Text 4
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 statement. Bob Herz, the FASB’s chairman, cried out against those who “question our motives.” Yet bank shares rose and the changes enhance what one lobby 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 word” 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 form 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.
37.According to the author , the rule changes of the FASB may result in
[A]the diminishing role of management
[B]the revival of the banking system
[C]the banks’ long-term asset losses
[D]the weakening of its independence
38.According to Paragraph 4, McCreevy objects to the IASB’s attempt to
[A]keep away from political influences.
[B]evade the pressure from their peers.
[C]act on their own in rule-setting.
[D]take gradual measures in reform.
39.The author thinks the banks were “on the wrong planet ”in that they
[A]misinterpreted market price indicators
[B]exaggerated the real value of their assets
[C]neglected the likely existence of bad debts.
[D]denied booking losses in their sale of assets.
40.The author’s attitude towards standard-setters is one of
[A]satisfaction.
[B]skepticism.
[C]objectiveness
[D]sympathy
36 . A
解析:细节题。答案意为“遵循不利的资产评估准则”。
由题干中的 “ Bankers complained ” 和 “ force ” 定位于第一段第三行 “ 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. ” 该句核心词为 rules ,四个答案中只有 A 选项包含。
37 . A
解析:推理引申题。答案意为“管理的作用的逐渐消失”。根据题干中的专有名词 FASB 定位于第三段。第一句提到 FASB 经过努力使国会通过了一些变革,这些变革赋予了银行更多的权利,也就是说对银行的管理更为松散,所以答案为“管理的作用的逐渐消失”。
38 . C
解析:细节题。答案意为“独立自主的制定法规”。根据题干中的 “M cCreevy objects to ” 定位到第五段。第五段提到立即根据美国的变化做出一样的反应,欧洲的各界人士对此的反对十分强烈,引用 M cCreevy 的话是为了说明这一点:欧洲要对这个问题有自己独立的法律法规。
39 . C
解析:句意题。答案意为“忽视了坏账存在的极大可能性”。根据题干的信息定位到第六段 Today they argue that market prices overstate losses, because they largely reflect the temporary illiquidity of markets, not the likely extent of bad debts. 批判银行一味的夸大“ that market prices overstate losses ”,而忽视了“ the likely extent of bad debts ”。
40 . D
解析:情感态度题。文章讨论了银行针对“ standard-setters ”的敌意行为,特别是文章最后一段更是明确的表明了作者对“ standard-setters ”的同情。
考研英语线上培训班哪个好?当然选【华慧考研】!这里有海量考研真题资料、配套的考研英语辅导书,更有专门的辅导老师一对一辅导,让你研途不再迷茫!点击下方图片链接了解详情,也可联系客服,在线为您答疑~