David Prosser: The distorting impact of share buy-backs
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Outlook Terry Smith is best-known these days as the chief executive of Tullet Prebon, the giant inter-dealer broker. It is often forgotten that Mr Smith first came to prominence in 1990, when he published Accounting for Growth, a book in which he revealed a string of accounting tricks through which companies had been pulling the wool over shareholders' eyes about how they were performing.
The book is well worth reading to this day and you won't need an accounting qualification to understand it. Equally, it's still worth listening to what Mr Smith has to say on the subject of accounting tricks – like the paper he published yesterday on share buy-backs.
Investors, broadly speaking, are fond of buy-backs. If a company has cash on its balance sheet for which it can't find a use, why shouldn't it be distributed among shareholders?
To which the answer is no reason at all, as long as the buyback process doesn't then distort investors' view of the company. Mr Smith's view is that on current accounting rules, it does. The effect of taking the shares bought off the balance sheet is to give an artificial boost to a company's earnings per share (earnings stay the same, the number of shares falls). Since the earnings per share ratio is one of the key yardsticks that investors look at when judging performance, that seems perverse.
What's the solution? Well, in an ideal world, one would change the accounting rules to counter the problem. But until that happens, this is a useful lesson for investors. Think carefully about the impact of share buy-backs – particularly, as Smith points out, where companies use eps as a basis for setting bonuses for senior executives.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments