undercrust

joined 2 years ago
[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Honest question: with this level of complete insanity in a legal filing, what are the chances that a deranged sov cit who has somehow passed the bar, is disbarred? Surely a point blank refusal to acknowledge the authority of the legal system is grounds?

I mean, if the law doesn't apply to anyone who says the magic words in the right order, then this person shouldn't be too upset they're being removed from representing that legal system, right?

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Yeah, it's a deferred accounting technique that's similar to the idea behind accounts payable / receivable.

For revenue due in the future, you book in a "sale" to accounts receivable, and then record the profit when the sale is delivered (in full or proportionally). That future loan revenue is an asset held by the bank until its actually received from the client and converted to current cash flow.

PCLs are effectively an offset to accounts receivable. I think it's technically a negative asset and not a liability, but that's not important. If everything goes right with a loan, the bank receives interest payable and the original principal. That was all logged as an expected receivable by the bank. When the bank chooses to believe more people will have difficulty paying their loans back, the bank increases PCLs to reduce the "expectation of owed income". The idea is that the PCL figure is supposed to both be a backward-looking indicator of good loan creation behaviour at the banks, and a forward-looking signal to government or shareholders about a pending problem that the bank has identified.

Usually what actually winds up happening is the banks create too-high PCLs, which then are reversed later, magically re-creating those assets & profits in a future reporting period.

So, while PCLs are an important part of IFRS accounting for the finance sector, they also introduce a LOT of ability for banking executives to "manage" their overall level of taxable earnings. For example, if you don't want to show huge earnings at a particular calendar year-end because of a proposed windfall tax on the banking sector...

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 34 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Shit policy idea. Banning things never works. Please see all of history as evidence.

Increase taxes on nicotine ten-fold if it's so important. Use taxes in part to ensure that the amount of smokes that fall off the back of trucks doesn't spike. That's about as good as you're gonna get to influence anyone who's addicted.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Provisions for credit losses (PCLs). Not bad loans.

One is permanently impaired capital.

The other is a discretionary accounting technique that helps "manage" bank earnings / earnings expectations.

PCLs are a great way for the banks to influence outside forces by adjusting real profits to artificially show lower profits or even losses.

Say, if a government was considering...a windfall tax on excess profits...? Sure would be handy not to have them profits anymore.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago

That's funny, this appears to be legislation working, not being "salvaged".

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Always convenient how these biased 'opinion' writers forget that these problems existed well before the Liberals were in power, and that their buddies in the CPC didn't do fuck all about it in their tenure either.

Backwards looking blame as always. Boring writing.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 years ago

Super, can't wait to "stand up against Ottawa" again for no good reason except for UCP political grandstanding.

Looking forward to these perennial losers taking another fat L.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

Because it is politically convenient for him to be a purposefully underinformed shitbird.

Little PP sucks at doing anything consequential, so the only space he can occupy is that of a whiny child screaming for ice cream.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago

This woman is a vile human being, bereft of compassion and critical thinking skills. A convenient fool and mouthpiece.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago

Goddamn Preston Manning realized the world was working towars forgetting about his archaic ass and is trying to get his name back in the running for shittiest Canadian again.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Bah, that's a double-decker butter sandwich.

A toast sandwich is a piece of dry toast between two other pieces of bread, toasted or otherwise.

Savages.

[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago
view more: ‹ prev next ›