takes 2,600 hours for a medium-sized business to keep up with its taxes each year. The same hypothetical business would pay 69% of its second-year profits in tax, if it played by the rules and did not receive special tax breaks.

Brazilian entrepreneurs show an unsurprising willingness to bend the law. “Essentially what determines good entrepreneurship in Brazil is the ability to navigate around the bureaucracy,” suggests Mr Djankov. Eduardo Giannetti da Fonseca, an economist, concurs: “If Bill Gates had started Microsoft in a garage in Brazil, it would still be in the garage.” Harder to explain than why Brazil’s entrepreneurs are as they are is why they exist at all.

Valor Justo 2

março 19, 2008

The Shaq Attack on Fair Value

An accountant invokes the world of hoops to disparage fair-value purchase accounting.

CFO – March 4, 2008

Time has not quashed the backlash over fair value accounting. It’s been 18 months since the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued FAS 157, Fair Value Measurement, to set the stage for using market pricing to value corporate transactions. But opponents of the concept continue to complain about the difficulties of its practical application.

To be sure, fair-value advocates, including FASB members, tout the concept’s main benefit: that it provides investors with added transparency by forcing companies to mark to market assets and liabilities. But critics argue that fair-value accounting does the opposite. Instead of providing investors with a better picture of economic reality, fair-value accounting distorts market realties by leaving too much room for management’s discretion and potential abuse, they contend.

Early on, corporate accountants blasted the idea of introducing fair value into purchase accounting. For example, in one 2005 comment letter filed with FASB, PepsiCo senior vice president and controller Peter Bridgman declared: “We have never used anything other than a discounted cash flows analysis to evaluate and value a business combination transaction . . . We believe that the fair-value is established by the buyer and seller as a result of the business combination transaction and not as a result of a hypothetical transaction among market participants.”

Attitudes haven’t changed much. Last week, another corporate accountant, currently working on a deal, disparagingly described fair-value accounting as akin to a misguided sports fan’s assessment of pro basketball’s Shaquille O’Neal. “Fair value accounting would have us valuing Shaq’s game total at 35 points, when the scoreboard only recorded 15 for him,” said the executive who asked not to be identified. He explained that while O’Neal may be capable of scoring 35 points on any given night — and some sports analysts may figure that potential into his overall value — the reality is reflected on the scoreboard, where the true accounting takes place.

What’s more, this summer two academics blamed fair-value methodology for contributing to the credit crisis — lumping the accounting concept in with such culprits as reckless lending and inaccurate credit ratings of securitized debt. In the opinion piece they prepared for the Financial Times, Stella Fearnley of the U.K.’s Bournemouth University and Shyam Sunder of Yale School of Management, stressed the “circularity” of fair value.

By their lights, fair value assumes that markets have “good information” culled from financial results and credit-rating reports. But if rating agencies and investors get their data from corporate financials — “which are themselves based on prices inflated by a market bubble, the accounting numbers support the bubble,” the scholars argue. They continue: “So instead of informing markets through prudent valuation and controlling management excess, ‘fair’ values feed the prices back to the market.”

Other critics contend that purchase-accounting abuses could be worsened by the use of the fair value. Just last month, RiskMetrics Group, a research and consulting outfit, issued a report contending that while FAS 141(R)— the revised business-combination rule that mandates the use of fair value — tightens some purchase accounting loopholes, it widens others.

The study, “Acquisition Accounting: New Rules & Shenanigans,” for example, notes on the one hand that FAS 141(R) will make it harder for buyers to manage earnings because the rule restricts the use of restructuring reserves and in-process research-and-development write-offs. At the same time, FAS 141(R) leaves “plenty of room for management discretion and potential abuse,” the report authors write.

What’s more, co-author Dan Mahoney says, fair-value accounting leaves the door open for companies to understate assets and overstate liabilities because the assumptions are subjective.

Manipulating fair-value assumptions during the so-called “stub” period is one way companies will abuse the new purchase-accounting rules, Mahoney told The stub period is the gap between the last time a target company reports interim results and the acquisition closing date.

Under 141(R), which takes effect for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, companies are required to value the target company’s assets and liabilities, identifiable intangible assets, and some previously unrecognized contingencies at fair-market value at the time of the sale. As a result, an overly aggressive company could manipulate assumptions to understate acquired inventory, then turn around and sell the inventory and record revenue with an understated cost of sales, for example.

By doing that, a company would see a boost in gross margins and earnings when they sold the inventory at the proper market rates. Similarly, if the company uses fair-value assumptions to understate accounts receivable, it will receive a boost to earnings when the outstanding bills are eventually paid and recognized.

Mahoney also warns investors to scrutinize acquisition price adjustments in light of fair-value calculations. He explains that under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, buyers have up to one year after a deal closes to make adjustments to the purchase price allocation for assets and liabilities of the target company. Accordingly, the same earnings-boosting games can be played during the post-acquisition period that are played during the stub period.

Organic growth, a non-GAAP metric, will also be ripe for gamesmanship in purchase accounting, says Mahoney. Generally, organic growth is defined as corporate growth minus benefits attributed to acquisitions. “However, companies have come up with their own definitions of organic growth than can be misleading,” write the authors.

The study cites a situation in which an acquiring company reports an “internal” growth revenue number that includes a portion of the target company’s annual revenue, rather than removing all of it—as the acquirer should do. That accounting treatment could allow buyers to acquire targets that have just signed large deals and then later label that growth as internal, contend the authors.

Where should investors look to unearth such non-GAAP shenanigans? In the Management’s Discussion and Analysis of the company’s annual report or in earnings releases where other non-GAAP measures are discussed, says Mahoney.

Valor Justo 1

março 19, 2008

Prudential defends rules on ‘fair value’.


15 March 2008

Financial Times

London Ed1

Page 16


(c) 2008 The Financial Times Limited. All rights reserved

Prudential has defended accounting rules that force companies to state assets at the latest market prices, potentially putting the UK’s second-biggest life assurer on a collision course with some of its big US and European rivals.

American International Group and Axa, two of the world’s biggest insurers, have blamed so-called “fair value” rules for exacerbating the financial market turmoil.

Philip Broadley, outgoing finance director of Prudential and former chairman of the 100 Group of Britain’s finance directors, said he took a “pragmatic” approach to accounting and would present the group’s figures in the way demanded by users of accounts to secure the lowest cost of capital.

“It seems to me from conversations with users of accounts that the balance of opinion is in favour of fair value,” he said.

Although users recognised that fair value was not perfect and that insurers held assets to back very long liabilities, “observable market data seems to be preferred by users to management estimates”, he said.

The comments came as Prudential reported net credit losses of Pounds 78m in the US from writedowns and losses on bond sales, mostly in areas other than subprime mortgages. It took a Pounds 30m writedown on an investment in an Asian collateralised debt obligation fund.

Mr Broadley remained comfortable with the group’s Pounds 912m exposure to assets backed by subprime or by mortgages between prime and subprime as well as with its Pounds 27m exposure to monoline insurers and Pounds 377m in CDO funds, out of its total debt securities portfolio of Pounds 84bn.

But the credit writedowns contributed to a fall in pre-tax profit, calculated under International Financial Reporting Standards, from Pounds 2.22bn to Pounds 1.19bn.

Operating profit, calculated under European em-bedded value principles, rose 25 per cent to Pounds 2.54bn. This was struck after a Pounds 312m charge for holders of annuity contracts living longer, offset by releasing money set aside as a contingency.

Mark Tucker, chief executive, said Prudential might look at a secondary listing in Asia but ruled out spinning off the Asian business into a separately listed entity.

It is prepared for a Chinese insurer such as Ping An attempting to take a stake, although no contact is thought to have been made.

A final dividend of 12.3p (11.72p) makes a total payout for the year of 18p (17.14p), payable from earnings per share of 41.7p (36.2p).

The shares fell 32p to 622p.

Melhorando o futuro

março 19, 2008

Yahoo Decides to Release a Rosy Forecast

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Yahoo has released a rosy outlook for the next two years, hoping to give investors a better understanding of why the company is not willing to sell itself to Microsoft for less than $45 billion.

Analysts interpreted the company’s unscheduled disclosure on Tuesday as a sign that Yahoo’s attempts to find an alternative to Microsoft’s offer, announced Feb. 1, are not bearing fruit.

Yahoo, the Internet company based in Sunnyvale, Calif., has been exploring alliances with Google; the unit of the News Corporation; and the AOL unit of Time Warner.

With its options apparently narrowing, Yahoo is under pressure to justify its board’s decision last month to rebuff a takeover offer that was 62 percent higher than the company’s market value.

Microsoft’s cash-and-stock bid was initially valued at $44.6 billion, or $31 a share — a price that Yahoo concluded was not enough, though it came after a two-year decline in the company’s profit. By sharing internal projections drawn up in December, Yahoo appears to be making a case for either its independence or a higher offer from Microsoft.

The forecasts predict that Yahoo’s revenue — minus advertising commissions — will climb more than 70 percent during the next three years to reach $8.8 billion in 2010.

As management warned in late January, Yahoo has modest growth expectations for 2008. Yahoo still expects revenue, after subtracting advertising commissions, to total $5.7 billion this year, in line with analysts’ expectations.

But Yahoo assured investors that its plans to grab a bigger piece of online advertising will become more evident after this year, with revenue climbing by about 25 percent in 2009 and 2010.

