道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)有效公允價(jià)值的重要性【外文翻譯】

1、<p>　　本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）</p><p>　　外 文 翻 譯</p><p>　　題 目 新環(huán)境下公允價(jià)值在我國(guó)應(yīng)用的若干問題 </p><p>　　外文題目 Ethics is Imperative to Effective Fair Value </p><p>　　

2、Reporting: Weaving Ethics into Fair Value </p><p>　　外文出處 St. John's University </p><p>　　外文作者 Teresa M.Cortese-Danile、The Peter J、 </p>&l

3、t;p>　　R.David Mautz Jr.、Irene M. McCarthy </p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　Ethics is Imperative to Effective Fair Value</p><p>　　Reporting: Weaving Ethics into Fai

4、r Value</p><p>　　Executive Summary</p><p>　　The use of fair value measurement in accounting has been a source of concern for accountants and auditors, legislators, regulators and market particip

5、ants. The role of fair value measurement (also known as “mark to market” accounting) in precipitating the near-collapse of financial markets in 2008 has been debated by Congress, the Securities and Exchange Commission (S

6、EC) and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), among others.</p><p>　　Congress explicitly considered the impact of fair value accounting in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. A

7、lthough the SEC concluded, in its report to Congress, that fair value accounting did not contribute to the failures of major financial institutions, the PCAOB has been actively issuing Staff Audit Practice Alerts to assi

8、st auditors in identifying matters that could affect audit risk. The ethical application of fair value measurement remains a critical concern.</p><p>　　Background</p><p>　　The Conceptual Framewo

9、rk of Accounting identifies relevance and reliability as the primary qualitative characteristics of useful financial information. While both are theoretical ingredients of ideal information, a tension exists between rele

10、vance and reliability in practice. The accounting profession’s perennial devotion to historical cost measurement reflects an overriding concern with the reliability of financial reports. Moreover, the historical cost of

11、an asset in an arm’s length transactio</p><p>　　The Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (FASB’s) gradual embrace of fair value measurement in recent years reflects an attempt to provide more relevant info

12、rmation about values after the initial transaction date. However, one of the costs of this shift has been an increased threat to the reliability of financial reports. This article explores some of the ethical implication

13、s of fair value reporting and argues that education can play an important role in mitigating the inherent threat to relia</p><p>　　The current economic environment may trigger certain risk factors associated

14、 with misstatement due to fraudulent financial reporting, including incentives, pressures and opportunities present in the reporting entity.</p><p>　　Prior to the issuance of Statement of Financial Accountin

15、g Standards No.157, Fair Value Measurements, there were varying definitions of fair value. Generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) guidance for applying those definitions was limited. Guidance related to fair val

16、ue measurements was contained within the broad spectrum of existing pronouncements, and the differences in that guidance created inconsistencies in the application of GAAP.</p><p>　　The Financial Accounting

17、Standards Board (FASB) addressed the need for increased consistency and comparability in fair value measurements, and in September 2006 issued Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) No.157 to address those needs and expand

18、disclosures related to fair value measurements. FAS No.157 has been codified into FASB Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosure. Topic 820 defines fair value, establishes

19、a framework for measuring fair valu</p><p>　　The FASB emphasizes the notion that fair value be based on an exit price and not an entry price. There is a distinction made between observable inputs and unobser

20、vable inputs. Observable inputs are based on market data obtained from independent sources. Unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements) emanate from the entity’s own assumptions based on the best information available.<

21、;/p><p>　　The importance of inputs cannot be underestimated, for it is these upon which reliance is placed and these which are most susceptible to manipulation. Observable inputs, used in Level 1 and 2 fair val

22、ues, include the data sources and market prices that are available and visible outside the entity. Observable inputs are external to the entity and more objective than the internal unobservable inputs of Level 3. Unobser

23、vable inputs are the data and analysis that are developed within the entity to a</p><p>　　The Impact of Fair Value on the Current Economic Environment</p><p>　　The notion of unobservable inputs

24、was intended to allow for situations in which there was little or no market activity for the asset or liability at the measurement date. In those situations the reporting entity need not have taken all possible efforts t

25、o obtain information about market participant assumptions. Additionally, though the reporting entity was expected not to ignore information about market participant assumptions, it was given the leeway to pursue the info

26、rmation if it was reasonab</p><p>　　For example, a Level 3 input would include a financial forecast developed using the reporting entity’s own data if there is no information reasonably available, without un

27、due cost and effort, that indicates that market participants would use different assumptions.2 Such latitude in professional standards clearly set the stage for the liberties taken by financial institutions in valuing th

28、e bad assets on their books. The extent to which Level 3 measurements contributed to the economic crisis was </p><p>　　The crisis has demonstrated that markets are ineffective in controlling unethical practi

29、ces driven by greed.</p><p>　　Consider the case of subprime mortgage-backed securities. These represent one of the instruments for which there were substantial write-downs. The fair value of financial instru

30、ments collateralized by assets, such as homes with declining values, is difficult to approximate due to the difficulty of estimating the value of the underlying homes. When there are falling house prices that may not sup

31、port the value of a mortgage and the mortgage backed security held as investments by banks and other in</p><p>　　In spite of the flagrant deception perpetrated by financial institutions, according to the Fin

32、ancial Crisis Advisory Group, accounting standards were not a root cause of the financial crisis. Instead, the crisis has exposed weaknesses in accounting standards and their application. The weaknesses primarily involve

33、d:</p><p>　　the difficulty of applying fair value (“mark-to-market”)accounting in illiquid markets</p><p>　　the delayed recognition of losses associated with loans, structured credit products, a

34、nd other financial instruments by banks, insurance companies and other financial institutions</p><p>　　issues surrounding the broad range of off-balance sheet financing structures, especially in the U.S.<

35、/p><p>　　the complexity of accounting standards for financial instruments, including multiple approaches to recognizing asset impairment</p><p>　　The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to

36、ok into consideration the view held by some that fair value accounting contributed to bank failures. Two sections of the Act recognize fair value as a possible influence on the degree to which financial institutions were

37、 viewed as having potential solvency problems. Section 133 of the Act required that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) report to Congress on the effect of mark-to-market fair value accounting on the recent bank

38、 failures</p><p>　　Specifically, this study was required to evaluate the effect of fair value accounting on bank failures and bank balance sheets. It was required to: (a) address the way the FASB develops ac

39、counting standards, (b) describe alternate possible accounting methods, and (c) evaluate the quality of financial reporting information provided under Topic 820. The study was issued by the SEC staff on December 30, 2008

40、, and concluded that Topic 820 did not contribute to the bank failures in 2008. The report d</p><p>　　Recent Efforts by Standard-Setters and Regulatory Agencies </p><p>　　Three FASB Staff Positi

41、ons (FSPs) were issued on April 9, 2009 which revised and clarified Topic 820:</p><p>　　FSP FAS 157-4, Determining Fair Value When the Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significant

42、ly Decreased and Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly (codified as Topic 820)</p><p>　　FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2, Recognition and Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary Impairments (codified as Topi

43、c 320)</p><p>　　FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments (codified as Topics 825 and 270, respectively).</p><p>　　[The] Treadway Commission repor

44、t... outlined causal factors associated with fraudulent financial reporting, identifying tone at the top as a critical factor</p><p>　　Topic 320 defines key classifications of securities and accounting treat

45、ment for the classifications, whereas Topics 825 and 270 extend disclosure requirements on all fair value assets and liabilities on the balance sheet and/or footnotes to interim periods. All three FSPs are tied together

46、in concept and purpose.</p><p>　　Most relevant to this article is FSP FAS 157-4. It is not our intent to engage in a detailed discussion of the FSP, but instead to point out that there is no change in the un

47、derlying principles set forth in Topic 820. FSP FAS 157-4 primarily clarifies the fair value measurement process and expands the disclosure requirements. It provides a list of tests of market activity. This list of tests

48、 can be found in ASC 820-10-35-51A. The tests provide guidance to help the reporting entity evaluate facto</p><p>　　The FSP does not prescribe a methodology for making adjustments to transactions when estima

49、ting fair value, so it offers no detailed specified tests for measuring fair value. If there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity, then a change in valuation technique or the use of multipl

50、e valuation techniques is considered appropriate. Determining the price at which willing market participants would transact if there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level </p><p>　　The FASB

51、 recognizes that the determination of whether a transaction is orderly is indeed more difficult if there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity. However, such circumstances do not provide con

52、clusive evidence that transactions are not orderly (distressed or forced). ASC 820-10-35- 51E provides guidance to assist in determining if a transaction is not orderly, but in 51F indicates that the entity need not unde

53、rtake all possible efforts and should not ignore inf</p><p>　　In general, fair values in the financial statements are frequently developed with the assistance of a valuation expert. Those valuations should t

54、o be audited by independent CPAs. Notwithstanding, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) has expanded audit requirements and the resulting implications have become apparent in field application of Topic 8

55、20’s guidelines. (CCH Accounting Research Manager, Current Economic Crisis et al.)</p><p>　　The PCAOB also issued Staff Audit Practice Alert No. 3, Audit Considerations in the Current Economic Environment, o

56、n December 5, 2008. The purpose of this practice alert is to assist auditors in identifying matters related to the current economic environment that could affect audit risk. Several audit risk considerations are provided

57、 in the alert including fraud risk considerations. The practice alert points out that the current economic environment may trigger certain risk factors associated wi</p><p>　　Resource: Cortese-Danile, Teresa

58、 M St.John's University.Review of Business[J]. 2010,4：50-54.</p><p><b>　　譯文：</b></p><p>　　道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)有效公允價(jià)值的重要性</p><p>　　報(bào)告：將道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)編進(jìn)公允價(jià)值</p><p><b>　　概要&l

59、t;/b></p><p>　　公允價(jià)值作為會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量屬性，已經(jīng)引起了會(huì)計(jì)師、審計(jì)師、立法者、監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)和市場(chǎng)參與者的關(guān)心。在2008年金融市場(chǎng)中，公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的角色(也就是熟知的“市場(chǎng)估價(jià)”會(huì)計(jì))，已經(jīng)被國(guó)會(huì)、美國(guó)證券交易委員會(huì)(SEC)和美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì)(美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì))等等爭(zhēng)論過。</p><p>　　國(guó)會(huì)明確考慮了公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)在2008年緊急經(jīng)濟(jì)穩(wěn)定行動(dòng)下的

60、影響。雖然美國(guó)證券交易委員會(huì)在其向國(guó)會(huì)提交的報(bào)告中推斷，公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)不會(huì)是主要金融機(jī)構(gòu)失敗的原因，美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì)一直在積極發(fā)行人員審計(jì)實(shí)踐警報(bào)協(xié)助審計(jì)人員識(shí)別可能會(huì)影響審計(jì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的問題。公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的道德運(yùn)用仍然是一個(gè)關(guān)鍵問題。</p><p><b>　　背景</b></p><p>　　會(huì)計(jì)的概念框架作為主要的質(zhì)量特征有用的財(cái)務(wù)信息識(shí)別具有相關(guān)性和可靠性

61、。而這兩個(gè)都是理想信息的理論成分，二者之間的張力在實(shí)踐中具有相關(guān)性和可靠性。會(huì)計(jì)行業(yè)對(duì)歷史成本計(jì)量的多年獻(xiàn)身，反映了財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告可靠性的一個(gè)首要考慮。此外，一項(xiàng)資產(chǎn)的歷史成本計(jì)量，在一條胳膊那樣的長(zhǎng)度上的交易可以說(shuō)是在交易日期最可靠的分析方法。隨著時(shí)間的流逝，歷史成本變得越來(lái)越不相關(guān)。</p><p>　　美國(guó)財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)(FASB)近幾年的循序漸進(jìn)的公允價(jià)值計(jì)量，反映了試圖提供在最初的交易發(fā)生日的價(jià)值更多的相

62、關(guān)信息。不過,其中一個(gè)費(fèi)用的變化增加了財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告可靠性的威脅。本文探討了公允價(jià)值報(bào)告的一些倫理問題，并認(rèn)為教育可以起到緩解的內(nèi)在威脅以公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)的可靠性提出了重要的作用。</p><p>　　目前的經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境可能引發(fā)某些由于虛假財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告引起的危險(xiǎn)因素，包括報(bào)告主體中的獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)、壓力和機(jī)會(huì)。</p><p>　　第157號(hào)財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則在發(fā)行前聲明，關(guān)于公允價(jià)值計(jì)量，有不同的公允價(jià)值定義。公認(rèn)會(huì)計(jì)原

63、則指導(dǎo)應(yīng)用這些定義是有限度的。公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的指導(dǎo)是包含在現(xiàn)有的廣泛的聲明中的，而指導(dǎo)中的差異使工人會(huì)計(jì)原則在應(yīng)用中產(chǎn)生了矛盾。</p><p>　　美國(guó)財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)(FASB)表明在公允價(jià)值計(jì)量中，增加一致性和可比性的需要性，并于2006年9月發(fā)布了財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)第157號(hào)文件(表達(dá)了這種需要，并且擴(kuò)大披露了與公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的關(guān)系。財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則的第157號(hào)文件已經(jīng)被編入到?jīng)]過財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)委員會(huì)的會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)編碼中的

64、第820條——公允價(jià)值計(jì)量和披露。第820條定義了公允價(jià)值，為測(cè)量公平價(jià)值，建立了一個(gè)框架，并且要求對(duì)公允價(jià)值計(jì)量進(jìn)行披露，意欲在公允價(jià)值標(biāo)準(zhǔn)衡量的方式上提供清晰性和一致性。</p><p>　　美國(guó)財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)委員會(huì)強(qiáng)調(diào)公允價(jià)值的觀念是建立在一個(gè)出口的價(jià)格和沒有入境的價(jià)格。沒有分別觀察的輸入和觀察的投入。觀察數(shù)據(jù)，是根據(jù)獨(dú)立的渠道獲得的市場(chǎng)數(shù)據(jù)。（3級(jí)測(cè)量）不可觀察數(shù)據(jù)出自該公司自己的假設(shè)的基礎(chǔ)上可獲得的最佳信

65、息。</p><p>　　投入的重要性不能被低估，因?yàn)樗沁@些賴以依靠放置，這些是最容易受到操控。觀察數(shù)據(jù)，在1級(jí)和2公允價(jià)值所使用，包括數(shù)據(jù)源和市場(chǎng)價(jià)格可用外實(shí)體可見。觀察數(shù)據(jù)是外部的實(shí)體，比第三級(jí)內(nèi)部不可觀察數(shù)據(jù)更加客觀。不可觀察輸入的數(shù)據(jù)和分析，開發(fā)的實(shí)體內(nèi)，以評(píng)估其公允價(jià)值。事實(shí)上，第3級(jí)的投入是不可觀察的資產(chǎn)或負(fù)債的投入。這些都是輸入，反映了我們對(duì)假設(shè)市場(chǎng)參與者的報(bào)告主體的假設(shè)，將使用自己的資產(chǎn)定價(jià)或責(zé)

66、任。</p><p>　　公允價(jià)值對(duì)當(dāng)前經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境的影響</p><p>　　無(wú)形投入的概念是為了考慮到在資產(chǎn)或負(fù)債測(cè)量的日子，只有很少或甚至沒有市場(chǎng)活動(dòng)的情況。在這些情況下的報(bào)告主體不需要采取一切努力去獲取關(guān)于市場(chǎng)參與假設(shè)的信息。此外，盡管報(bào)告主體期望可以無(wú)視市場(chǎng)參與假設(shè)的信息，假如在不花費(fèi)無(wú)故的成本和努力的情況下可以去獲取合法信息，那么它已經(jīng)留了余地去追求信息。</p>&

67、lt;p>　　例如，一個(gè)三級(jí)的投入在不必要的成本和努力下，如果沒有信息是可以合法獲得的，那么將包括使用報(bào)告試題數(shù)據(jù)的財(cái)務(wù)預(yù)測(cè)開發(fā)，這表明市場(chǎng)參與者會(huì)使用不同的假設(shè)。這樣的專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的范圍給金融機(jī)構(gòu)自由地估算他們的不良資產(chǎn)設(shè)了一個(gè)清楚的舞臺(tái)。三級(jí)測(cè)量在一定程度上為還不為人所知的經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)做出了貢獻(xiàn)。三級(jí)測(cè)量的過高定價(jià)，允許被金融機(jī)構(gòu)用作為加速經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)影響的催化劑來(lái)使用。</p><p>　　這個(gè)危機(jī)已經(jīng)表明，市場(chǎng)

68、在控制由貪婪引起的違反道德的做法是無(wú)效的。</p><p>　　考慮到次級(jí)抵押貸款證券的情況。這些代表了實(shí)質(zhì)性減值的一種工具。金融工具的公允價(jià)值資產(chǎn)抵押證券，比如房屋的股票貶值,這是很困難的近似，因?yàn)闈撛诘姆课莸膬r(jià)值估計(jì)存在著難度。當(dāng)不支持抵押貸款的價(jià)值或抵押貸款的安全性給銀行和投資者拿去投資，房產(chǎn)價(jià)格會(huì)有所下降的時(shí)候，為缺乏客觀測(cè)量房屋價(jià)值去支持這些債務(wù)的能力，創(chuàng)造了不確定性。這已經(jīng)引起了在證券中的缺乏信心的投

69、資及造成了不活躍的市場(chǎng)。實(shí)體必須清算其持有的這些抵押貸款證券，收到的價(jià)格就有可能被認(rèn)為不代表內(nèi)在公允價(jià)值、“被迫”或“痛苦”的價(jià)格。當(dāng)市場(chǎng)不活躍的時(shí)候，問題就是這些市場(chǎng)交易參與者和經(jīng)紀(jì)人的報(bào)價(jià)是否是公允價(jià)值的可靠的統(tǒng)計(jì)。</p><p>　　金融危機(jī)咨詢小組根據(jù)此次金融危機(jī)中金融機(jī)構(gòu)的公然欺騙行為得出會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則不但沒有對(duì)金融危機(jī)的根源做出解釋，而且這場(chǎng)危機(jī)暴露了會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則及其應(yīng)用程序的弊端，這些弊端主要有：</

70、p><p>　　在流動(dòng)性差的應(yīng)用市場(chǎng)公允值（“盯市場(chǎng)”）比較困難。</p><p>　　結(jié)構(gòu)性信貸產(chǎn)品，與銀行，保險(xiǎn)公司和其他金融機(jī)構(gòu)的其他金融工具延遲確認(rèn)的損失與貸款相關(guān)的。</p><p>　　問題圍繞資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表外融資結(jié)構(gòu)范圍很廣，尤其是在美國(guó)。</p><p>　　為金融工具，包括多種方法的會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則的復(fù)雜性認(rèn)識(shí)資產(chǎn)減值。</p>

71、<p>　　2008年的緊急經(jīng)濟(jì)穩(wěn)定法案提到了一些對(duì)公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則導(dǎo)致銀行倒閉的看法。該法承認(rèn)的兩部分認(rèn)為公允價(jià)值作為一個(gè)有可能影響在何種程度上的金融機(jī)構(gòu)被視為具有潛在的償付能力問題的一個(gè)尺度。</p><p>　　具體來(lái)說(shuō)，這項(xiàng)研究需要以評(píng)估對(duì)銀行倒閉銀行資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表和公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)的影響。它被要求：（a）財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)制定會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。（b）描述可能替代的會(huì)計(jì)方法。（c）820的主題下，評(píng)價(jià)財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)

72、告提供的信息質(zhì)量。這項(xiàng)研究是由美國(guó)證券交易委員會(huì)的工作人員在2008年12月30號(hào)發(fā)出的，并得出結(jié)論該820主題不支持2008年銀行倒閉（是由于應(yīng)用公允價(jià)值計(jì)量）的說(shuō)法。該報(bào)告建議為擴(kuò)大披露的需要，更多的公允價(jià)值有被指導(dǎo)的必要性，并在財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告上提出其他改進(jìn)。（衛(wèi)生協(xié)調(diào)會(huì)計(jì)研究經(jīng)理，820專題概述等人。）</p><p>　　按標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定者和監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)最近所做的努力</p><p>　　在200

73、9年4月9日發(fā)布了三個(gè)FASB職員位置(FSPs)用來(lái)校正并且澄清820主題：</p><p>　　FAS中157-4，當(dāng)資產(chǎn)或負(fù)債的規(guī)模和水平已大幅度減少和識(shí)別出交易是不正常的(編纂為主題820)時(shí)，可以確定交易費(fèi)用價(jià)值。</p><p>　　FAS中115-2和FAS 124-2，非暫時(shí)性的缺陷的識(shí)別和陳述。(編纂為主題320)</p><p>　　FSP FA

74、S 107-1 and APB 28-1，關(guān)于用于交易費(fèi)用價(jià)值的金融工具的臨時(shí)披露。(編纂為主題各自為825、270)</p><p>　　[該]特雷德韋委員會(huì)的報(bào)告...概述因果因素，相關(guān)的虛假財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表，確定的頂部是一個(gè)關(guān)鍵因素</p><p>　　320定義主題的分類主要分類及會(huì)計(jì)處理方法的證券，而825和270延伸主題的所有資產(chǎn)的公允價(jià)值和負(fù)債在資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表和/或腳注披露規(guī)定的臨時(shí)期。

75、所有這三個(gè)金融服務(wù)商已經(jīng)聯(lián)系在一起，理念和宗旨。</p><p>　　最相關(guān)的這篇文章是FAS的157-4。這不是我們的意圖進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)討論的全漢，而是要指出的是，有沒有設(shè)定主題820規(guī)定的基本原則的改變。全漢主要闡明了FAS的157-4公允價(jià)值計(jì)量過程，并擴(kuò)大了披露要求。它提供了一個(gè)市場(chǎng)活動(dòng)的測(cè)試列表。這種測(cè)試列表中可以找到升序820-10-35-51A的。這些測(cè)試提供指導(dǎo)，幫助評(píng)估報(bào)告實(shí)體因素，以確定是否有在數(shù)

76、量和資產(chǎn)或負(fù)債的活動(dòng)水平顯著下降。這應(yīng)有助于用戶決定，如果市場(chǎng)成交量下降到這種地步的市場(chǎng)報(bào)價(jià)是公允價(jià)值，也沒有可靠的措施都有條不紊。</p><p>　　在沒有規(guī)定做出調(diào)整，估計(jì)公允價(jià)值交易的方法，因此它提供了計(jì)量公允價(jià)值沒有詳細(xì)指明的測(cè)試。如果出現(xiàn)了大幅下降的數(shù)量和活動(dòng)水平，那么在估值方法的改變或多個(gè)估值技術(shù)的使用被認(rèn)為是合適的。確定價(jià)格的市場(chǎng)參與者愿意在該會(huì)辦理，如果出現(xiàn)了在數(shù)量和活躍程度顯著下降，將需要做出

77、重大判斷使用。從這個(gè)指導(dǎo)部分共鳴是，每一個(gè)測(cè)試應(yīng)用的方式將繼續(xù)需要做出判斷。因此，我們認(rèn)為這樣的指導(dǎo)，允許在計(jì)量公允價(jià)值的實(shí)體相當(dāng)大的余地。</p><p>　　財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則委員會(huì)認(rèn)識(shí)到，如果出現(xiàn)了在數(shù)量和活動(dòng)量明顯下降，交易是否有秩序確實(shí)比較困難的。然而，這種情況并沒有提供確鑿的證據(jù)表明，交易也不是有序（苦惱或被迫）。升序820-10-35- 51E章提供指引，以協(xié)助確定，如果交易沒有秩序，但在51F章表示實(shí)體

78、不必采取一切可能的努力，不應(yīng)忽略成本和精力，避免提供給它不必要的資料。</p><p>　　一般來(lái)說(shuō)，在財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表中公允價(jià)值經(jīng)常開發(fā)出了一個(gè)估價(jià)專家協(xié)助。這些估值應(yīng)該向被審計(jì)由獨(dú)立的會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所。盡管如此，上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)督委員會(huì)（PCAOB）已經(jīng)擴(kuò)大審計(jì)的要求和由此產(chǎn)生的影響已經(jīng)成為該領(lǐng)域的課題820的應(yīng)用準(zhǔn)則。（衛(wèi)生協(xié)調(diào)會(huì)計(jì)研究經(jīng)理，當(dāng)前的經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)等。）</p><p>　　PCAOB的審

79、計(jì)實(shí)務(wù)工作人員也發(fā)出警報(bào)，3號(hào)審計(jì)事項(xiàng)在目前的經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境對(duì)2008年12月5日。這種做法的目的是提醒協(xié)助查明與當(dāng)前的經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境可能會(huì)影響審計(jì)事項(xiàng)的審計(jì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。若干審計(jì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的考慮提供的警示包括欺詐風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的考慮。實(shí)踐警示指出，目前的經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境可能引發(fā)一定的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和錯(cuò)誤陳述，由于欺詐性財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告，包括獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)，壓力和機(jī)會(huì)在本報(bào)告實(shí)體的相關(guān)因素。此外，提到了PCAOB的工作人員對(duì)審計(jì)實(shí)務(wù)警示第2期，對(duì)審計(jì)事項(xiàng)有關(guān)的公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的金融工具和專家使用，于2007年1