Don't get bitten by Bitcoins
A negative interest rate is impossible under CMUCPP in terms of the Daily CPI.
Thursday, 11 April 2013
Tuesday, 9 April 2013
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 12 and 13: PricewaterhouseCoopers clueless about Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 12 and 13: PricewaterhouseCoopers clueless
about Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power
‘Benefits of purchasing power adjusted financial statements.’
PricewaterhouseCoopers Understanding IAS 29 2006 p4
Correction
What PricewaterhouseCoopers should have stated:
Benefits of Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant
Purchasing Power during hyperinflation.
Correction 13
‘Financial statements that are expressed under IAS 29 in a measuring
unit that is current at the balance sheet date provide several benefits:’
PricewaterhouseCoopers Understanding IAS 29 2006 p4
PricewaterhouseCoopers and the IASB do not understand
that IAS 29 is a failed attempt
at implementing Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power
during hyperinflation because
(1)
they do not understand the concept of
financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power
(proof: they do not understand
(a) that (and why) a daily index instead of a monthly
published index needs to be used and
(b) they do not understand that the IFRS-authorized
statement in the Conceptual Framework (2010), Par. 4.59 (a) that ‘Financial capital maintenance can be
measured in units of constant purchasing power’ means that non-monetary
items are split in two: variable real value non-monetary items and constant real
value non-monetary items)
(2) they mistakenly believe that by simply “restating”
HC or CC financial statements in a
measuring unit that is current at the balance sheet date will stop making
these financial statements misleading since that is what they believe is the
objective of IAS 29. They are duped by
their blind believe in the meaningless “restatement” dogma. They are clueless
about Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power authorized in IFRS in 1989.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Monday, 8 April 2013
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 11: Monetary amounts per se (meaning all values in the economy) are not expressed in terms of a relatively stable foreign currency.
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 11: Monetary amounts per se (meaning all
values in the economy) are not expressed in terms of a relatively stable
foreign currency.
‘Monetary amounts are
expressed in terms of a relatively stable foreign currency.’
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
Correction
All monetary amounts per se (meaning all values in the
economy) are not expressed in
terms of a relatively stable foreign currency.
All local currency monetary items (local currency bank values, bank statements,
cheques, local currency loans, etc.) are not
expressed in terms of a relatively stable foreign currency. They are expressed
in local currency values.
Most variable
real value non-monetary items are expressed in terms of a relatively
stable foreign currency.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 10: People do not accumulate wealth in a stable foreign currency during hyperinflation
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 10: People do not accumulate wealth in a
stable foreign currency during hyperinflation
‘Characteristics of
hyperinflation
There is no absolute definition of hyperinflation. The characteristics
identified in IAS 29 are as follows:
• People accumulate wealth in non-monetary assets or in a stable
foreign currency;’
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
Correction
Generally people do not accumulate wealth in a stable
foreign currency. It is often forbidden and a crime to accumulate wealth in a
stable foreign currency in a country with hyperinflation.
If what PricewaterhouseCoopers state above was true,
then it would be no problem dealing with hyperinflation in a hyperinflationary
country. Often the single biggest problem in a hyperinflationary country is
that it is a crime to trade in and to hold especially the US Dollar.
It would be relatively easy to solve the monetary
problem of hyperinflation if it were always legal to hold and freely trade in
especially the US Dollar in hyperinflationary countries. All people would have
to do would be to buy US Dollars every end of the day with excess local currency.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 9: IAS 29 aims to implement Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction
9: IAS 29 aims to implement Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant
Purchasing Power
‘IAS 29 aims to overcome the limitations of historical cost financial
reporting in hyperinflationary environments.’
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
Correction
IAS 29 does not aim to overcome the limitations of
historical cost financial reporting in hyperinflationary environments. IAS 29
aims to replace financial capital maintenance in nominal monetary units (HCA)
during hyperinflation with capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing
power during hyperinflation.
IAS 29 unfortunately does not succeed in this aim
because it is generally implemented in terms of the monthly published CPI. The
price level changes at least from 28 to 31 times per month (or even more often,
generally above 3000 per cent inflation per annum). However, IAS 29 is
currently being implemented using one single price level change: the month end
CPI.
This means that a part of the real value of current
year profits and a part of the real value of non-monetary receivables treated
as monetary items are eroded (destroyed) in this fashion under IAS 29.
IAS 29 can also have absolutely no positive effect in
an economy during hyperinflation. IAS 29 had absolutely no positive effect
during the last eight years in Zimbabwe´s hyperinflation. Zimbabwe´s economy
imploded on 20 November 2008 with the full implementation of IAS 29.
It is quite easy to stop this from happening: simply copy
what Brazil did during 30 years from 1964 to 1994. Brazil updated some monetary
items and all non-monetary items daily in terms of a government supplied daily
index during those 30 years of very high and hyperinflation.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Saturday, 6 April 2013
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 8: Companies implementing IAS 29 have departed from Historical Cost Accounting
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 8: Companies implementing IAS 29 have
departed from Historical Cost Accounting
‘Inflation-adjusted financial statements are an extension to, not a
departure from, historical cost accounting.’
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
Correction
Reporting period financial statements are never
inflation-adjusted. Only monetary items can be inflation-adjusted. Monetary
items are never inflation-adjusted in reporting period financial statements.
What happens under IAS 29 is that the net monetary loss or gain is recorded and
non-monetary items are measured in units of constant purchasing power in terms
of the monthly CPI. Reporting period financial statements are never
inflation-adjusted under IAS 29 – no matter what PricewaterhouseCoopers states.
What PricewaterhouseCoopers wanted to state is the
following:
Financial
statements ‘restated’ in terms of IAS 29 are an extension to, not a departure
from, historical cost accounting.
PricewaterhouseCoopers is correct - when the firm´s
statement above is corrected – as far as the way in which IAS 29 is being implemented
under the guidance of Big Four audit firms. Companies implementing IAS 29 –
under their guidance – carry on implementing the Historical Cost Accounting model
during hyperinflation as required by IAS 29: IAS 29 states that either
Historical Cost or Current Cost financial statements have to be ‘restated’ in
terms of the guidelines in IAS 29.
This is what
is supposed to happen under IAS 29 when it is implemented correctly (no-one is
doing it this way - at the moment).
The first year that IAS 29 is being implemented, a
company is obviously implementing HCA or CCA. IAS 29 requires the company to
implement the measures guide-lined in the Standard as from the start of the
year in which it detects hyperinflation in the economy. The company departs
from HCA when it starts implementing IAS 29: it changes its capital maintenance
concept from financial capital maintenance in nominal monetary units (HCA) to
financial capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power. It stops
doing HCA. It stops implementing the stable measuring unit assumption.
However, it has a problem: IAS 29 and all IFRS are
seen by the IASB, Big Four audit firms, national accounting standard and other
accounting authorities and most Historical Cost accountants as the Ten
Commandments of Accounting: The letter of IAS 29 has to be followed. So, IAS 29
requires Historical Cost or Current Cost financial statements to be ‘restated’
in terms of the measuring unit current at the end of the reporting period.
A company implementing IAS 29 has however departed
from HCA the moment it started implementing IAS 29. Now what? From the second
year on, it is not complying with IAS 29, because it has departed from HCA: it
does not implement HCA anymore.
Fortunately, this problem is very easy to overcome:
All accounting items are recorded at their original or historical values
(costs). So, it is very easy to satisfy the requirement of IAS 29 to ‘restate’
Historical Cost financial statements: simply run a set of HC financial
statements from the original data and IAS 29 is complied with. A company can
always print a set of HC financial statements for the sole reason of complying
with IAS 29. The HC financial statements would serve no other purpose: they are
completely meaningless during hyperinflation, but, IAS 29 requires them. So,
they are printed simply to satisfy the requirement in IAS 29.
A company, in fact, departed from HCA in
the first year it adopted IAS 29.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Friday, 5 April 2013
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 7: PricewaterhouseCoopers does not understand IAS 29
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 7: PricewaterhouseCoopers does not understand
IAS 29
Because IAS 29 incorrectly and misleadingly states in
Par 2 that
‘Money loses purchasing power at such a rate that comparison of amounts
from transactions and other events that have occurred at different times, even
within the same accounting period, is misleading.’
PricewaterhouseCoopers misleadingly and incorrectly
states
‘Significant changes in the purchasing power
of money mean that financial statements unadjusted for inflation are likely to
be misleading. Amounts are not comparable between periods, and the gain
or loss in general purchasing power that arises in the reporting period is not
recorded. Financial statements unadjusted for inflation do not properly reflect
the company’s position at the balance sheet date, the results of its operations
or cash flows.’
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
Neither the IASB nor PricewaterhouseCoopers understands
IAS 29.
Implementing
Historical Cost Accounting during hyperinflation is suicidal for a company and a
country (see Zimbabwe in 2008 and Yugoslavia before that), not because
financial statements are misleading, but because
1.
The real value of only monetary items
are hyper-destroyed by hyperinflation (hyper-inflate your economy long enough
and you can wipe out the real value of your entire money supply: see Zimbabwe
on 20 November 2008 and Yugoslavia three times during four months before that)
and
2.
The constant real non-monetary value
of only constant real value non-monetary items never maintained constant in
terms of units of constant purchasing power in terms of the Daily CPI or daily
USD (or other relatively stable foreign currency) parallel rate are hyper-destroyed
by, not inflation as the IASB, PricewaterhouseCoopers, other Big Four audit
firms, the Argentinian Accounting Federation, the Brazilian accounting
authorities, the Chilean Accounting Authorities and most Historical Cost accountants
believe, but, by the implementation of the stable measuring unit assumption,
i.e., by the implementation of HCA during hyperinflation.
What is
stated in the 1 and 2 above is what happens during hyperinflation and what IAS
29 is unsuccessfully trying to stop with the incomplete IASB guidelines to the
implementation of Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power.
Yes, PricewaterhouseCoopers
is correct when the firm states
‘Amounts are not comparable between periods, and the gain or loss in
general purchasing power that arises in the reporting period is not recorded.’
But, that is not what it is about during
hyperinflation: What is stated in 1 and 2 above is what it is about during
hyperinflation.
IAS 29 is not implemented simply to (i) make amounts comparable
between periods and (ii) to record the gain or loss in general purchasing power
that arises in the reporting period.
IAS 29 is supposed to implement Capital Maintenance in
Units of Constant Purchasing Power during hyperinflation - a form of which was
very successfully done during 30 years in Brazil from 1964 to 1994 (IAS 29 was authorized
in 1989) when that country inflation-adjusted, not all, but some monetary items
daily and measured most
non-monetary items – variable real value non-monetary items and constant real
value non-monetary items – in units of constant purchasing power in terms of a
government supplied daily
index.
Unfortunately IAS 29 does not result in Capital
Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power because the monthly and not
the Daily CPI is used in the implementation of IAS 29.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Thursday, 4 April 2013
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 6: Reporting year financial statements are never adjusted for inflation under IAS 29
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 6: Reporting year financial statements are
never adjusted for inflation under IAS 29
‘Significant changes in the purchasing power
of money mean that financial statements unadjusted for inflation are
likely to be misleading.’
PricewaterhouseCoopers Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
It is impossible to adjust reporting year financial
statements for inflation under IAS 29. Reporting year financial statements are
never adjusted for inflation under IAS 29.
Inflation only affects the real value of monetary
items. It is impossible to adjust non-monetary items for inflation. Thus only
monetary items can be adjusted for inflation. This happens in the case of, for
example, daily
inflation-adjusted government bonds (TIPS in the US) on an
almost worldwide basis ; all mortgages in Colombia are
inflation-adjusted daily in terms of the Colombian Real Value Unit; all
90-day deposits and many other items (25 per cent of the broad M3 money supply)
are inflation-adjusted daily in Chile in terms of the Unidad
da Fomento (UF), etc.
Actual monetary items values in reporting year
financial statements are never
adjusted for inflation under IAS 29. What is done is the net monetary loss or
gain on monetary items are calculated and accounted under IAS 29 and under
Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power. That is the case
with monetary items.
It is impossible to adjust constant real value
non-monetary items for inflation in current year financial statements or anywhere
else because inflation has no effect on the real value of non-monetary items.
What happens is that constant real value non-monetary items are measured in
units of constant purchasing power as authorized in the Conceptual Framework
(2010), Par 4.59 (a) and guide-lined in IAS 29.
The PricewaterhouseCooper´s statement that
‘Significant changes in the purchasing power of money mean that financial
statements unadjusted for inflation are likely to be misleading.’
should thus be corrected to state:
Significant
changes in the purchasing power of money mean that financial statements
prepared under the Historical Cost principle are likely to be misleading
because the net
monetary item loss or gain is not accounted.
