刷题刷出新高度,偷偷领先!偷偷领先!偷偷领先! 关注我们,悄悄成为最优秀的自己!

单选题

    Bankers have been blaming themselves for their troubles in public. Behind the scenes, they have been taking aim at someone else: the accounting standard-setters. Their rules, moan the banks, have forced them to report enormous losses, and it’s just not fair. These rules say they must value some assets at the price a third party would pay, not the price managers and regulators would like them to fetch.

    Unfortunately, banks’ lobbying now seems to be working. The details may be unknowable, but the independence of standard-setters, essential to the proper functioning of capital markets, is being compromised. And, unless banks carry toxic assets at prices that attract buyers, reviving the banking system will be difficult.

    After a bruising encounter with Congress, America’s Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rushed through rule changes. These gave banks more freedom to use models to value illiquid assets and more flexibility in recognizing losses on long-term assets in their income statements. Bob Herz, the FASB’s chairman, cried out against those who “question our motives”. Yet bank shares rose and the changes enhance what one lobbying group politely calls “the use of judgment by management”.

    European ministers instantly demanded that the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) do likewise. The IASB says it does not want to act without overall planning, but the pressure to fold when it completes it reconstruction of rules later this year is strong. Charlie McCreevy, a European commissioner, warned the IASB that it did “not live in a political vacuum” but “in the real world” and that Europe could yet develop different rules.

    It was banks that were on the wrong planet, with accounts that vastly overvalued assets. Today they argue that market prices overstate losses, because they largely reflect the temporary illiquidity of markets, not the likely extent of bad debts. The truth will not be known for years. But bank’s shares trade below their book value, suggesting that investors are skeptical. And dead markets partly reflect the paralysis of banks which will not sell assets for fear of booking losses, yet are reluctant to buy all those supposed bargains.

    To get the system working again, losses must be recognized and dealt with. America’s new plan to buy up toxic assets will not work unless banks mark assets to levels which buyers find attractive. Successful markets require independent and even combative standard-setters. The FASB and IASB have been exactly that, cleaning up rules on stock options and pensions, for example, against hostility from special interests. But by giving in to critics now they are inviting pressure to make more concessions.

36. Bankers complained that they were forced to _______.

A
follow unfavorable asset evaluation rules
B
collect payments from third parties
C
cooperate with the price managers
D
reevaluate some of their assets
使用微信搜索喵呜刷题,轻松应对考试!

答案:

A

解析:

答案精析:根据关键词bankers complained和they were forced可定位到第一段第二句。定位句的下一句中可以得知银行抱怨的内容:他们制定的准则迫使自己汇报巨额损失,以第三方出价而非经理或监管部门定价来估值资产。由此可知,standard-setters给出的规定是用来资产评估(value assets)的,与A项的asset evaluation同义,而这种估值方式却受到抱怨,与A含义吻合。

错项排除:B项关键词third parties在原文中对应的句子是关于出价标准的,与collect payments无关。原文没有体现C项的cooperate所以排除。D项的reevaluate也不是银行家的行为,银行家对应的谓语是value,所以D排除。

创作类型:
原创

本文链接:36. Bankers complained that they were forced to __

版权声明:本站点所有文章除特别声明外,均采用 CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 许可协议。转载请注明文章出处。

让学习像火箭一样快速,微信扫码,获取考试解析、体验刷题服务,开启你的学习加速器!

分享考题
share