摩根大通的會計魔術：60億虧損消失之謎

????我們來看看關于摩根大通（JPMorgan Chase）58億美元交易虧損最有意思的事情吧。乍看一眼公司的整體業績，“倫敦鯨”的投資失策仿佛從未發生過，盡管它事實上是華爾街歷史上最大的滑鐵盧之一。

????今年4月中旬，大概在摩根大通交易損失傳聞出現之前兩星期，分析人士預計該行第二財季每股盈利1.21美元。上周五，該行公布第二財季業績報告，計入“倫敦鯨”事件造成的虧損后，竟然正好就是這個數。

????從摩根大通用來抵銷巨額交易虧損的辦法可以看出：銀行利潤的來歷有多么復雜，而它的變更又可以有多么隨意，我們又能相信幾分。未來一段時間內，摩根大通這一財季的業績報告應該會給會計師們提供值得回味的談資。

????農業銀行信貸證券（美國）公司（Credit Agricole Securities）分析師邁克?梅奧在摩根大通公布業績報告后的分析師會議上對戴蒙說：“確實，我看到業績報告了。只是，我還看到了香腸的制作過程，我現在擔心我將來可能會食物中毒。” 梅奧是《流亡華爾街》（Exile on Wall Street）一書的作者。

????摩根大通確實有些業務很強。受益于利率下調，該行的抵押貸款業務盈利增加了大約13億美元。但是，它利潤的很大一部分來自于對虧損的會計調整和基于未來該行及整體經濟狀況大幅向好的假設。然而，這樣的假設有可能對，也有可能落空，從而加劇后期的虧損。

????那么，怎樣使近60億美元的虧損消失于無形呢？第一步，抵稅。摩根大通曾表示，“倫敦鯨”的過失僅第二財季就給該行造成了44億美元的損失。但那是稅前。該行稱，稅后虧損額可減少到略高于27億美元的水平。這就意味著，摩根大通計劃從美國政府獲得17億美元沖銷虧損。按照規定，出現虧損時，銀行可以用交易虧損額與銀行其他業務的應納稅利潤額相抵銷。問題是沖銷比率。若真是17億美元，則摩根大通的上述交易虧損就沖銷了38%。這一沖銷率與美國的企業所得稅率差不多，但是比大多數美國公司實際繳納的所得稅率要高得多。僅經過抵稅這一步，該行就能將 “倫敦鯨”引起的虧損減少到41億美元。

????我們還沒有談到該行聲名顯赫的首席投資辦公室呢。首席執行官杰米?戴蒙一直都說該部門的投資組合是安全的，如果現在把它們變現的話，可以為摩根大通帶來80億美元的利潤。第二財季，他已經賣出了其中一部分資產。拋開“倫敦鯨”管理的那部分資產，首席投資辦公室當季盈利6.3億美元。現在，虧損額下降到35億美元了。

????下一步：不良貸款準備金。銀行一般要計提部分貸款以防出現壞賬。而銀行少計提一部分貸款的話就能降低費用。第二財季，該行共計提不良貸款準備金2億美元多一點。這個季度計提的金額不僅是自金融危機以來，也是該行有史以來最低。去年同期計提的不良貸款準備金是18億美元。

????而且，該行不僅是計提的不良貸款準備金少了，甚至把過去計提的保證金都取了出來。根據會計規則，取出來的不良貸款準備金可以直接計入利潤。取出的準備金是13億美元，相當于該行第二財季總利潤的28%，經過這么一調整，它們都變成實實在在的賬面利潤了。

????當然，這樣的調整某種程度上說是有理有據的。該行的貸款資產的質量貌似確實是改善了——無力償還貸款者的數量下降了。問題的關鍵再次落在比率上。例如，僅該行零售業務一項，借款人已經停止償還的貸款就達到80億美元，只比去年同期下降了4%。該行首席財務官道格?布蘭施泰因曾告訴分析師，該行應該不會繼續下調信用卡壞賬準備金了，這意味著他們在第二財季已經想盡辦法從中盡可能多地取出了準備金。

????這樣一來，通過調整不良貸款準備金，摩根大通共獲得了29億美元的利潤。這個數字非同小可。接下來只有6億美元的虧損額了。

????現在我們要見識一些更加隱秘的步驟了。抵押貸款債權事務性服務權利——銀行所承擔的收回付款的義務和將這些貸款出售給投資者時一并轉手的義務——即為一種會計規則上所稱的無形資產。銀行在其資產負債表上將這些權利所做的會計處理仿佛說明它們存在著一定的價值，但其實它們是一種義務。沒有銀行真正能夠出售這種權利，至少不可能以高價出售。然而，摩根大通稱，在第二財季，由于風險控制得到改善——不用在意“機器簽名”丑聞了——該行抵押貸款債權事務性服務權利的價值已經躍升到2.33億美元，幾乎為該行去年同期所做相同會計處理后產生利潤的10倍。這樣，虧損額進一步降至4億美元。

????Here is perhaps the most amazing thing about JPMorgan Chase's (JPM) $5.8 billion trading loss: Take a look at the firm's overall results, and it's like the London Whale's misstep, one of the largest flubs in the history of Wall Street, never happened.

????Back in mid-April, about two weeks before talk of the trading losses emerged, JPMorgan was expected to earn $1.21 a share in its second quarter. On Friday, JPMorgan reported that it had, Whale and all, earned exactly that.

????How the bank appears to have offset the huge trading loss is a prime example of how complex and malleable bank profits actually are, and how much they should be believed. JPMorgan's quarter should give fodder for accountants to talk about for some time.

????MORE: Who will take JPMorgan to task?

????"Yes, I have seen these results, but I have also seen how the sausage is made and I am worried that I might get food poisoning in the future," Mike Mayo of Credit Agricole Securities and author of the book Exile on Wall Street told Dimon in a meeting with analysts following the bank's earnings release.

????Sure some of JPMorgan's businesses were strong. Profits in its mortgage operations, helped by falling interest rates, rose by nearly $1.3 billion. But a good deal of JPMorgan's earnings came from some shifting of losses and an assumption that things for the bank, and the economy in general, are about to get a good deal better. That assumption might prove right, but it could also add to losses in the future.

????So how do you make a nearly $6 billion loss go away? First stop taxes. The bank said that the London Whale's blunder cost the bank $4.4 billion in the second quarter alone. But that's before taxes. After it pays taxes, though, JPMorgan says the loss will shrink to just over $2.7 billion, which means the bank plans to take a $1.7 billion write off from Uncle Sam. Like any loss, banks are allowed to use trading blunders to offset taxable profits elsewhere in the bank. The question is the rate. At $1.7 billion, JPMorgan is writing off roughly 38% of the loss. That's not that out of line with the U.S. corporate tax rate, but it's a far larger percentage of profits than most companies actually pay. Nonetheless, on taxes alone, the bank was able to shrink the London Whale's wake to $4.1 billion.

????We haven't left the firm's vaunted chief investment office yet. CEO Jamie Dimon has long said the portfolio is safe and that if he were to liquidate it today he could produce an $8 billion gain for the bank. In the second quarter, he dipped into some of that. London Whale aside, the CIO took a $630 million gain. Now we're down to $3.5 billion.

????Next stop loan losses. Banks have to put money away for loans they believe are going to go bad. But banks can lower their expenses by putting away less money for future loan losses. In the second quarter, the bank put away just over $200 million for future loan losses. That was not only the lowest amount the bank had set aside in any three month period since the start of the financial crisis, it was the lowest by far. A year ago, the loan loss provision was $1.8 billion.

????What's more, not only did the bank put away less money for future loans, it also pulled back money it had put away in the past. And any money you take out of your loan loss reserves the accountants let you send right to your bottom line. It appears $1.3 billion, or about 28% of the company's total second quarter profit, came from this move, which is again only real earnings to accountants.

????Of course, some of this move may be justified. The bank's loan portfolio does appear to have improved - fewer new people are telling the bank they can't pay their loans. The question is, once again, how much. For example, in the bank's retail business alone, JPMorgan still has $8 billion in loans in which people have stopped paying. That's only down by 4% from a year ago. And CFO Doug Branstein told analysts not to expect any more reduction in reserves from credit cards, which means they probably took all the earnings juice they could get out of that business this quarter.

????Put them together, and JPMorgan appears to have gotten a $2.9 billion boost from changes it made to its loss provisions. Impressive. Just $600 million of the Whale to go.

????Now we get to the more esoteric moves. Mortgage servicing rights - the obligation that a bank takes on to collect payments and pass those along on the loans it sells to investors - are one of those assets that accountants call intangible. Banks hold those rights on their balance sheets as if they are worth something, but it's really an obligation, and no bank could actually sell it, at least not for much. Nonetheless, JPMorgan said in the second quarter, due to improved risk management - never mind the whole robo-signing thing - the value of its mortgage servicing rights jumped by $233 million, nearly 10 times the benefit the bank got from the same accounting maneuver a year ago. And we're down to $400 million.