After subtracting ad commissions, Yahoo’s revenue predictions of $7.1 billion in 2009 and $8.8 billion in 2010 are well ahead of analysts’ estimates.

Microsoft so far has not wavered from its original offer. What is more, the software maker, based in Redmond, Wash., has indicated it would try to oust Yahoo’s board if the resistance continues.

But the two sides signaled they might be ready to negotiate last week when senior executives from Yahoo and Microsoft held their first face-to-face meeting in Silicon Valley.

A Stanford Group analyst, Clayton Moran, described Yahoo’s decision to release its projections as “another step in the public negotiation between these two companies.”

“We believe this deal is turning friendly,” Mr. Moran said.

Yahoo’s shares rose $1.81, to $27.66. Microsoft shares rose $1.12, to $29.42.

Nova Lei e Carga Tributária

março 19, 2008
Convergência ao IFRS não aumenta a carga tributária

Gazeta Mercantil – 19/3/2008

São Paulo, 19 de Março de 2008 – A convergência das normas contábeis brasileiras ao padrão internacional (IFRS), determinada pela Lei 11.638/07, não implicará em aumento da carga tributária das companhias, de acordo com interpretação da Abrasca, a associação das companhias abertas. Segundo Antonio Duarte de Castro, presidente da Abrasca, a Lei 11.638/07 teve origem em um projeto elaborado pela CVM (Comissão de Valores Mobiliários), com forte apoio das entidades representativas do mercado e seu objetivo principal foi facilitar o ingresso de investimento estrangeiro na economia brasileira.

Em razão da polêmica que ainda cerca o assunto, a Abrasca depois de estudo realizado por especialistas, decidiu emitir parecer com base na avaliação que se segue. Até a promulgação da Lei 11.638/07, a escrituração da companhia era mantida em registros permanentes, com obediência aos preceitos da legislação comercial e da Lei 6.404/76 e aos princípios de contabilidade geralmente aceitos, devendo observar métodos ou critérios uniformes no tempo e registrar as mutações patrimoniais segundo o regime de competência. Eventuais ajustes para contemplar aspectos tributários ou para fins de legislações especiais eram efetuados em livros auxiliares, sem modificação da escrituração mercantil. Ao dar nova redação ao parágrafo 2º do artigo 177 da Lei 6.404/76, a Lei 11.638/07 inova por permitir que, alternativamente ao conceito anterior (que ainda permanece válido), a escrituração para fins tributários poderá ser a primeira a ser efetuada e, depois de apurados os correspondentes tributos (imposto de renda e contribuição social sobre o lucro), sejam feitos lançamentos contábeis adicionais que assegurem a preparação e divulgação das demonstrações financeiras com observância dos preceitos societários dispostos no mesmo artigo 177.

Já o parágrafo 7º do artigo 177, da Lei 6.404/76, que foi adicionado pela Lei 11.638/07, estabelece que tais lançamentos de ajustes efetuados exclusivamente para harmonização das normas contábeis e as demonstrações e apurações com eles elaboradas não poderão ser base de incidência de impostos e contribuições nem ter quaisquer outros efeitos tributários. Segundo Castro, esse dispositivo reafirma a premissa de neutralidade fiscal que norteou o projeto que deu origem a nova lei.

(Gazeta Mercantil/Finanças & Mercados – Pág. 4)(Lucia Rebouças)

Custo da Guerra

março 17, 2008
Quinto aniversario de la guerra de los tres billones

Cinco Días – 17/3/2008


La campaña en Irak cuesta 12.500 millones de dólares al mes

El próximo miércoles se cumple el quinto aniversario de la guerra de Irak. EE UU estará librando en ese territorio la segunda guerra más larga de su historia tras la de Vietnam. El ejército americano lleva un lustro persiguiendo una victoria que nadie ha definido en qué consiste y que ha costado la vida a más de 150.000 iraquíes, ha provocado el éxodo de dos millones de ellos y ha sido, también, el fin de los días de más de 4.000 soldados de EE UU.

En costes, el actual conflicto bélico supera a los de aquella guerra en Asia. De hecho, la única confrontación bélica que ha costado más que la actual es la II Guerra Mundial, cuando 16,3 millones de americanos lucharon contra Alemania y Japón. Actualizado su coste en dólares y a la inflación, esa guerra costó cinco billones de dólares (3,21 billones de euros). El conflicto en Irak, para el que se han movilizado dos millones de efectivos a la zona, costará tres billones de dólares (1,9 billones de euros), según los cálculos hechos por los catedráticos de economía Joseph Stiglitz, premio Nobel de Economía, y Linda Bilmes. Estos cálculos incluyen los costes de las operaciones militares, pero también gastos como los médicos para los veteranos, pensiones por incapacidad, indemnizaciones, la recapitalización de las Fuerzas Armadas, la reconstrucción de Irak y el interés de la deuda con la que se está financiando la contienda. También se incluyen gastos de otros departamentos del Gobierno o los costes para la economía, entre otros, y que no están detallados o no son fáciles de encontrar en las cuentas del Estado. Stiglitz y Bilmes calculan estos costes en un escenario que da por sentado que las tropas se irán retirando y la presencia será mínima en 2012. Sus cuentas se contienen en un estudio que iniciaron hace unos años y ahora se ha convertido en un libro que actualiza las cifras, titulado The three trillion dollar war. En una presentación ante los estudiantes de la Universidad de Columbia hace unos días, Stiglitz admitía que, puesto que tanto él como Bilmes habían tenido una posición muy crítica con la guerra, habían preferido optar por el lado más conservador y ofrecer la cifra más baja dentro de los rangos que sus modelos de cálculo les han ofrecido. En escenarios más complicados y siendo menos conservadores, admiten que podría llegar hasta los cinco billones.

Cifras oficiales

Estas no son cifras oficiales. El Gobierno de EE UU no ha utilizado una contabilidad clara para detallar a los contribuyentes lo que les va a costar la guerra. La mayoría de los costes vienen ligados a los de Afganistán y hay gastos ocultos en otras partidas presupuestarias y otros departamentos que son distintos de los solicitados como atribuibles de forma directa al combate.

De acuerdo con las cifras oficiales de costes directos de operaciones, y si se incluye la cantidad pedida al Congreso en 2008, desde 2001 se habrán gastado 845.000 millones de dólares. Estos son los gastos de Irak y Afganistán, pero la mayoría corresponden al primero. La guerra de Irak, que costaba 4.400 millones al mes en 2003 ha pasado a 12.500 millones mensuales. Para cada hogar, la cuenta al mes es de 138 dólares, de ellos, más de 100 por Irak. Según Stiglitz, el aumento de estos gastos mensuales se debe al mayor número de subcontratas para actividades militares, las reparaciones y reposiciones de equipo militar sofisticado, los elevados costes de las tropas y los cada vez mayores gastos de alistamiento (para seguir haciendo atractivo un ejército que es voluntario), además de la formación de las fuerzas iraquíes. Estas cuentas están muy lejos de ser las que hizo el Gobierno en 2003. Entonces, uno de sus asesores, Larry Lindsey, fue despedido por filtrar que el coste sería de 200.000 millones de dólares cuando Defensa los calculaba en 50.000 millones. Stiglitz dice que no es que EE UU no se pueda permitir este dinero, sino que se podían haber hecho muchas cosas con él, como financiar las pensiones para las próximos 60 años o un Plan Marshall para Oriente Medio.


março 17, 2008
Auto-regulação ganha espaço com respaldo da CVM

Valor EconômicoColocar a raposa para cuidar do galinheiro pode não parecer a melhor solução, mas a experiência mostra que pode ajudar a manter as galinhas ciscando no seu devido lugar. No mercado de capitais brasileiro, a prática da auto-regulação vem se sofisticando cada dia mais. Os participantes do mercado vêm criando novos e cada vez mais complexos mecanismos de organização. Uma das mais recentes iniciativas de peso nesse sentido, que deve ser implantada a partir de julho deste ano, evidencia a ampliação dos limites da auto-regulação e o respaldo que ela conquistou do próprio regulador. Conforme antecipado pelo Valor, a Associação Nacional dos Bancos de Investimento (Anbid) fará um convênio com a Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (CVM) para analisar as ofertas públicas de títulos mobiliários. A idéia é que todo o material pertinente chegue já avaliado na autarquia. Luiz Fernando Resende, vice-presidente da Anbid, explica que, primeiramente, a associação avaliará as emissões de títulos de dívida.

