The valuation of reported pension measures for firms sponsoring defined benefit plans
The valuation of reported pension measures for firms sponsoring defined benefit plans
复制标题
对赞助固定福利计划的公司报告的养老金措施的估值
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1982
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Daley
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Daley
财务会计准则委员会目前正在为固定福利养恤金计划制定报告准则。历史上，财务报表中包括三种养老金成本：1）养老金费用，2）无资金准备的既得利益（均为会计原则委员会意见#8所要求的），以及3）无资金准备的先前（过去）服务成本（直到1979年证券交易委员会要求）。然而，投资者在设定他们对未来养老金成本的预期时并不局限于会计数据。本研究采用横截面股权估值模型来评估这三个替代会计措施的一致性与养老金成本估计扣押的股票市场参与者在总证券价格。研究结果反驳了早期的工作，这表明，无资金的既得利益“最一致”的措施，证券市场的总养老金成本估计。相反，养老金支出被认为是“最一致的”成本措施。此外，精算选择的贴现率的横截面差异没有被发现用于股票市场在评估数据的养老金成本。在1980年以前的财务报表中，已经报告了赞助公司的固定福利养老金计划成本的几个会计计量。本文探讨了这些措施是如何与股票的市场价值。Oldfield [1976年]和Feldstein和Seligman [1981年]分别研究了股权价值与无资金准备的既得利益和无资金准备的先前服务成本之间的关系。本研究通过纳入第三项措施，养老金费用，这是一个与养老金福利义务相关的未来现金流量的年度化估计扩展了这一研究。此外，它调查的横截面差异的影响，精算假设的利率对报告的措施的解释。虽然对养恤金计划费用的具体衡量标准存在相当大的分歧，但其经济意义是不容置疑的。例如，《商业周刊》（1980）对100家公司进行的调查发现，养老金支出从730万美元（阿梅拉达·赫斯）到260亿美元（美国电话电报公司）不等，对未备基金的既得利益的义务范围为：特别感谢罗伯特·鲍恩、理查德·卡斯塔尼亚斯、皮特·杜克斯、加里·桑德姆、希亚姆·桑德和罗伯特·维格兰对本文的贡献。莱恩·艾伦·戴利是明尼苏达大学会计学助理教授。1983年1月，任总经理。1983年4月和1983年9月收到修订。1983年9月接受。
The Financial Accounting Standards Board is presently setting reporting standards for defined benefit pension plans. Three measures of pension costs have historically been included in financial statements: 1) pension expense, 2) unfunded vested benefits (both required by Accounting Principles Board Opinion #8), and 3) unfunded prior (past) service costs (required until 1979 by the Securities and Exchange Commission). However, investors are not limited to accounting data in setting their expectations of the future pension costs. This study uses a cross-sectional equity valuation model to assess the consistency of these three alternative accounting measures with pension cost estimates impounded by equity market participants in aggregate security prices. The findings refute earlier work which suggests that the unfunded vested benefits "most consistently" measure the security market's aggregate pension cost estimate. Instead, pension expense is found to be the "most consistent" cost measure. Further, cross-sectional differences in actuarially chosen discount rates are not found to be used by the equity markets in evaluating data on pension costs. SEVERAL accounting measures of the cost of defined benefit pension plans for sponsoring firms had been reported in financial statements prior to 1980. This paper examines how these measures are related to the market value of equity. The relationship of equity value to the unfunded vested benefits and unfunded prior service costs has been examined by Oldfield [1976] and Feldstein and Seligman [1981], respectively. The present study extends this research by incorporating a third measure, pension expense, which is an annualized estimate of the future cash flows associated with the pension benefit obligation. In addition, it investigates the effect of cross-sectional differences in the actuarial assumption about interest rates on the interpretation of the reported measures. While considerable disagreements exist on specific measures for the cost of pension plans, their economic significance is beyond debate. For example, Business Week's [1980] survey of 100 firms found pension expense ranging from $7.3 million (Amerada Hess) to $26 billion (AT&T), and the obligation for unfunded vested benefits ranging Special acknowledgement for their contributions to this paper goes to Robert Bowen, Richard Castanias, Pete Dukes, Gary Sundem, Shyam Sunder, and Robert Vigeland. Lane Alan Daley is Assistant Professor of Accounting, the University of Minnesota. Manuscript received January 1983. Revisions received April 1983 and September 1983. Accepted September 1983.