2. 外语
  3. In public, bankers have been blaming themselves for their troubles. Behind the scenes, they have been taking aim at someone else

In public, bankers have been blaming themselves for their troubles. Behind the scenes, they have been taking aim at someone else

admin2012-05-28  60
问题     In public, bankers have been blaming themselves for their troubles. 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.
    On April 2nd, 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 recognising losses on long-term assets in their income statements. Bob Herz, the FASB’s chairman, openly condemned 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 its reconstruction of rules later this year is strong. On April 1st 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 banks’ shares trade below their book value, suggesting that investors are sceptical. 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 recognised 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.
The author thinks the banks were "on the wrong planet" in that they______.
选项 A、misinterpreted market price indicators
B、denied booking losses in their sale of assets
C、neglected the likely existence of bad debts
D、exaggerated the real value of their assets
答案D
解析 由题干中的on the wrong planet将本题出处定位到第五段首句。该句的主干部分为一个强调句，对应题干；with accounts that vastly overvalued asset(他们的账目将资产估价过高)解释了banks were“on the wrong planet”(银行们的立场是错误的)的原因，故答案为[D]，其中的exaggerated对应原文中的overvalued。原文说的是银行认为其资产价值被市场低估，[A]说的是银行曲解市场价格指标，显然不正确。原文没有提到银行是否出售了不良资产，也没提到他们否认杜撰损失，故排除[B]。[C]是针对第五段第二句“如今，他们辩称，市场价格夸大了损失，因为它们很大程度地反映了市场的暂时停滞，而不是坏账的程度”设的干扰项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/0VE7777K
0

大学英语六级

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)