SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Apple Inc.
AAPL 262.22-1.9%Jan 6 3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (68663)9/17/2007 11:55:06 AM
From: inaflash   of 213180
 
Stock Options: To Expense or Not To Expense
nam.org

Until recently, expensing options was not an accounting requirement. Companies chose whether to expense them or not, as long as it was clear what they were doing. And only recently has backdating clarity been provided as to what constitutes legal versus illegal activity. For the longest time, I don't think anyone really considered the collision of these two effects, and treated them independently. I recall Jobs was attributed as speaking against expensing options while CEO of Apple. Much of what was done wasn't designed to bypass any laws, but simply following a method of accounting. Later legal changes made following those steps illegal in certain situations and companies changed along with it. Many of the investigations are simply bringing this to light. Activities that these companies did 10 years ago may be considered illegal under todays rules, but that doesn't mean that any of these companies actually broke any current laws then or now. The confusion is that standards HAVE changed, and seem to be applied retrospectively. It will be nice to see the statue of limitions expire, so this black cloud can be lifted, especially for all the innocent companies.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext