Printer Friendly

To consolidate or not: for some companies, that is the question.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

* AMONG ENRON'S PROBLEMS WAS ITS USE of variable interest entities, which allowed it to leave significant amounts of debt off its balance sheet. In response to concern about this practice, FASB issued interpretation no. 46 in January 2003 and a revised version in December 2003 to help companies decide whether to consolidate VIEs into their financial statements.

* A VIE MUST BE CONSOLIDATED INTO THE FINANCIAL statements of the primary beneficiary company when it does not have enough equity at risk or its equity investors lack any of three characteristics of controlling financial interest. The equity at risk should be sufficient for the VIE to finance its activities without additional support.

* A VIE'S PRIMARY BENEFICIARY TYPICALLY IS ABLE to make decisions about the entity and share in profits and losses. The primary beneficiary is the reporting entity, if any, that receives the majority of expected returns or absorbs the majority of expected losses.

* CPAs SHOULD RECONSIDER A DECISION ABOUT WHETHER an entity is a VIE if its situation changes so its equity investment at risk is no longer adequate, some or all of the equity investment is returned to investors or the entity undertakes additional activities, acquires additional assets or receives an additional equity Investment that is at risk.

* THE GUIDANCE IN INTERPRETATION NO. 46(R) is causing reporting entities to make new decisions about whether affiliated entities need to be consolidated into their financial statements. The practical result of the new rules is that many reporting entities are adding significant assets and liabilities to their balance sheets.

Among myriad accounting problems that led to the downfall of Enron was its use of variable interest entities (VIEs), allowing it to leave significant amounts of debt off its balance sheet. In response to widespread concerns about this business practice, FASB issued Interpretation no. 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, in January 2003 and Interpretation no. 46 (Revised) with the same name in December 2003. Both interpret Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB) no. 51, Consolidated Financial Statements, to address consolidation requirements for businesses that are affiliated with VIEs.

Interpretation no. 46(R) addresses the consolidation of business enterprises where the usual consolidation condition--ownership of a majority voting interest--does not apply. It focuses on controlling financial interests achieved by means other than voting. Where there is no voting interest, a company's exposure to the assets' risks and rewards represent the best evidence of control. When a company holds a majority of variable interests in another entity, it is considered the primary beneficiary and must consolidate that entity into its financial statements.

The purpose of this article is to explain the substantive provisions of Interpretation no. 46(K) and provide CPAs with practical guidance on the ongoing process of deciding whether a VIE needs to be consolidated, the measurements the primary reporting entity should use in consolidation and the required disclosures.

Public companies were required to implement the consolidation provisions in Interpretation no. 46(R) in 2003 and 2004. Private companies with an interest in a VIE that was created after December 31, 2003, should have consolidated those entities immediately. Most private Companies with VIEs that existed on December 31, 2003, made transition disclosures during calendar year 2004 and were required to consolidate those VIEs no later than calendar year 2005.

WHO SHOULD CONSOLIDATE?

Under Interpretation no. 46(R) a VIE must be consolidated into the financial statements of the primary beneficiary company when either of the following conditions exist:

* The VIE does not have sufficient equity investment at risk.

* Equity investors in the VIE lack any of three characteristics of controlling financial interest. Investors with such an interest

* Participate in decision-making processes by voting their shares.

* Expect to share in returns generated by the entity.

* Absorb any losses the entity may incur.

To avoid consolidation the total equity investment at risk should be sufficient for the VIE to finance its activities without additional support. CPAs can help reporting entities evaluate the sufficiency of equity at risk using qualitative or quantitative methods. Use the qualitative approach first to make the consolidation vs. nonconsolidation decision; use the quantitative approach if qualitative methods don't result in a definitive conclusion. Where neither approach provides an answer, use a combination of the two.

Qualitatively, a VIE must be able to demonstrate it can get nonrecourse financing from an unrelated party without additional subordinated financial support from other entities or individuals, including equity investors. Examples of such support include equity investments, loans, guarantees and commitments to fund operations. When provided by related parties, such support is considered provided by the primary reporting entity. In many cases involving private companies, these additional support arrangements exist between and among affiliated entities and indicate there is not sufficient equity at risk for the VIE to operate on a standalone basis.

Quantitatively, the general rule is that at least 10% of the fair value of the VIE's assets must be provided as an equity investment. (A lesser investment does not give the entity sufficient equity to operate alone.) The 10% rule is not a safe harbor--having more equity at risk should not lead CPAs to presume the VIE has sufficient equity at risk to cover any expected losses.

If the equity investors lack any of the three characteristics described above, the VIE's primary beneficiary must consolidate the entity. Conversely, where equity investors have these characteristics and the other requirements in Interpretation no. 46(R.), no investor needs to consolidate the VIE.

A VIE's primary beneficiary is the entity that will consolidate it in its financial statements. In some cases, it is relatively easy to determine which entity is the primary beneficiary through a qualitative analysis of the entity's ability to make decisions about the VIE and share in its profits or losses. In those circumstances where one entity receives the majority of expected returns and another absorbs the majority of expected losses, the entity that absorbs the losses is the primary beneficiary. This means the ability to absorb expected losses is a tie-breaker CPAs should use to determine which entity, if any, is a VIE's primary beneficiary. However, CPAs should base the consolidation vs. nonconsolidation decision on a determination of which entity holds a majority of the variable interests in another entity. Exhibit 1, page 77, describes a public company that had already implemented Interpretation no. 46(R). Exhibit 2, page 78, includes some practical issues CPAs working with private companies should consider in deciding whether to consolidate.
Exhibit 1: Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities--Public Company Example

In evaluating whether an affiliated entity
needed to be consolidated using the guidance
in Interpretation no. 46(R), some
reporting entities initially concluded they
were not the primary beneficiary of a VIE
and later concluded they were the primary
beneficiary. The relationship between Dell
Inc. and Dell Financial Services illustrates
this point.

Initial Conclusion (excerpted from
2003 10-K filing). The company is
currently a partner in Dell Financial
Services LP (DFS), a joint venture
with CIT Group Inc. (CIT). The
joint venture allows the company to
provide customers with various financing
alternatives and asset management
services as a part of the total
service offered to the customer. CIT,
as a financial services company, is the
entity that finances the transaction
between DFS and the customer.

In accordance with the partnership
agreement between the company
and CIT, losses generated by DFS
are allocated to CIT. Net income in
DFS is allocated 70% to the company
and 30% to CIT, after CIT has
recovered any cumulative losses. The
company's share of DFS new income
is reflected in investment and other
income, net.

The company recognized approximately
$4 million of cumulative
pretax earnings as of the end of fiscal
2003. In the event DFS is terminated
with a cumulative deficit, Dell is not
obligated to fund any losses. Although
the company has a 70% equity
interest in DFS, because the
company cannot and does not exercise
voting or operational control
over DFS, the investment is accounted
for under the equity method.

The company's investment in
DFS at January 31, 2003, was $35
million. Equity income in DFS and
any intercompany balances were
immaterial to the company's results
of operations and financial position
for fiscal 2003, 2002 and 2001. Had
the company controlled--and as a
result consolidated--DFS, the impact
to the company's reported revenue
and earnings would not have
been material for fiscal 2003, 2002
and 2001.

Resolution (excerpted from 2004 10-K
filing). Dell is currently a partner in
DFS, a joint venture with CIT. The
joint venture allows Dell to provide
its customers with various financing
alternatives while CIT provides the
financing for the transaction between
DFS and the customer. In general,
DFS facilitates customer-financing
transactions through either loan or
lease financing.

Dell currently owns a 70% equity
interest in DFS. In accordance with
the partnership agreement between
Dell and CIT, losses generated by
DFS are fully allocated to CIT. Net
income generated by DFS is allocated
70% to Dell and 30% to CIT,
after CIT has recovered any cumulative
losses. If DFS is terminated
with a cumulative deficit, Dell is not
obligated to fund any losses, including
any potential losses on receivables
transferred to CIT. Although Dell
has a 70% equity interest in DFS,
prior to the third quarter of fiscal
2004, the investment was accounted
for under the equity method because
the company historically could not,
and currently does not, exercise control
over DFS.

In January 2003, the FASB issued
FIN 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities. FIN 46 provides that, if
an entity is the primary beneficiary
of a VIE, the assets, liabilities, and results
of operations of the VIE should
be consolidated in the entity's financial
statements. Based on the guidance
in FIN 46, Dell concluded that
DFS is a VIE and Dell is the primary
beneficiary of DFS's expected cash
flows. Accordingly, Dell began consolidating
DFS's financial results at
the beginning of the third quarter of
fiscal 2004. The consolidation of
DFS had no impact on Dell's net income
or earnings per share during
fiscal 2004 because Dell has historically
been recording its 70% equity
interest in DFS under the equity
method. The impact to any individual
line item on Dell's consolidated
statement of income was not material;
however, the consolidation of
DFS increased DelI's consolidated assets
and liabilities by $55 million.
CIT's equity ownership in the net
assets of DFS as of January 30, 2004,
was $17 million, which is recorded
as minority interest and included in
other noncurrent liabilities on Dell's
consolidated statement of financial
position. The consolidation has not
altered the partnership agreement or
risk-sharing arrangement between
Dell and CIT.

Exhibit 2: Consolidation of VIEs by Private Companies

It's not uncommon for the owners of private companies
to personally own the real estate used in the
business and to lease it under an operating lease. In
those cases the company must decide whether the real
estate and any related mortgage need to be recognized in
its financial statements. In the past, only rents paid by the
business were reflected in the financial statements.

Here's a three-step decision-making process CPAs
should use to determine if this is necessary.

Step 1: Is the real estate "housed" in an entity? If the answer
is no, there is no consolidation requirement under
Interpretation no. 46(R).

* Entities subject to this provision might be corporations,
partnerships, limited liability companies and
grantor and other trusts.

* If the owners of the business own the real estate
outside an entity, there is no requirement to consolidate
it into the financial statements of the business.

Step 2: If the answer in step 1 is yes, the next question
would be, Is that entity a VIE? If the answer is no, there
is no consolidation requirement under Interpretation no.
46(R).

* There should be sufficient equity at risk for the VIE
to operate on a stand-alone basis.

* Equity investors should have the characteristics typically
associated with a controlling financial interest.

* There should be no guarantees from other entities
or owners.

* There should be no additional collateral.

* There should be no subordinated debt outstanding
(second mortgages or intercompany loans).

* There should be no loans from equity investors or
related parties to those equity investors.

* There should be no above-market lease payments or
management fees.

Step 3: If the answer in step 2 is yes, then which entity, if
any, is the primary beneficiary of the VIE? If no entity is
the primary beneficiary, there is no consolidation requirement
under Interpretation no. 46(R).

* There can only be one primary beneficiary associated
with a VIE.

* The primary beneficiary may be determined qualitatively
without undertaking an exhaustive quantitative
analysis.

* The primary beneficiary provides the majority of
the VIE's financial support.

* The primary beneficiary receives the majority of
expected returns and absorbs the majority of expected
losses.

* If one investor is entitled to the majority of expected
returns and another must absorb the majority of expected
losses, the latter is the primary beneficiary.

Using the guidance in Interpretation no. 46(R), not all
VIEs need to be consolidated, paralleling the requirement
that not all voting interest entities are consolidated under
ARB no. 51. To the extent risk has been effectively disbursed
between and among investors, the result might be
that no entity is considered a VIE's primary beneficiary.


BUSINESS CONSOLIDATIONS

In replacing the original Interpretation no. 46, FASB concluded a primary reporting entity need not evaluate activities deemed to be businesses to determine whether they are VIEs unless certain conditions exist. Excluded entities should use other accounting literature to determine whether consolidation is required. CPAs should consider an entity for consolidation if one or more of these conditions exist:

* The reporting entity, its related parties or both participated significantly in the design or redesign of the entity. This condition does not apply if the entity is an operating joint venture under control of the reporting entity and one or more independent parties or a franchisee.

* The entity is designed so that substantially all of its activities either involve or are conducted on behalf of the reporting entity and its related parties.

* The reporting entity, its related parties or both provide more than half of the total equity, subordinated debt or other forms of subordinated financial support based on an analysis of the fair values of interests in the entity.

* The entity's activities are primarily related to securitizations or other forms of asset-backed financings or single-lessee leasing arrangements.

MEASUREMENT ISSUES

When determining whether primary beneficiaries should initially measure assets, liabilities and noncontrolling interests in VIEs at fair value or carrying value, CPAs need to evaluate whether the primary beneficiary and the VIE are commonly controlled. Examples of common control include cases where one individual owns a controlling interest in several corporations with related operations or multiple entities under common management.

Except for entities under common control and assets and liabilities consolidated shortly after transfer from a primary beneficiary to a VIE, a primary beneficiary must initially measure the VIE's assets, liabilities and noncontrolling interests at their fair values at the date the reporting entity first becomes the primary beneficiary. That date is the first day the reporting entity, if it issued financial statements, would report the entity in its consolidated statements.

A primary beneficiary under common control with the VIE must initially measure the assets, liabilities and noncontrolling interests as they are carried in the controlling entity's accounts. It must measure assets and liabilities it transferred to the VIE at, after or shortly before the date the entity became the primary beneficiary at the same amounts as if they had not been transferred. No gain or loss can be recognized.

The primary beneficiary must allocate and report the excess, if any, of (a) the fair value of the newly consolidated assets and (b) the reported amount of assets the primary beneficiary transferred to the VIE over (1) the sum of the fair value of the consideration paid, (2) the reported amount of any previously held interests and (3) the fair value of the newly consolidated liabilities and noncontrolling interests as a pro-rata adjustment to the amounts that would have been assigned to the newly consolidated assets--as delineated in FASB Statement no. 141, Business Combinations--as if the consolidation had resulted from a business combination.

The excess, if any, of (a) the sum of the fair value of the consideration paid, (b) the reported amount of any previously held interests and (c) the fair value of the newly consolidated liabilities and noncontrolling interests over (1) the fair value of the newly consolidated identifiable assets and (2) the reported amount of identifiable assets transferred by the primary beneficiary to the VIE must be reported in the period the reporting entity becomes the primary beneficiary as

* Goodwill, if the VIE is a business.

* An extraordinary loss, if it is not.

The principles of consolidated financial statements in ARB no. 51 apply to primary beneficiaries' accounting for consolidated VIEs. After initial measurement, the assets, liabilities and noncontrolling interests of a consolidated VIE must be accounted for in consolidated financial statements as if the entity were consolidated based on voting interests. This entity must follow the requirements to eliminate intercompany balances and transactions described in ARB no. 51 and existing practices for consolidated subsidiaries. Fees or other sources of income and expense between a primary beneficiary and a consolidated VIE must be netted against the VIE's related expense and income. In the consolidated financial statements the resulting effect on net income and expense must be attributed to the primary beneficiary--not to noncontrolling interests.

WHEN TO RECONSIDER

An entity not previously subject to the requirements of Interpretation no. 46(R) does not become subject to it simply because of higher than expected losses that reduce the equity investment. CPAs should reconsider an initial determination of whether an entity is a VIE if one or more of the following occur:

* The entity's governing documents or contractual arrangements change in a way that alters the characteristics or adequacy of the entity's equity investment at risk.

* Some or all of the equity investment is returned to investors, and other interests become exposed to the entity's expected losses.

* The entity undertakes additional activities, or acquires additional assets, beyond those anticipated at the later of its inception or the latest event that increases expected losses.

* The entity receives an additional equity investment that is at risk, or curtails or modifies its activities in a way that decreases expected losses.

For purposes of applying these provisions, a troubled debt restructuring, as defined in FASB Statement no. 15, Accounting by Debtors and Creditors for Troubled Debt Restructuring, must be accounted for according to that statement and is not an event that requires reconsideration of whether the entity is a VIE.

DISCLOSURES

Unless the beneficiary also holds a majority voting interest, in addition to disclosures required by other standards, the primary beneficiary of a VIE must disclose

* The VIE's nature, purpose, size and activities.

* The carrying amount and classification of consolidated assets that are collateral for the VIE's obligations.

* Whether creditors or beneficial interest holders of a consolidated VIE have no recourse to the primary beneficiary's general credit.

NEW THINKING

The guidance in Interpretation no. 46(R) is causing reporting entities to think differently in deciding whether affiliated entities need to be consolidated in the primary reporting entity's financial statements. Historically, they based that decision almost exclusively on an analysis of voting interests. Now, a primary beneficiary will consolidate based on new criteria. The practical result is that many reporting entities will be adding significant assets and liabilities to their balance sheets.

Interpretation 46(R) in Action

* In the notes to its 2004 financial statements, Coors said it had consolidated three joint ventures in 2004 as a result of the guidance in FASB Interpretation no. 46(R).

* In the notes to its 2004 annual report, FirstBank NW Corp. said Interpretation no. 46(R) did not have a material effect on its financial position or on the consolidated results of its operations.

* In 2004 La-Z-Boy Furniture Galleries determined that several of the independent dealers operating La-Z-Boy stores were variable interest entities under the terms of Interpretation no. 46(R) and included them in its consolidated financial statements.

PRACTICAL TIPS

* Use qualitative or quantitative methods to help reporting entitles evaluate the equity at risk. First use the qualitative approach to make the consolidation vs. nonconsolidation decision. if this doesn't result in a definitive conclusion, use the quantitative method. Where neither approach provides an answer, use a combination of both.

* To determine a VIE's primary beneficiary, consider its ability to absorb expected losses as a tie-breaker.

* An entity previously not subject to Interpretation no. 46(R) does not become subject to its guidance simply because higher than expected losses reduce the equity investment. Reconsider an initial determination of whether an entity is a VIE only if certain events occur.

AICPA RESOURCES

CPE

* The AICPA's Guide to Business Consolidations, Goodwill and Other Consolidation Issues (text, # 735129JA).

* Variable Interest Entities--FIN 46 (InfoBytes, BYT-XXJA).

For more information or to order, call the Institute at 888-777-7077 or go to www.cpa2biz.com.

THOMAS A. RATCLIFFE, CPA, PhD, is director of accounting and auditing at Wilson Price in Montgomery, Ala. His e-mail address is tomr@wilsonprice.com.
COPYRIGHT 2005 American Institute of CPA's
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2005, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Ratcliffe, Thomas A.
Publication:Journal of Accountancy
Date:Dec 1, 2005
Words:3538
Previous Article:The change game: a review of FASB Statement no. 154.
Next Article:Get back on track: an IRS program helps correct retirement plan defects so tax benefits are not lost.
Topics:


Related Articles
The debate over consolidating statements.
FASB presents views on consolidated statements.
Final rule addresses (some) industry concerns about PPS.
Coast cities approve consolidation ballot.
TEI comments on International Accounting Standards and European Union consolidated tax base: May 30, 2003.
Fires do a fade.
Schedule M-3: closing the corporate book-tax gap.
Taxpayer successful in establishing no successor.
GASB publishes comprehensive implementation guide for 2006-2007.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2018 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters