Contents - AL-Tax

Contents - AL-Tax Contents - AL-Tax

eduart0.tripod.com
from eduart0.tripod.com More from this publisher
11.07.2015 Views

158 11 Global Trading of Commoditiesensure access to product are also potentially important intangible assets in a tradingcontext. However, as with its reputation, the Group has historically developed suchrelationships jointly, not through investment per se, but in the ordinary course ofbusiness. (Moreover, in the alumina and aluminum markets in particular, establishedrelationships with customers and suppliers have greatly diminished in value recentlyas a result of China’s substantially reduced role in these markets.)Most trading firms utilize off-the-shelf software developed specifically for tradingapplications, and this Group is no exception. However, the software generallyhas to be extensively customized. Hence, the customization component constitutesan intangible asset of some significance, owned by FP in this case.In sum, FP has created an intangible asset through the customization of software.Expenditures on customization activities are a reasonable approximation ofthe asset’s value: One would not pay more than this amount to purchase the customizationfeatures, because the software engineering work can readily be replicated.11 The Group’s offtake arrangements have largely expired; if this were notthe case, they would also be valuable intangible assets, and ownership should beascribed to the Group member that is the legal counterparty. 12 A reputation forreliability, while a highly valuable intangible asset, has been developed jointly byall members of the Group, and, as such, cannot be used to allocate trading profitsamong members. Established relationships likewise have been developed jointly,and now have de minimis value in any event. More broadly, in circumstances whereone is justified in applying the formulary apportionment method, joint ownershipof intangible assets that are developed in the normal course of business is the rulerather than the exception.Where most intangible assets are jointly developed and owned by all members ofa controlled trading group (as in this case), the allocation of after-tax free cash flowsby entity should be based primarily on each entity’s contribution (or utilization)of capital over the course of the year, and the degree of risk assumed thereby. Asdescribed in the summary of key facts above, in many instances (including thiscase), individual group members have their own designated lines of credit, extendedby third party lenders, and bear the associated interest costs. Under these circumstances,the borrower should retain the after-tax free cash flows earned on all tradesfinanced by drawdowns on its credit lines (out of which it will repay principal andinterest). For swing lines, loans extended to the Group as a whole, or equity capital,the same basic logic applies: The entity that draws on such capital to finance tradesincurs the associated cost of capital, and should retain the associated after-tax freecash flows, out of which it compensates lenders and investors. 1311 The Constructive Cost Model (COCOMO) is a widely used means of estimating software developmentcosts.12 Under the U.S. Temporary Regulations issued in 2006, “[t]he legal owner of an intangible pursuantto the intellectual property law of the relevant jurisdiction ... will be considered the soleowner of the respective intangible ...” See Temp. Treas. Reg. Section 1.482-4T(f)(3)(i)(A).13 To illustrate, consider an extreme case where a single group member provides all of the capitalnecessary to finance transactions, while other group members employ only as much working