The implementation of the stable measuring unit assumption means that Historical Cost financial statements are likely to be misleading because constant
real value non-monetary items are measured in nominal monetary units during
inflation, hyperinflation and deflation and result in the unnecessary erosion (destruction) of real value in constant real
value non-monetary items never maintained constant under this
model during inflation and hyperinflation.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Wednesday, 3 April 2013
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 5: The stable measuring unit assumption erodes real value during low inflation too
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 5: The stable measuring unit assumption
erodes real value during low inflation too
‘This produces a meaningful result provided
that there are no dramatic changes in the purchasing power of money.’
PricewaterhouseCoopers Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
The generally accepted, globally implemented,
traditional Historical Cost Accounting model, i.e., financial capital
maintenance in nominal monetary units, does not result in maintaining the real
value of capital constant during inflation and deflation since this is
impossible, per se.
‘Dramatic
changes’ are considered by PricewaterhouseCoopers and all
Historical Cost accountants to be 26 per cent inflation for three years in a
row, i.e., 100 per cent cumulative inflation over three years, the generally
accepted definition of hyperinflation by millions of accountants worldwide who
follow the IASB´s definition of hyperinflation.
A few academics, particularly Prof Steve Hanke, very unscientifically do
not recognize the IASB´s generally accepted definition of hyperinflation. These
few academics follow Cagan´s definition of 50 per cent inflation per month.
Thus PricewaterhouseCoopers, the IASB and all
Historical Cost accountants consider inflation of 15 or 20 per cent per annum
as not dramatic and would not require the implementation of IAS 29. This is
obviously a mistake. This is in the process of being corrected by the IASB. This
however takes a very long time via the IFRS process. The Argentinian Accounting
Federation submitted a proposal, entitled ‘IFRS X INFLATION’ to the IASB in
2010 which proposes changes to the accounting model at inflation of 10 per annum
or cumulative inflation of 26 per cent over three years. I amended the
Argentinian Federation´s proposal in January 2012 to ‘IFRS X CAPITALMAINTENANCE IN UNITS OF CONSTANT PURCHASING POWER’. The IASB voted unanimously
in May 2012 to make the replacement of IAS 29 a research project in the future.
This research project has not jet started at the IASB.
The implementation of the very destructive stable
measuring unit assumption, even at 2 per cent inflation per annum, results in
the erosion (destruction) of hundreds of billions of US Dollars in the real
value of constant real value non-monetary items per annum in the world economy.
PricewaterhouseCoopers, the IASB and most HC accountants do not understand
this.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 4: Inflation only affects the real value of
only monetary items.
‘The impact of inflation is
ignored.’ P3
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
This should be stated as follows:
The impact of
(a)
inflation and deflation on the real
value of only monetary items and
(b)
the implementation of the stable
measuring unit assumption on the real value of constant real value non-monetary
items during inflation and deflation
is ignored.
PricewaterhouseCoopers, like most people, mistakenly
thinks that inflation affects non-monetary items. That is impossible. Inflation
only affects the real value of monetary items – nothing else.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Tuesday, 2 April 2013
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction: Assets are not stated at cost as PricewaterhouseCoopers states
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 3: Assets are not stated at cost as PricewaterhouseCoopers
states
‘The individual assets,
liabilities, shareholders’ equity, revenue, expenses and gains and losses are
therefore stated at cost at the time at which these items were originated.’
P3
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
Assets are not stated at cost per se as PricewaterhouseCoopers states. Some assets can be stated
at cost, but most are stated in terms of fair value, net realizable value, net
present value, recoverable value, etc. in terms of IFRS.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction: Inflation has no effect on the real value of non-monetary items
Understanding IAS 29 per
PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 2: Inflation has no effect on the real value of
non-monetary items
‘Financial statements unadjusted
for inflation in most countries are prepared on the basis of historical
cost without regard to changes in the general level of prices.’ P3
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Understanding IAS 29 2006 p3
This should be changed to:
Financial
statements with (a) net monetary losses and gains (resulting
from inflation – hyperinflation - and deflation) not accounted and (b) constant
real value non-monetary items measured in nominal monetary units implementing
the very destructive stable measuring unit assumption in most countries are prepared on the basis of historical cost without
regard to (i) changes in the general level of prices and without regard to (ii)
the fact that constant real value non-monetary items are measured in nominal monetary
units during inflation (hyperinflation) and deflation.
Inflation only affects the real value of monetary
items. Inflation has no effect on the real value of non-monetary items. It is
thus misleading and incorrect to state that financial
statements are unadjusted for inflation. Financial statements are never ‘adjusted for inflation’ since monetary
items are not ‘adjusted for inflation.’
The net monetary loss or gain in monetary items is calculated and accounted
under IAS 29, i.e., under capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing
power.
Constant real value non-monetary items cannot be ‘adjusted for inflation’ because
inflation has no effect on the real value of non-monetary items. Constant real
value non-monetary items are measured in units of constant purchasing power in
terms of the monthly published CPI in terms of IAS 29.
Financial statements are not ‘adjusted for inflation’ under IAS 29. (a) The net monetary loss or
gain as a result of hyperinflation in only monetary items is calculated and
accounted under IAS 29 and (b) constant real value non-monetary items are
measured in units of constant purchasing power in terms of the monthly
published CPI in terms of IAS 29.
IAS 29 is thus based on capital maintenance in units
of constant purchasing power principles. However, implementing IAS 29 in terms
of the monthly published CPI does not result in the maintenance of the constant
purchasing power of capital during hyperinflation, specifically with respect to
the current year´s profit (eventually retained income, i.e., part of capital).
A part of current year profits is eroded (destroyed) as a result of the
implementation of the monthly CPI (one single price-level change per month)
when the price level changes at least 28 to 31 times per month or even more
often (sometimes twice a day) generally at above 3000 per cent inflation per
annum.
IAS 29 can also have absolutely no positive effect in
a hyperinflationary economy. That is what happened in Zimbabwe where IAS 29 was
implemented during the last 8 years of hyperinflation. The Zimbabwe economy
imploded on 20 November 2008 with full implementation of IAS 29.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Understanding IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Corrections: Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power principles instead of current purchasing power principles
Understanding
IAS 29 per PricewaterhouseCoopers: Correction 1: Capital Maintenance in Units of Constant Purchasing Power
principles instead of current purchasing power principles
‘Introduction
Why is this guide needed?
IAS 29 is based on current purchasing power principles and
requires financial statements prepared in the currency of a hyperinflationary
economy to be stated in terms of the value of money at the reporting balance sheet
date.’
PricewaterhouseCoopers Understanding IAS 29 2006 P3
PricewaterhouseCoopers Understanding IAS 29 2006 P3
IAS 29 is not based on current purchasing power
principles. IAS 29 contains the IASB´s specific guidelines on how to implement financial
capital maintenance in units of constant purchasing power as authorized in the
Conceptual Framework (2010), Par. 4.59 (a) during hyperinflation. Par. 4.59 (a)
states ‘Financial capital maintenance can
be measured in either nominal monetary units or in units of constant purchasing power.’ Capital
maintenance in units of constant purchasing power is authorized in IFRS at all
levels of inflation and deflation, including during hyperinflation as specifically
guide-lined in IAS 29.
IAS 29 is thus based on capital maintenance in units
of constant purchasing power principles. However, implementing IAS 29 in terms
of the monthly published CPI does not result in the maintenance of the constant
purchasing power of capital during hyperinflation, specifically with respect to
the current year´s profit (eventually retained income, i.e., part of capital).
A part of current year profits is eroded (destroyed) as a result of the
implementation of the monthly CPI (one single price-level change per month)
when the price level changes at least 28 to 31 times per month or even more
often (sometimes twice a day) generally at above 3000 per cent inflation per
annum.
IAS 29 can also have absolutely no positive effect in a hyperinflationary economy. That is what happened in Zimbabwe where IAS 29 was implemented during the last 8 years of hyperinflation. The Zimbabwe economy imploded on 20 November 2008 with full implementation of IAS 29.
Nicolaas Smith
IAS 29 can also have absolutely no positive effect in a hyperinflationary economy. That is what happened in Zimbabwe where IAS 29 was implemented during the last 8 years of hyperinflation. The Zimbabwe economy imploded on 20 November 2008 with full implementation of IAS 29.
