Coming pucks?
FASB 157 – Level 3 to see at least a bit of light? (Note: I think the implementation date may have been pushed out but not sure)
From fasb.org
And Here rgemonitor.com
This Statement clarifies that a fair value measurement for a liability reflects its nonperformance risk (the risk that the obligation will not be fulfilled). Because nonperformance risk includes the reporting entity’s credit risk, the reporting entity should consider the effect of its credit risk (credit standing) on the fair value of the liability in all periods in which the liability is measured at fair value under other accounting pronouncements, including FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.
This Statement affirms the requirement of other FASB Statements that the fair value of a position in a financial instrument (including a block) that trades in an active market should be measured as the product of the quoted price for the individual instrument times the quantity held (within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy). The quoted price should not be adjusted because of the size of the position relative to trading volume (blockage factor). This Statement extends that requirement to broker-dealers and investment companies within the scope of the AICPA Audit and Accounting Guides for those industries.
This Statement expands disclosures about the use of fair value to measure assets and liabilities in interim and annual periods subsequent to initial recognition. The disclosures focus on the inputs used to measure fair value and for recurring fair value measurements using significant unobservable inputs (within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy), the effect of the measurements on earnings (or changes in net assets) for the period. This Statement encourages entities to combine the fair value information disclosed under this Statement with the fair value information disclosed under other accounting pronouncements, including FASB Statement No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments, where practicable.
………………………..
Japanese Banks holding Sub-Prime ?
From seekingalpha.com
And here businessweek.com
While banks in the U.S. and Europe are writing down billions of dollars in subprime losses, Japanese banks have been surprisingly stable. Japan's banking industry, hammered by the collapse of the nation's real estate bubble in the early 1990s, have not reported gigantic losses related to the collapse of the American real estate bubble of the mid-2000s. That's prompted some analysts to ask, Is it possible Japan's banks really do have relatively little exposure to the subprime tsunami that is wiping out billions in earnings at the likes of UBS (UBS), Merrill Lynch (MER), and Citigroup (C)?
Chief among the skeptics is Hans Redeker, currency chief at BNP Paribas (BNPP.PA). In a research note to clients early this month, he warned that Japan may be hiding billions of dollars in subprime losses that so far no one has admitted to owning. His argument is simple: Japan, as the world's largest creditor nation, plays a central role in pumping global liquidity, aided by its ultra-low interest rates. But its biggest banks, which include "megabanks" Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MTU), Mizuho Financial Group (MFG), and Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group (8316.T), have admitted to only $5 billion or so of subprime-related losses, a remarkably small figure considering the losses at American and European banks already run to more than $130 billion.
What's more, with some estimates putting the total subprime black hole at $400 billion to $500 billion, somebody somewhere could be sitting on $300 billion of subprime losses. Japan, in Redeker's view, is a suspect. "We think this is where the next big problem is going to pop up," he told Britain's Daily Telegraph newspaper, echoing comments he made in a research note to clients Feb.
.....
BT
NNNN
nonrev |