Depois, iniciará o acompanhamento das distribuições públicas de ações de companhias já listadas na Bovespa. Só então é que passará a analisar as ofertas inicias, de companhias que abrirão capital. Na prática, esse convênio significa que os agentes do mercado alcançaram um grau tal de confiança que poderão fazer uma parte do trabalho que, até então, era feito pela CVM. “A auto-regulação não é nova no Brasil. Vem de um ciclo longo, iniciado em 1998. É um dos pilares do ‘boom’ que o mercado de capitais brasileiro viveu”, diz Maria Helena Santana, presidente da autarquia. A expansão citada pela presidente da CVM são as aberturas de capital ocorridas a partir de 2004. O Novo Mercado e os níveis de governança da Bovespa, também iniciativas de auto-regulação, são parte importante da explicação desse sucesso. O espaço tido como de excelência em governança da bolsa paulista conta hoje com 93 participantes. No Nível 1 há outros 44 e no Nível 2, mais 20. Em 1998, ano citado por Maria Helena, foi lançado o código Anbid. As regras criadas pela organização, mais tarde, vieram a balizar a instrução 400 da CVM, que regula ofertas de títulos de dívida e ações. Ser fonte de inspiração para o regulador e a capacidade de ser mais ágil são justamente os pontos da auto-regulação mais citados como positivos pelos especialistas. Gilberto Mifano, diretor-geral da Bovespa, destaca que iniciativas adotadas pelo mercado costumam ser seguidas, mais à frente, pelo regulador. “Antes, as exigências do Nível 1 tinham uma diferença maior sobre as regras obrigatórias a todos do que hoje”, diz.Além disso, complementa Mauro Cunha, vice-presidente do Instituto Brasileiro de Governança Corporativa (IBGC), a auto-regulação tem um custo muito mais baixo. Essa economia é enfatizada também por Maria Helena. “A auto-regulação libera recursos do regulador para outras questões. E também dá conforto a respeito do cumprimento das regras”, diz ela. Mas a capacidade (ou a falta de) dos agentes auto-reguladores para fiscalizar e punir com o empenho necessário é o que mais causa preocupação no avanço desse processo. A história recente do mercado de capitais mais desenvolvido do mundo, o americano, mostra que a raposa pode sim cair em tentação. Por isso, ela também precisa de um fiscalizador. Até as fraudes contábeis do começo da década, as auditorias não eram reguladas nos Estados Unidos. Depois dos escândalos que destruíram nomes como Enron e WorldCom, o país decidiu criar um órgão para fiscalizar os auditores. Por isso, Edison Garcia, superintendente da Associação dos Investidores do Mercado de Capitais (Amec), diz que o sucesso da auto-regulação depende da maturidade dos participantes do mercado. “É um processo de construção de credibilidade em que os agentes admitem que seus pares submetam penas e multas. Assim, adere-se às regras para participar de um grupo.” A avaliação, em dado momento, pode ser que as regras precisam ser mais rígidas para que a credibilidade no sistema aumente. Ser mais exigente com seu próprio grupo pode trazer ganhos para o mercado como um todo.Além da Anbid, outras associações têm iniciativas de auto-regulação. A Associação Brasileira das Companhias de Capital Aberto (Abrasca) fornece regras, por exemplo, para a política de comunicação de fatos relevantes das empresas registradas na CVM. O Instituto Brasileiro de Relações com Investidores (Ibri), por sua vez, prepara um processo de certificação da política das companhias de relacionamento com o mercado. Segundo João Nogueira Batista, presidente do conselho de administração, a idéia é desenvolver as bases do processo neste ano para aplicar em 2009.A contabilidade também avança no terreno da auto-regulação. Hoje as regras são conjuntamente decididas entre a CVM e o Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis (CPC), órgão que reúne seis entidades de mercado, das companhias abertas aos analistas de investimentos.Há outras iniciativas de criação de códigos e parâmetros de conduta que não têm a mesma capacidade punitiva, mas que se multiplicam velozmente. Hoje, praticamente todas as grandes companhias regulam por meio de códigos de conduta e ética o comportamento de seus executivos. Os temas tratados em tais documentos vão desde o cuidado com informações sigilosas a questões ambientais e negociação com ações da empresa. “Essas iniciativas são muito importantes pelo caráter preventivo”, destaca Maria Helena. Porém, para que funcionem é preciso seriedade na adoção dos códigos de conduta pelas empresas e pelos executivos. “Não podem ser apenas instrumentos de marketing.”Na semana passada, José Guimarães Monforte, presidente do IBGC, explicou porque as medidas de auto-regulação estão mais complexas, ao lançar a primeira carta diretriz do instituto (que trata sobre independência do conselho de administração). Segundo ele, o Brasil já começa a apresentar questões e dilemas de um país com um mercado desenvolvido. Por isso, precisa que os participantes passem a discutir e debater assuntos polêmicos em profundidade. “Passamos anos divulgando melhores práticas para companhias. Agora, temos de ir além.” Não por acaso os próximos temas a serem avaliados pelo IBGC são as chamadas “pílulas de veneno”, aquelas cláusulas nos estatutos das companhias que visam impedir ou dificultar tomadas hostis de controle, e os laudos de avaliação, documentos que balizam preço ou as relações de trocas de ações em casos de incorporação, cisão ou aquisição.Resende, da Anbid, acredita que a auto-regulação do mercado brasileiro está mais avançada e à frente da organização apresentada até mesmo em países desenvolvidos. Para Monforte, do IBGC, um dos destaques do país é a coesão entre as organizações e os participantes de mercado. “As diversas associações se auxiliam no processo de formulação das regras e mesmo na fiscalização.”


março 14, 2008
Demonstrativos de leasing terão mudanças com o IFRS

Gazeta Mercantil – 14/3/2008São Paulo, 14 de Março de 2008 – As operações de arrendamento mercantil, conhecidas como leasing, devem sofrer importantes modificações dentro dos balanços das companhias do País após a implementação das novas normas contábeis. A principal alteração é a que obriga que todas as transações que levem à transferência de titularidade do bem ao final dos contratos seja considerada uma modalidade de venda financiada nos demonstrativos das empresas. O procedimento não é adotado atualmente. De acordo com especialistas consultados pela Gazeta Mercantil , a maioria dos contratos de leasing é assinado como se fosse da modalidade operacional. Na prática, significa que as empresas envolvidas consideram esses arrendamentos uma forma de locação do bem.

No entanto, o IAS 17 – parágrafo do IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards) que trata de leasing – também engloba o aluguel, desde que transfira o direito do uso do bem em troca do pagamento. “A principal novidade será o reconhecimento de um novo ativo nos balanços”, afirma o sócio da PricewaterhouseCoopers, Fábio Cajazeira. “A idéia da legislação foi deixar bem acomodada na contabilidade a questão dos direitos e obrigações com os bens e as prestações pagas por ele”, diz o consultor.

A demonstração das despesas com arrendamento mercantil tem variações que dependem da classificação entre a modalidade financeira ou operacional. A clareza com que esses dados passarão a ser dispostos nos balanços será um dos principais fatores para compreender a vida financeira das companhias. A opinião é do sócio de auditoria da Deloitte, Marcelo Magalhães. “O arrendamento financeiro, que configura uma aquisição, costuma ter uma curva de parcelas ascendente. O operacional, similar a uma locação, tende a ter custos lineares”, compara. Segundo o especialista, clientes que utilizam muito o leasing, como as empresas aéreas, podem sofrer impactos em seus resultados pela adequação à lei. “Isso acontecerá, por exemplo, se elas estiverem submetidas a um alto grau de endividamento com operações de arrendamento mercantil. Um indicador que pode ser alterado é a rentabilidade futura”, exemplifica Magalhães.

Com a adoção às regras do IFRS, projeta o executivo da Deloitte, profissionais que elaboram análise dessas empresas e seus acionistas serão os principais beneficiados. “Há empresas aéreas listadas na Bovespa que já preparam as demonstrações da forma mais adequada. O comportamento é interpretado como um conjunto de melhores práticas. A chegada do IFRS deve diminuir os desequilíbrios de informação entre esses diferentes públicos”, estima Magalhães.

Opinião parecida tem o presidente do Ibracon (Instituto dos Auditores Independentes do Brasil), Francisco Pappelás. “As modificações da implantação de IFRS não trarão alterações nos resultados das empresas de leasing. O que certamente veremos é uma grande mudança na formatação dos demonstrativos”, diz.

Outro que compartilha essa visão é Nelson Carvalho, presidente do conselho consultivo do órgão internacionalmente responsável pela atualização de normas contábeis, o Iasb (International Accounting Standards Board). “As alterações que levarão à convergência contábil internacional conseguirão melhorar muito as informações de leasing nos balanços”, diz. “Hoje, quando viajo de avião, faço um passeio virtual. Afinal, as aeronaves não estão adequadamente contabilizadas”, brinca Carvalho, que também é professor da Fipecafi (Fundação Instituto de Pesquisas Contábeis, Atuariais e Financeiras).

Vida útil econômica

Outro ponto aprimorado pelo IFRS com relação às demonstrações de leasing é, para os especialistas, o que trata da vida útil dos bens arrendados. “O primeiro pronunciamento divulgado pelo CPC (Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis) esclarece bastante a questão, fornecendo os métodos necessários para demonstrar as possíveis perdas ao longo do tempo”, diz Cajazeira, da Price.

A atual Lei das S.A., para os executivos, não traz elementos necessários para avaliações adequadas. “Nossas empresas não estão habituadas a saber lidar com essa questão. Essa é uma das principais novidades introduzidas pela lei”, diz o vice-coordenador técnico do CPC e também professor da Fipecafi, Eliseu Martins. Os especialistas em IFRS entrevistados pela Gazeta Mercantil têm a mesma opinião sobre a formatação de contratos para os consumidores de pessoa física da modalidade leasing: nada deve mudar.

Procurada pela reportagem, por meio de sua assessoria de imprensa, a Abel (Associação Brasileira das Empresas de Leasing), respondeu que não se manifestaria sobre o assunto. A entidade afirmou, ainda, que segue todas as normas da lei que regula o segmento, a 6.099.

(Gazeta Mercantil/Finanças & Mercados – Pág. 1)(Luciano Feltrin)


março 14, 2008
A single set of accounting standards is inevitable: Samuel A. Dipiazza
R. Sridharan and Shalini S. Dagar

Business Today – 23/3/2008
As the CEO of PricewaterhouseCoopers, Samuel A. DiPiazza Jr. runs the world’s biggest audit and advisory firm, with revenues of $25.2 billion and a headcount of 146,767 (June 2007). It’s a job DiPiazza has held for six years now with two more to go. When the accounting scandal at Enron blew up in late 2001, DiPiazza, who joined the firm in 1973, lost no time in telling the world how to prevent such scandals in future. His book Building Public Trust: The Future of Corporate Reporting, co-authored with PwC colleague and former Harvard Business School professor Robert G. Eccles, was published in 2002 and made a case for greater transparency and accountability in financial reporting. DiPiazza currently serves as a Trustee of the International Accounting Standards Committee Foundation and is Chairman of the World Business Council on Sustainable Development. Recently in India, DiPiazza, 57, spoke to BT’s R. Sridharan and Shalini S.

Dagar on how much things have improved since and how much more they can improve. Excerpts:

Q. It’s been a little over five years since you co-authored your book Building Public Trust in the wake of the Enron and other accounting scandals. Has the accounting environment changed for the better since?

A. In the 1990s, the focus of business was really on revenue growth. Valuations were driven on growth numbers, not necessarily income. There was an attitude in business, almost an obsession, of creating wealth and I think we were out of balance, particularly in the US. As I look back now, and see the changes, they’ve been dramatic. Supervisory boards understand their obligation to provide oversight, to have a firm hand over the control structures, and the accountability of companies. The management understands the risk of pushing the envelope and their obligation to being transparent and, frankly, the price they pay when their organisation is not transparent. The (audit) profession has responded very well to this over the last four-five years. Are we perfect? No. We will make mistakes, we’re big. At times you will have someone who makes a mistake by accident. If it’s an accident we treat them, we help them learn. We don’t tolerate multiple mistakes, but we try to coach them through that. If it’s on purpose, we fire them.

Q. Is the cost of compliance a big issue for corporations around the world?

A. We do a survey every year of about 1,000 CEOs around the world and it’s interesting to see how their attitudes change over the time. We are just completing our survey that was done in December. Regulation has always been the biggest issue on the mind of the CEOs. But last year we began to see that regulation wasn’t the first, it second. The first issue was people. So, the access to the talent was getting the focus of CEOs as the primary issue that they faced every year. Now, this year, regulation was reported as third. Second, will be people. And first, will be global economic growth, and CEOs are very focussed on what’s happening across the world in the economic environment. And they worry about it as it affects their own business.

Q. Is the accounting industry still too controlled by the big (four) audit firms. Why isn’t there more competition?

A. First, you have to understand why the industry went from eight to four. When there were eight firms, it was often the case that a firm would be very strong in one geography and very weak in another. Because of that, we were not as capable of serving companies that were moving across the world. And so those early mergers happened. Our own merger 10 years ago happened (Price Waterhouse merged with Coopers & Lybrand) to fill the gaps. It was all about filling competencies and gaps. So, it went from eight to five, really as a pressure around audit quality. It went from five to four because of the (Arthur) Andersen collapse, which none of us was happy to see and frankly I’d prefer five firms… Now, what do you do with four? It is clear, and I think that there’ve been plenty of studies to suggest, that this is not a competitive issue. The CEOs that try to live in denial, that want to live inside their own border… eventually they find themselves out of business The environment is still very competitive, pricing is very competitive, and the firms aggressively are competing against each other. If any one was to ask the question it would be more about choice. Four firms, is it enough (choice)? We’ve seen very little issue with people finding auditors unless those firms have higher risk. We are now in a position with just four firms, where no client influences our behaviour. We’re big enough that if our largest client decides that they want to disengage us because we’re too tough, that’s fine, because we have so much coverage around the world. I think the real question is, how do you make sure that you keep four firms and not lose one. It’s about the risk of going from four to three, or from four to two, and what would happen to the industry if something like that was to happen. That becomes the real public policy question.

Q. Is there still too much that firms like PwC do in terms of services to one client you’re doing auditing, you’re doing tax advisory and you’re also doing consulting for them. Wouldn’t there be some sort of conflict that gets built into this kind of a model?

A. I simply don’t accept that. There’ve been considerable number of academic studies that have shown that where we have engaged with a client in a broader set of activities, the likelihood of audit failure is much lower because we have a deeper understanding of the company. Another piece of that is when we audit, we don’t just use accounts. Our auditing requires tax people, it requires actuaries, it requires technology people all different types of skills. If you were to take one of these audit firms and say ‘you only do audits’, we would have a very difficult time attracting those kinds of talents and the quality of audits would go down.

Q. Earlier you’d mentioned that businesses would continue to make mistakes. No one has issues with mistakes that happen due to bad strategy. But what happened in Japan with one of your clients in 2006 was cheating and that affected PwC very badly. So, have companies actually learnt and are they keen on being clean?

A. I think the vast, vast majority of companies have always had a commitment to being clean, to do the right thing, before Enron, and after Enron. But I also believe that you operate in a world where if people want to break the rules, if they feel personal pressure or greed, they’ll try to break the rules. And you need processes and activities to keep that from happening. And whenever we feel that one of our people has done something wrong not just made a mistake, but something morally illegal we take very harsh action, and our situation in Japan shows that. We, effectively, shut that firm down. It cost us hundreds of millions of dollars of business, but we didn’t blink.

Q. But do you think it’s possible for auditors to prevent fraud?

A. Actually, I think auditors prevent fraud every day because we are the eyes and ears of industry. We come to the table with an independent point of view. We test, question, and we challenge. CEOs encourage us to do this. So, there’s no question in my mind that the entire audit profession has, over the years, prevented fraud. We find often, during the course of a year, people pushing that envelope. And most of the time it’s not visible, it’s not public because it’s fixed before it ever becomes a factor. People are fired, and it’s very quiet and that’s the job we have.

Q. In some sense, you’re not just the eyes and ears of the industry, but also the conscience of the client.

A. Yes, and boards… you asked about change. Today, CEOs and supervisory boards are deeply into what we do. So, it’s not we and they , we’re in this with the boards and with the management. Reputational damage done through financial mis-statement is huge and no one wants their name connected to that. No board member, no supervisory board member and no CEO. Sometimes, the pressures they put create that incentive in their company and they have to understand that they can only push so far before people might go too far.

Q. Is globalisation making the job harder for firms like yours?

A. I think globalisation has made the entire world more complex, not just for a firm like PWC. Competitors are coming from different places, supply chains are connected in different ways, risks are (in) places you don’t expect in every piece of your business. The opportunity is also at a much higher level because globalisation opens markets. The CEOs that try to live in denial, that want to live inside their own border… eventually they’ll find themselves out of business. Q. In your 2007 review, you talked about how the M&A environment has been very robust and that’s helped the extraordinary number that PwC announced. What’s the M&A outlook for 2008 and 2009?A. There’s no question that many of the major economies have started to slow a bit, especially in the US. There’s also concern about the weakening dollar, the effect it has on the rupee, the effect it has on many places around the world. The credit crisis in 2007 continues to be difficult. But in light of all that, you see 2007 as being one of the strongest M&A years in history and, frankly, we see 2008 being very strong as well. It’ll be different because what you saw happening in 2006 and part of 2007 was transactions… acquisitions being driven by private equity. We are the eyes and ears of the industry… There’s no question in my mind that the entire audit profession has, over the years, prevented fraud Today, you’re seeing transactions moving towards strategic corporates because the leverage of private equity has changed. You also see lots of sovereign wealth funds in play and now you see companies in markets like Brazil, India and Russia being major buyers. So, the capital shift is beginning to show itself in the acquisition game (and) that’s actually going to take the acquisition game into an even higher level.

Q. PwC has been growing in India at between 35 and 40 per cent. What are the challenges for the firm in ensuring that it keeps growing on an increasing base?

A. Well, it is difficult to grow any business at 35-40 per cent year after year without experiencing some problems. Problems in attracting people, problems in making sure your processes are stable. When you go from 3,000 people to 5,000 people like we’ve done in the past few years and now heading to 10,000 people, you need to put in place very different processes around recruiting and retaining people. I think our team has done a great job in building that foundation. In our significant emerging markets Eastern Europe, South America, China, India, and Turkey we have strong infrastructure in place. So, I feel we’re in good shape to take this from 5,000 to 10,000, in a very short period of time.

Q. How far are we from a common set of global accounting standards, realistically speaking?

A. When I wrote Building Public Trust in 2002, I led that book by saying that the issue with many of these corporate failures was transparency. Accounting standards were too complex and frankly, transparency didn’t exist. And I said, one of the key issues was moving towards a single global standard. And if you look around the world, over a 100 countries are using IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards) today. India will be there within three years. Before this is over, and I feel we have the chance, between now and the middle of the next decade, to have one standard around the world and that standard will be IFRS. It’s not about converging India with IFRS, or US GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) with IFRS. This is about moving towards a single global standard. I think this is a path that, at this point, could happen very, very quickly.