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Wednesday, 27 March 2013
Scam at previous Venezuela parallel rate site
Scam at previous Venezuela parallel rate site
Reblogged from The Devil´s Excrement
Moraima Garcia Says:
March 27, 2013 at 11:25 am
Glenn, in truth there is more to the Lechuga Verde case, apparently they were running a scam, selling people dollars at lower prices (apparently dollars they got from SITME) and at some point they stopped paying peolple. There is a web page of the victims with very direct threats to the people of Lechuga Verde. Not sure if the creators of the site have been arrested or even if people really know who they are, but from what you can read online it seems they were not saints wanting to give us information about the real price that must not be mentioned.
- Nicolaas Smith Says:
March 27, 2013 at 11:59 am CNN indicates this site Dolar Today http://dolartoday.com/ quoting the parallel rate daily.”Precio del Dolar paralelo en Venezuela y noticias SIN CENSURA…” It seems to be a Colombian site.
island canuck Says:
March 27, 2013 at 11:33 am There’s been some confusion about this.
Lechuagaverde.com was responsible for defrauding 100′s(?) of people by offering US$ at below market prices. After paying off a few early clients they just stopped paying the rest. A typical Ponzi scheme.
I think its these owners who Maduro was referring to.
In the meantime you will see efforts to block access to other sites inside Venezuela that post current rates. One notably is publishing the current price in Cucuta, Colombia (which is a legal & active market) & the Implicit rate (current Bs. in circulation (liquidity) divided by the international reserves on hand).
Efforts to block access are pretty useless as they also have Twitter & FB accounts.
Bloomberg:
Dollar-Desperate Venezuelans Get Defrauded on Internet
Parallel rate in Venezuela
Parallel rate in Venezuela
CNN indicates this site Dolar Today http://dolartoday.com/ quoting the parallel rate daily.”Precio del Dolar paralelo en Venezuela y noticias SIN CENSURA…”
It seems to be a Colombian site.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
CNN indicates this site Dolar Today http://dolartoday.com/ quoting the parallel rate daily.”Precio del Dolar paralelo en Venezuela y noticias SIN CENSURA…”
It seems to be a Colombian site.
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Official and parallel rate generally unify at the parallel rate
Official and parallel rate generally unify at the parallel rate
The experience with unification indicates that it usually takes place at the parallel exchange rate.
Parallel exchange rates in developing countries : lessons from eight case studies, Volume 1
Kiguel, Miguel A.; O'Connell, Stephen A.;
Policy, Research working paper; no. WPS 1265
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
The experience with unification indicates that it usually takes place at the parallel exchange rate.
Parallel exchange rates in developing countries : lessons from eight case studies, Volume 1
Kiguel, Miguel A.; O'Connell, Stephen A.;
Policy, Research working paper; no. WPS 1265
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Friday, 22 March 2013
Fundamental mistake in IFRIC 7
Dear Mr Hoogervorst,
Thank you for your reply dated 19 February.
I further wish to point out to you that there is a fundamental mistake in IFRIC 7 Applying the Restatement Approach under IAS 29 Financial Reporting in Hyperinflationary Economies as follows:
Par 3 Consensus states:
Therefore, in relation to non-monetary items measured at historical cost, the entity’s opening statement of financial position at the beginning of the earliest period presented in the financial statements shall be restated to reflect the effect of inflationfrom the date the assets were acquired and the liabilities were incurred or assumed until the end of the reporting period. For non-monetary items carried in the opening statement of financial position at amounts current at dates other than those of acquisition or incurrence, that restatement shall reflect instead the effect of inflation from the dates those carrying amounts were determined until the end of the reporting period.
Inflation has no effect on the real value of non-monetary items.
‘Purchasing power of non monetary items does not change in spite of variation in national currency value.’
Gucenme U and Arsoy A P 2005 Changes in financial reporting in Turkey, Historical Development of Inflation Accounting 1960 – 2005 Academy of Accounting Historians 2005 Research Conference 6-8 Oct 2005 Ohio State University Columbus Ohio USA (Second last item on website referenced.)
It is the stable measuring unit assumption, and not inflation, that affects the real value of non-monetary items. Inflation only affects the real value of monetary items.
Please change the word inflation in IFRIC 7, Par 3 above to “the stable measuring unit assumption”.
You stated in your reply to me that “It is important that our staff collaboration approach retains a degree of flexibilityand agility to respond to the circumstances.” I have found that to mean flexibility to ignore facts.
You are free to ignore the above fact too.
Yours sincerely,
Nicolaas Smith
Copyright (c) 2005-2013 Nicolaas J Smith. All rights reserved. No reproduction without permission.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)