-226- position in the swap given that the counterparty has a worse credit rating than FNBC. Whereas petitioner is correct that credit risk is normally negligible at the inception of a swap, and that interest rate movements after inception may produce an incremental credit risk warranting a downward adjustment at a revaluation date, petitioner ignores the reality of the converse of this principle; i.e., that an upward credit adjustment might be justified when changes in interest rates have caused the market value of the swap to become negative. 2. One-Month Lag in Recording Swaps Whereas FNBC calculated its credit adjustments quarterly, those quarterly periods did not coincide with the calendar quarters in which its swaps actually arose. FNBC treated each of its swaps as arising 1 month after the date that the swap actually arose. FNBC’s 1-month lag for determining the swaps which it included in its credit adjustment for a quarter was inconsistent with the section 475 mark-to-market requirement that value be determined as of the last business day in the taxable year. FNBC’s 1-month lag resulted inappropriately in FNBC’s postponing the recognition of some of its credit adjustments for 1 whole year; e.g., the credit adjustments for 32 swaps which FNBC initiated in December 1993 were actually claimed in 1994.Page: Previous 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011