April 13, 2007
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Technical Director
Financial Accounting Standards Board
401 Merritt 7
P.O. Box 5116
Norwalk, CT 06856-5116
Re: Valuation Guidance for Financial Reporting
File Reference No. 1520-100
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Investment Company Institute1 appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Board’s
Invitation To Comment: Valuation Guidance for Financial Reporting (the “ITC”). The ITC asks
constituents whether they need more guidance on measuring fair value for purposes of financial
reporting, how the guidance should be developed, and what parties should be responsible for its
development.
The Institute agrees with the Board’s conclusion that fair value reporting for financial assets
and financial liabilities provide financial statement users with more relevant and understandable
information than cost-based measures.2 We encourage the Board to continue to incorporate fair value
measurements into financial reporting, particularly where those measurements are corroborated by
market data.
1 The Investment Company Institute is the national trade association of the U.S. investment company industry. ICI
members include 8,821 open-end investment companies (mutual funds), 664 closed-end investment companies, 385
exchange-traded funds, and 4 sponsors of unit investment trusts. Mutual fund members of the ICI have total assets of
approximately $10.481 trillion (representing 98 percent of all assets of US mutual funds); these funds serve approximately
93.9 million shareholders in more than 53.8 million households.
2 See FASB Statement No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, paragraph A3d.
Investment companies have extensive experience with valuing their investment securities.
Indeed, mutual funds are required to value their securities daily for purposes of determining their
current net asset value.3 The 1940 Act defines value for this purpose as market value where market
quotations are readily available, and fair value as determined in good faith by the fund’s board of
directors for other securities and assets.4
The Securities and Exchange Commission and Commission staff have issued various items of
interpretive guidance elaborating on the concept of value. For example, Accounting Series Release 113
addresses valuation practices with respect to restricted securities.5 Accounting Series Release 118
provides guidance on a broad range of valuation issues and defines the fair value of a security as the
amount the owner might reasonably expect to receive upon current sale.6 Accounting Series Release
219 enables funds to utilize the amortized cost method to value debt securities having remaining terms
of 60 days or less.7 More recently, Commission staff has issued interpretive letters addressing fair value,
the availability of market quotations, and the effect of significant events that occur subsequent to a
foreign market close.8
Importantly, Regulation S-X requires registered investment companies, in preparing their
financial statements, to value their investments consistent with the valuation concepts prescribed in the
1940 Act.9 As we indicated in our comment letter on FAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements, it is
imperative that the valuation principles incorporated into generally accepted accounting principles are
not inconsistent with the valuation requirements imposed on registered funds by the 1940 Act. Funds
cannot concurrently comply with differing valuation regimes. In this regard, we were pleased to see that
the Board ultimately rejected application of block discounts to actively traded securities when it
adopted FAS No. 157.
Question 3—What Process Should Be Used for Issuing Valuation Guidance for Financial
Reporting?
3 See Rule 2a-4 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“1940 Act”).
4 See 1940 Act Section 2(a)(41)(B).
5 Accounting Series Release No. 113, Investment Company Act Release No. 5847 (October 21, 1969).
6 Accounting Series Release No. 118, Investment Company Act Release No. 6295 (December 23, 1970).
7 Accounting Series Release No. 219, Investment Company Act Release No. 9786 (May 31, 1977).
8 Letter from Douglas Scheidt, Associate Director and Chief Counsel, Division of Investment Management, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission to Craig S. Tyle, General Counsel, Investment Company Institute (December 8, 1999) and
Letter from Douglas Scheidt, Associate Director and Chief Counsel, Division of Investment Management, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission to Craig S. Tyle, General Counsel, Investment Company Institute (April 30, 2001).
9 See Regulation S-X rule 6-02(b) and rule 6-03(d).
The ITC requests comment on the process that should be used to issue valuation guidance for
financial reporting and identifies several alternative processes and entities that could be involved. If the
Board ultimately decides to issue valuation guidance for financial reporting, we strongly recommend
close coordination with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In particular, we urge the Board to
consult with staff in the Division of Investment Management, which is responsible for the regulation
and oversight of registered investment companies on valuation guidance relating to investment
securities.
If the Board decides to establish a resource group composed of valuation professionals and
other interested parties to advise and assist in developing valuation guidance for financial reporting, we
recommend that you include representation from the investment company industry. In particular,
where the Board is developing guidance on valuation of investment securities, including fund personnel
would be appropriate since funds have extensive experience valuing their holdings, both for daily net
asset value calculations and financial reporting.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the ITC and would be pleased to provide any
additional information you may require. Please contact the undersigned at 202/326-5851.
Sincerely,
/s/ Gregory M. Smith
Gregory M. Smith
Director – Operations/
Compliance & Fund Accounting
cc: Andrew J. Donohue, Director
Division of Investment Management
Richard F. Sennett, Chief Accountant
Division of Investment Management
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Latest Comment Letters:
TEST - ICI Comment Letter Opposing Sales Tax on Additional Services in Maryland
ICI Comment Letter Opposing Sales Tax on Additional Services in Maryland
ICI Response to the European Commission on the Savings and Investments Union