Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Henry a Wallace — Part 4
Page 214
214 / 543
APRIL 14, 1947
firm of millions of dollars and had
manipulated accounts so as-to conceal
-his thefts, But in 1938 Price, Waterhouse
had declared to the stockholders that the
firm’s accounts “fairly present, in ac-
cordance with accepted principles of
accounting .. . the position of the com-
bined companies. . . .” This is, actually,
no reflection on the honesty or bright-
ness of the Price, Waterhouse ac-
countants. It merely dramatizes just
how little the auditor’s certification may
mean on the annual report you got in
the mail this morning.
Who's right?
ND how much should you rely on the
glowing statement in which -the
company’s president invariably damns-
government interference with business,
but always promises—even in spite of
such interference—to turn up a good
profit next year? On that touchy sub-
ject, Arthur Stone Dewing, one-time
professor at the Harvard Business
School, writes in his classic Financial
Policy of Corporations: ‘Financial lit-
erature abounds with well authenticated
cases in which the same directors, who
were outwardly seeking to support the
company’s credit by persistent reassur-
ances to the stockholder, were at the
very same time selling their own shares’ ,
and even hastening the inevitable catas-
trophe by selling stock short.” Fortu-
mately for your peace of mind, though,
the. most flagrant examples of such prac-
tices belong to the days before Franklin ,
D. Roosevelt and the New Deal.
So much for Dr, Finney’s warning
that “some men are liars.” But outright
dishonesty is not the major obstacle in
the path of an eager annual-report
reader.
Of much more concern is the cau-
tion that even honest men differ
widely on accounting practices. The
varying techniques make presentation of
figures to suit the purpose at hand sur-
prisingly easy. This appears most clearly
when a corporation wants to develop
two different figures for
two different purposes.
In 1940, for example,
Western Union, in
order to show a high
profit to its stockhold-
ers, told them in the
main body-of-its annual -
report that only, $8.2
million had to be set
aside for depreciation.
In the less well read tax
section of the same re-
port, however, Western
Union admitted it had reported a depre-
ciation reserve of more than $11 million
to the government in ‘order.to lessen
taxable income. The contradictory fig- -
ures were developed by equally legiti-
mate accounting practices. Only Western
Union knows which, if either, figure was
correct.
Or take the case of Amerada Petro-
leum, a small but definitely blue-chip
, oil company. Its.annual report is a thing
of beauty, and—on second glance—
of wonder, It lists splendid earnings
and handsome profits. The company has
not missed a dividend since 1922; and
TRY FIGURING IT OUT FOR YOURSELF
19
in 1944, with gross profits of $17 -mil-
lion and a net of $5 million, it raised
its dividend from $2:to $3 a share. But
its stockholders’ report for that year
showed no item for taxes on income or
surplus profits. This caught the eye of
one keen investment analyst, who
looked into the detailed report which
the company had filed with the SEC.
There he found that Amerada actually
-had paid $200,000 in- taxes, but this
was less than it had
paid in previous years
when its income was
lower. And it had paid
no excess-profits tax at
all.
The answer to this is
another study in ac-
counting legerdemain.
It so happens that each
year, any oil company
can claim that its oil
properties have been de-
pleted by 27.5 percent
of its gross income. The fact that after
four years, this figure of depletion comes
to 110 percent has never seemed to bother
Congress, solicitous for the future of ._-
the oil companies. In addition, by law
Amerada is permitted to charge off costs
of developing new wells as operating ©
expenses, though the rest of us would
have to list such expenses as capital out-
lays. So, by these perfectly legitimate
deductions, Amerada was able to show
a pitiable state of affairs to the govern-
ment. But to its stockholders, everything
was rosy. But what if its report to the
government is nearer the truth? What
if it is really depleting its oil reserves?
What if its extensive drilling operations
strike nothing of value? Fortune, after
analyzing Amerada’s success with a not
unfriendly eye, added that ‘“Amerada’s
present affluence and serenity are also
due to luck.” If luck should run out,
those annual reports are going to look
awfully silly.
But these are special cases, each with
its own peculiarities. What can be said
in general about the figures presented
in the ordinary annual teport? As
George O. May puts it, they are
“the reflections of opinions subject to a
wide margin of error.” And accountants
differ furiously among themseves in
their opinions. Suppose, for example,
one or ce ene
a ee eee
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
federal bureau
letter
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic