Abordagens para a classificação contábil de instrumentos financeiros híbridos e/ou compostos: um estudo de caso com uma companhia aberta brasileira

Abstract

Hybrid financial instruments and/or compounds has been a constant theme regarding accounting regulation. The positive literature presents a hypothesis that help to understand why some companies appeal to said instruments to raise funds: Indebtedness level on the breach limit of contractual covenants. In Brazil, companies with CVM register, that used these instruments, sorting them on the equity, had their quarterly statements and/or financial statements restated and/or republished by CVM resolution. The critical point of the whole discussion lies in the distinction between a liability item and an equity item. This subject is covered in the IAS 32 (PT CPC n. 39) and is present in "Discussion Paper - A review of the conceptual framework for financial reporting", issued by IASB in July 2013, having two approaches that can be used, order to simplify the distinction between an item of liabilities and equity: the narrow equity approach - NEA and the strict obligation approach - SOA. The adoption of each of these approaches have a different impact on levels of debt / leverage and the potential dilution of the shareholding. This work aims to investigate approaches to accounting classification of mandatorily convertible debentures, vis-à-vis the IAS 32 (PT CPC n. 39) and the Discussion Paper of the IASB (NEA x SOA).The methodology used is a case study of a Brazilian corporation, that in 2010 issued mandatorily convertible debentures and made a classification of these instruments deemed inappropriate by the regulator. It can be observed that the strict obligation approach is the approach that impacts least on the level of indebtedness, while the narrow equity approach is the one that have the most leverage. Evidence suggests the contractual covenants as potencial inducers of such practice, fact which is in accordance with the literature documenting the area as a phenomenon expected. It is true that in the case in, there was continuous breach of the contractual covenants, corroborating the hypothesis presented by SILVA (2008) that the low cost of violation of covenants contribute to such a situation. Alternatively, a possible explanation for the choice of the accounting company is the complexity of IAS 32 (PT CPC 39) and ignorance of its nuances.