02-13-2009, 09:20 PM
Dears,
SECP today issued a Notification SRO 150(1)/2009 whereby directing the companies to use market rates of 31 December 2008 for calculating the fair values of available for sale (AFS) listed equity securities. It directs that the resulting IMPAIRMENT loss (which is off course significant and prolonged) will be taken directly to equity (through statement of changes in equity instead of charging to profit and loss account).
This means such impairment will be debited to the fair value reserve instead of charging as expense.
However, the notification imposes the condition that while declaring dividend, any such impairment carried to Equity will be considered as have been charged to Profit and Loss account. This means that no dividend could be paid to that extent.
On one side SBP and SECP had substantiated through earlier circulars that market rates of 31 December 2008 have to be considered the active market rates. Now, the regulator has waived off / changed the requirement of IAS 39. I don't see any sanity in the manner this whole matter has been lingered on and finally decided.
Specially the entities which have finalized their accounts and got qualifications in auditors reports are most affected of this delayed notification. Regulators, some how, are not playing their part of game efficiently and effectively. The rule of law does not exist and no body can ever dare to push such non-sense regulators to the court of justice. I wonder if some other Iftikhar Ch. would arise to oversee these criminal delays, over-looking and "stakeholders affected" decisions by a regulator.
We saw another instance of SECP where its two departments (NBFC and Enforcement) at the same date issued two conflicting clarifications regarding the time limitation for holding AGMs after change in CO84. No one pulled the dummy regulators into the court of justice.
I wonder when professionalism would be seen in such institutions. Off course our institutions and justice procedures have been materially destroyed.
These are my personal views and do not depict a professional opinion.
Regards,
KAMRAN.
SECP today issued a Notification SRO 150(1)/2009 whereby directing the companies to use market rates of 31 December 2008 for calculating the fair values of available for sale (AFS) listed equity securities. It directs that the resulting IMPAIRMENT loss (which is off course significant and prolonged) will be taken directly to equity (through statement of changes in equity instead of charging to profit and loss account).
This means such impairment will be debited to the fair value reserve instead of charging as expense.
However, the notification imposes the condition that while declaring dividend, any such impairment carried to Equity will be considered as have been charged to Profit and Loss account. This means that no dividend could be paid to that extent.
On one side SBP and SECP had substantiated through earlier circulars that market rates of 31 December 2008 have to be considered the active market rates. Now, the regulator has waived off / changed the requirement of IAS 39. I don't see any sanity in the manner this whole matter has been lingered on and finally decided.
Specially the entities which have finalized their accounts and got qualifications in auditors reports are most affected of this delayed notification. Regulators, some how, are not playing their part of game efficiently and effectively. The rule of law does not exist and no body can ever dare to push such non-sense regulators to the court of justice. I wonder if some other Iftikhar Ch. would arise to oversee these criminal delays, over-looking and "stakeholders affected" decisions by a regulator.
We saw another instance of SECP where its two departments (NBFC and Enforcement) at the same date issued two conflicting clarifications regarding the time limitation for holding AGMs after change in CO84. No one pulled the dummy regulators into the court of justice.
I wonder when professionalism would be seen in such institutions. Off course our institutions and justice procedures have been materially destroyed.
These are my personal views and do not depict a professional opinion.
Regards,
KAMRAN.