Since deferred tax is a contingent item and the amount recorded may not represent a realistic
value (present value), the deferred asset or liability may not be timely, material, relevant,
reliable, or representationally faithful. If these concepts (as outlined in SFAC No. 2) are not
followed, the reported amount of deferred tax may be of little value, and it may be misleading.
THE MATCHING PROCESS
The matching process is generally described as trying to match revenues with expenses that
caused the revenues to be generated. This basic idea can also be expressed as trying to match
effort with results. If expenses cannot be matched with particular revenues, the expenses are
charged either to the period in which they are incurred or are allocated systematically over
several periods (e.g., depreciation).
Management should strive to reduce tax legally within the overall objective of profit
maximization. Therefore, it is logical to match the annual net cost (present value) of the
income tax provision with the annual effort by management to minimize tax. The matching of
undiscounted deferred tax with related taxable items in the income statement results in
exacerbated income smoothing and overstated deferred tax amounts on the balance sheet.
Income tax generally cannot be traced directly to specific governmental services. However,
current income tax law can be applied to tax related items in the income statement to compute
the income tax provision. This approach to the matching process is appealing because it
matches taxable items with tax that would be paid if these items were the ones included in the
current-year taxable income. However, this matching process is appropriate only if the
deferred tax is reported at effective present value. Interperiod tax allocation is based on the
assumption that over a period of time temporary differences will reverse. However, if
temporary differences (1) reverse at a time when the tax liability is unaffected or (2) effectively
reverse so far in the future that present value is materially different from the undiscounted
deferred tax reported, this matching process is not meaningful because the deferred tax is
greater than its net, potential benefit or obligation. When effective reversal is not within a
157
short period of time, the matehing of tax items in the ineome statement with undiseounted,
future tax on these items is not relevant beeause the tax effeet is overstated.
COST-BENEFIT AND MATERIALITY CONCEPTS
The undiseounted deferred tax reeorded under eurrent GAAP is very likely to be materially
different from the effeetive present value of the deferred tax. SFAC No. 2 indieates aeeounting
information should be subjeet to the "eost eonstraint" eoneept. That is, the cost of providing
information should not be more than the benefits derived from providing that information.
Since deferred tax information is costly to provide (Karlinsky 1983) and often conveys little
information to the users because it is not reported at present value, it is likely that the cost of
reporting the undiseounted deferred tax exeeeds the benefit. A logieal eonelusion would be to
diseontinue interperiod tax alloeation (Ketz 2010). Tax expense would be the amount of tax
owed as a result of eurrent-year operations (the flow-through method). Major differenees
between finaneial accounting and tax accounting could be disclosed in notes to the financial
statements. However, given the history of standard-setting bodies, this course of action is
unlikely to occur. Assuming that ITA is to be continued, the best solution is to change
accounting for ITA and use a present value approach that provides more relevant information.
INCOME SMOOTHING
The practice of interperiod tax allocation has the effect of automatic income smoothing. When
there is a financial accounting loss or net loss involving taxable items, the loss is automatically
reduced by the amount of the estimated reduced tax resulting from the loss without regard to
when the tax benefit will be used. When there is a financial accounting gain or net income
involving taxable items, net income is automatically reduced by the estimated amount of
related tax without regard to when the tax will be paid. Generally speaking, management is
likely to prefer the income smoothing afforded by interperiod tax allocation in order to avoid
volatile annual earnings. This income smoothing effect is exaggerated when the undiseounted
deferred tax asset or liability is materially in exeess of effeetive present value.
1S8
REALISTIC ACCOUNTING FOR TAX BENEFITS FROM OPERATING LOSSES
The tax benefit from an operating loss carryback should be recognized in the year of the
operating loss. The tax refund is an immediate claim that is payable by the U. S. Treasury
Department and is a direct result of the reported operating loss. Recognition of any tax benefit
from an operating loss carryforward (OLCF) should be deferred until the year the tax benefit is
realized. Recognition of an estimated benefit from an OLCF in the year of the operating loss
results in the recognition of an undiscounted contingent asset. Under current GAAP,
contingent assets (other than deferred tax) are generally not recognized. Also, the contingent
nature of any future tax benefit from an OLCF makes estimation of the amount and timing of its
potential realization very difficult.
Continued operating losses or low amounts of taxable income within the carryforward period
could result in loss of some or all of the potential benefits. Also, the present value of any future
benefits is much less than the undiscounted amount if realization occurs in the latter part of the
carryforward period. Recognition of the entire, undiscounted, estimated carryforward benefit
in the year of the operating loss understates the net financial loss reported. The combined
effect of all these problems results in the logical conclusion that the tax benefits from an OLCF
should not be recognized in the period of the operating loss. The best solution is to recognize
the carryforward credit(s) in the year(s) that realization occurs. This would eliminate the need
for the dubious task of estimating taxable income each year over possibly the next 20 years
after incurring an operating loss. Furthermore, the OLCF credit(s) taken in future years would
be matched with the successful efforts of management to provide taxable income.
EFFECTIVE TAX EXPENSE RELATED TO DEFERRED ITEMS
A more appropriate description for the deferred tax currently reported on the balance sheet
would be: "Undiscounted, Potential Future Tax Effects Caused by Differences between Financial
and Tax Accounting." A better solution would be to report the deferred tax at present value
and make additional disclosures about the origin and contingent nature of the item(s).
159
The ability to defer the payment of tax using various techniques such as accelerated
depreciation for tax purposes allows the business entity to use the saved money in the
meantime for profit making operations. Thus, the deferring of a tax liability in substance
reduces the tax expense of the current year. The present value of the deferred tax is the
relevant value for determining tax expense and the deferred tax liability. A realistic discount
rate would be the estimated, after-tax internal rate of return for the money saved. Conversely,
the present value of a deferred tax asset should be used for current-year reporting. For the
vast majority of publicly held companies, deferred tax liabilities greatly exceed deferred tax
assets.