Deconstructing the use of REPO 105 and Repo 108 Transactions Under SFAS 140: the Case of Lehman Brothers Holding Inc. and the Liability of Ernst & Young

Prior to filing for bankruptcy in 2008, Lehman Brothers Holding Inc., [LBHI] relied upon select repurchase agreements denominated “Repo 105” and “Repo 108” for the purpose of re-casting its balance sheet to meet net leverage ratios required by money markets. SFAS 140, as then existing without the 20...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	John JA Burke
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Academicus 2019
Materias:	lehman brothers; audit failure; repo 105 and repo 108; ernst & young; misleading financial statements Social Sciences H Economics as a science HB71-74
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/518374960e2a43be89c17695eabfbd29
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:518374960e2a43be89c17695eabfbd29
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:518374960e2a43be89c17695eabfbd292021-12-02T19:11:41ZDeconstructing the use of REPO 105 and Repo 108 Transactions Under SFAS 140: the Case of Lehman Brothers Holding Inc. and the Liability of Ernst & Young2079-37152309-108810.7336/academicus.2019.19.12https://doaj.org/article/518374960e2a43be89c17695eabfbd292019-01-01T00:00:00Z http://www.academicus.edu.al/nr19/Academicus-MMXIX-19-165-187.pdf https://doaj.org/toc/2079-3715https://doaj.org/toc/2309-1088Prior to filing for bankruptcy in 2008, Lehman Brothers Holding Inc., [LBHI] relied upon select repurchase agreements denominated “Repo 105” and “Repo 108” for the purpose of re-casting its balance sheet to meet net leverage ratios required by money markets. SFAS 140, as then existing without the 2011 amendment, provided a mechanism to treat “ordinary borrowings” as “asset sales”. LBHI used SFAS 140 to justify Repo 105 and Repo 108 transactions to engineer its balance sheet. The accounting treatment resulted in the publication of misleading quarterly and annual Financial Statements relied upon by external users to make investment decisions. In 2011 and 2012, the Southern District of New York issued opinions in the consolidated LBHI litigation. The finding that LBHI correctly applied the criteria of SFAS 140 to justify “borrowings” as “asset sales” under Repo 105 and Repo 108 is fundamentally flawed. During the period 2000 until 2008, Ernst & Young [E&Y] served as the outside auditor of LBHI. Legal principles governing the obligations of auditors support a finding that E&Y committed professional malpractice by issuing unqualified audit opinions knowing that LBHI failed to disclose its liabilities to repurchase transferred securities under Repo 105 and Repo 108 transactions. Economic analysis of non-contractual obligations [tort] supports a reformulation of the legal standard governing auditor liability to external users of audited financial statements containing materially misleading information. The reformulated standard allocates incentives to take precautions both to the audit firm and to the external user to achieve an efficient allocation of the cost of harm ensuing from defective information products.John JA BurkeAcademicusarticlelehman brothers; audit failure; repo 105 and repo 108; ernst & young; misleading financial statementsSocial SciencesHEconomics as a scienceHB71-74ENAcademicus International Scientific Journal, Vol MMXIX, Iss 19, Pp 165-187 (2019)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	lehman brothers; audit failure; repo 105 and repo 108; ernst & young; misleading financial statements Social Sciences H Economics as a science HB71-74
spellingShingle	lehman brothers; audit failure; repo 105 and repo 108; ernst & young; misleading financial statements Social Sciences H Economics as a science HB71-74 John JA Burke Deconstructing the use of REPO 105 and Repo 108 Transactions Under SFAS 140: the Case of Lehman Brothers Holding Inc. and the Liability of Ernst & Young
description	Prior to filing for bankruptcy in 2008, Lehman Brothers Holding Inc., [LBHI] relied upon select repurchase agreements denominated “Repo 105” and “Repo 108” for the purpose of re-casting its balance sheet to meet net leverage ratios required by money markets. SFAS 140, as then existing without the 2011 amendment, provided a mechanism to treat “ordinary borrowings” as “asset sales”. LBHI used SFAS 140 to justify Repo 105 and Repo 108 transactions to engineer its balance sheet. The accounting treatment resulted in the publication of misleading quarterly and annual Financial Statements relied upon by external users to make investment decisions. In 2011 and 2012, the Southern District of New York issued opinions in the consolidated LBHI litigation. The finding that LBHI correctly applied the criteria of SFAS 140 to justify “borrowings” as “asset sales” under Repo 105 and Repo 108 is fundamentally flawed. During the period 2000 until 2008, Ernst & Young [E&Y] served as the outside auditor of LBHI. Legal principles governing the obligations of auditors support a finding that E&Y committed professional malpractice by issuing unqualified audit opinions knowing that LBHI failed to disclose its liabilities to repurchase transferred securities under Repo 105 and Repo 108 transactions. Economic analysis of non-contractual obligations [tort] supports a reformulation of the legal standard governing auditor liability to external users of audited financial statements containing materially misleading information. The reformulated standard allocates incentives to take precautions both to the audit firm and to the external user to achieve an efficient allocation of the cost of harm ensuing from defective information products.
format	article
author	John JA Burke
author_facet	John JA Burke
author_sort	John JA Burke
title	Deconstructing the use of REPO 105 and Repo 108 Transactions Under SFAS 140: the Case of Lehman Brothers Holding Inc. and the Liability of Ernst & Young
title_short	Deconstructing the use of REPO 105 and Repo 108 Transactions Under SFAS 140: the Case of Lehman Brothers Holding Inc. and the Liability of Ernst & Young
title_full	Deconstructing the use of REPO 105 and Repo 108 Transactions Under SFAS 140: the Case of Lehman Brothers Holding Inc. and the Liability of Ernst & Young
title_fullStr	Deconstructing the use of REPO 105 and Repo 108 Transactions Under SFAS 140: the Case of Lehman Brothers Holding Inc. and the Liability of Ernst & Young
title_full_unstemmed	Deconstructing the use of REPO 105 and Repo 108 Transactions Under SFAS 140: the Case of Lehman Brothers Holding Inc. and the Liability of Ernst & Young
title_sort	deconstructing the use of repo 105 and repo 108 transactions under sfas 140: the case of lehman brothers holding inc. and the liability of ernst & young
publisher	Academicus
publishDate	2019
url	https://doaj.org/article/518374960e2a43be89c17695eabfbd29
work_keys_str_mv	AT johnjaburke deconstructingtheuseofrepo105andrepo108transactionsundersfas140thecaseoflehmanbrothersholdingincandtheliabilityofernstyoung
_version_	1718377086007115776

Deconstructing the use of REPO 105 and Repo 108 Transactions Under SFAS 140: the Case of Lehman Brothers Holding Inc. and the Liability of Ernst & Young

Ejemplares similares