Holman Jenkins's article
in today's WSJ on Warren Buffett's observations on mark-to-market
accounting is a must-read in light of TAS's series
on the pitfalls of mark-to-market.
Apparently Buffett, during his CNBC interview the other day, was
trying to highlight mark-to-market's drawbacks not for disclosure
purposes, but for regulatory accounting purposes. It seems that
CNBC edited this out of the clips they played on air, but it is
an important note coming from a money manager of Buffett's
stature.
The point is not that marking down assets based on similar assets
falling in price creates a problem for investors looking for
value. The problem is when the markdown brings the bank below a
regulatory minimum capital requirement, at which point regulators
force them to raise capital, often at steep prices. This added
expense puts a major strain on the banks.
In other words, the government gets them coming and going. First
they are required to mark down their assets, and then to
recapitalize because their assets have been marked down. As
Buffett put it, it's like throwing gasoline on a burning
building. It does not seem like the effects the accounting system
has on regulatory capital requirements is given enough
consideration. There are no quick fixes, but if this could
improve the balance sheets of banks with simple changes to the
accounting requirements, isn't it worth a shot?