Zwu
CCP's management has an exaggerated proclivity for accounting conservatism, and for deploying funds in a formulaic manner. From a cash-flow perspective, there is no cash-flow reason for the up-front provisioning that springs from the timing of tax payments, but by sticking to a stated dividend pay-out ratio of about 50% of Statutory NPAT, CCP lowers dividend payments when it needs funds to invest in the Loan Book. It does this because it can (that is, the auditors would allow it, and the ATO, by ignoring the provisioning, does too.
Within the concept of matching cash to needs, CCP amortises the PDLs in step with revenue and profit recognition. Potentially, the fair-value accounting standard would allow CCP to make Statutory profit earlier, by Management simply having an opinion, or pretending to have one, to the effect that the PDLs in the balance sheet are worth more than their value there. If a company upvalues any balance-sheet asset, that is a debit to assets and a credit to the trading accounts, which by definitions means increased Statutory profit. In companies holding real estate, like two stocks that I hold (FRI and FFI), profits are often increased by up-valuing the balance-sheet value of property.
Readers who hold, or follow, PNC would know that its management tried to increase profits via PDL revaluations. This may have been legally defensible, but the auditors objected on the basis that it did not conform to normal practice for PDL accounting. From a shareholders perspective it made no sense, because booking profit early did not occasion cash inflows early, but it probably occasioned early outflows to the ATO. In other words, "window dressing" may have been the objective.
Not knowing your level of accounting knowledge, I have erred on the side of explaining more than what may have sufficed to answer your post.
Expand