11.4 Analysis Under Alternative Regime 159A more readily available proxy for capital employed (and certain types of risksassumed thereby) may serve the same purpose. Commodities trading firms measureand monitor their market risk continuously. 14 They also invest significant resourcesin the development and refinement of risk models and stress testing. 15 Value atrisk (VaR) is one common means of measuring market risk. It entails quantifyingpotential losses resulting from adverse price movements of a given percentage overa specified time horizon. Trading firms generally calculate VaR on a position-bypositionbasis and aggregate these individual measures into an overall risk position.VaR measures jointly capture the amount of capital invested in a given positionand the degree of price risk associated with the position: The larger the investmentand/or the greater the risk (as calibrated by the assumed percentage price change),the higher the VaR, all other things equal. As such, individual group members withlarger VaRs will have a higher cost of capital.VaRs could serve as a proxy for the relative amount of, and risk to, capitalemployed by individual group members, for purposes of allocating after-tax freecash flows among them. Ideally, one would average VaRs over days, rather thanweeks or months, given the fluidity of trading firms’ positions. Such an analysispresupposes that individual group members own limited intangible assets. However,even where this is not the case (e.g., where one group member is the counterparty toan offtake arrangement with discounted pricing), allocations of intangible incomeare more readily handled separately, prior to a VaR-based allocation of the remainingtrading income. (Stated differently, the income allocated to individual group membersas a result of their ownership of intangible assets should be removed from thepool of after-tax free cash flows to be allocated based on average VaRs.) For thispurpose, intangible assets do not need to be valued explicitly. Instead, one needonly estimate the amount of income generated by each such asset during the periodat issue, a much more manageable task. Given the one- or two-step allocation ofcombined after-tax free cash flows based on (a) income generated by intangibleassets and/or (b) average VaRs, it remains to convert such flows into before-tax netincome (see Chapters 4 and 9 for discussions of this issue).It should be noted that VaRs measure market risk, not credit or counterparty risk.However, as the latter risks become more pronounced, trading firms’ measures ofrisk will be refined accordingly. As such, the more general point to be made is thatcapital as is necessary to maintain a staff and premises. The latter members are effectively servicesproviders and should retain only enough free cash flows to compensate the providers of workingcapital in limited quantities. All other free cash flows should accrue to the group member thatfinances transactions, inasmuch as it must pay its shareholders and lenders for the use of theirfunds on a much larger scale.14 For the results of a survey of 17 commodities trading firms’ risk management procedures andpractices, see Commodity Firms Regulatory Capital Working Group, “An Alternative Approach tothe Application of the full CRD to Commodity Firms Active in the EU,” 2006, Appendix 3.15 Stress testing entails assuming dire financial market conditions and determining whether thefirm could withstand these conditions.

11.4 Analysis Under Alternative Regime 159A more readily available proxy for capital employed (and certain types of risksassumed thereby) may serve the same purpose. Commodities trading firms measureand monitor their market risk continuously. 14 They also invest significant resourcesin the development and refinement of risk models and stress testing. 15 Value atrisk (VaR) is one common means of measuring market risk. It entails quantifyingpotential losses resulting from adverse price movements of a given percentage overa specified time horizon. Trading firms generally calculate VaR on a position-bypositionbasis and aggregate these individual measures into an overall risk position.VaR measures jointly capture the amount of capital invested in a given positionand the degree of price risk associated with the position: The larger the investmentand/or the greater the risk (as calibrated by the assumed percentage price change),the higher the VaR, all other things equal. As such, individual group members withlarger VaRs will have a higher cost of capital.VaRs could serve as a proxy for the relative amount of, and risk to, capitalemployed by individual group members, for purposes of allocating after-tax freecash flows among them. Ideally, one would average VaRs over days, rather thanweeks or months, given the fluidity of trading firms’ positions. Such an analysispresupposes that individual group members own limited intangible assets. However,even where this is not the case (e.g., where one group member is the counterparty toan offtake arrangement with discounted pricing), allocations of intangible incomeare more readily handled separately, prior to a VaR-based allocation of the remainingtrading income. (Stated differently, the income allocated to individual group membersas a result of their ownership of intangible assets should be removed from thepool of after-tax free cash flows to be allocated based on average VaRs.) For thispurpose, intangible assets do not need to be valued explicitly. Instead, one needonly estimate the amount of income generated by each such asset during the periodat issue, a much more manageable task. Given the one- or two-step allocation ofcombined after-tax free cash flows based on (a) income generated by intangibleassets and/or (b) average VaRs, it remains to convert such flows into before-tax netincome (see Chapters 4 and 9 for discussions of this issue).It should be noted that VaRs measure market risk, not credit or counterparty risk.However, as the latter risks become more pronounced, trading firms’ measures ofrisk will be refined accordingly. As such, the more general point to be made is thatcapital as is necessary to maintain a staff and premises. The latter members are effectively servicesproviders and should retain only enough free cash flows to compensate the providers of workingcapital in limited quantities. All other free cash flows should accrue to the group member thatfinances transactions, inasmuch as it must pay its shareholders and lenders for the use of theirfunds on a much larger scale.14 For the results of a survey of 17 commodities trading firms’ risk management procedures andpractices, see Commodity Firms Regulatory Capital Working Group, “An Alternative Approach tothe Application of the full CRD to Commodity Firms Active in the EU,” 2006, Appendix 3.15 Stress testing entails assuming dire financial market conditions and determining whether thefirm could withstand these conditions.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!