Lucent Technologies Deferred Taxation

Executive Summary This memorandum is intended to communicate the deferred tax issues of Lucent Technologies Inc. on the basis of analysis of the veracity of the situation according to the reporting framework’s guidelines to anticipate unfavorable implications that had been resulted due to poor performance of the company over the past years. The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) is the recognized body for making pronouncements as Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAPs) in the United States.

The FASB has promulgated Statement of Financial Accounting Standard # 103 “Accounting for Income Taxes” which specifically prescribes the treatment of income taxes of corporate entities and guidance for how deferred taxes should be recorded either an asset or a liability in the financial statements. It also provides assistance in certain cases requiring a valuation allowance to be used to reduce the carrying value of any deferred tax asset for which it was “ more likely than not” that the asset would not be realized.

The main reason behind the issue is the impact of cut-throat competition in the telecom industry and downturn in the economic conditions which had adversely affected the company’s overall financial performance as a result deferred taxes amounting to $ 7. 6 billion as of September 30, 2011 have been recognized against deductible temporary differences, operating losses and tax credit carry forwards. However, under the prevailing circumstances, it is apparent that the company will not be able to generate positive taxable income in the future periods to offset the losses.

Accordingly, as per FAS # 109 the valuation allowance has to be reviewed against potential tax assets and for any items in which it is more probable through persuasive and reliable evidence that the asset will not reduce future taxable income Analysis Since after the inception of its operations in November 1995, the quality production and innovation were key business success factors. However, eventually with the passage of time the entry of new firms in the telecom industry such as Alcatel, Ciena, Cisco, Ericsson, and Motorola Inc. , have intensified the level of competition.

As a result of this most industry participant opted to strengthen their relationships with large service providers, as they represented over 70% of global carrier spending. The collapse of competitive local exchange carriers and other competitors of incumbent carriers had resulted in fewer customers. In addition the large service providers, has been consolidating, thus giving the remaining service providers additional buying power. Furthermore, as service providers continued to reduce their capital spending, fewer sales opportunities existed.

Moreover, a number of its existing competitors were very large companies with substantial technical, engineering, and financial resources, brand recognition and established relationships with global service providers. These competitors were able to offer low prices, additional products or services, or other incentives. These potential competitors were also in a stronger position to respond quickly to new or emerging technologies and to undertake more extensive marketing campaigns, adopt more aggressive pricing policies, and make more attractive offers to potential customers, employees, and third-party agents.

During the company’s financial year ending September 30, 2001, Lucent had lost $16 billion placing its retained earnings into a net deficit. Subsequently, in the first and seconds quarters of fiscal 2002, the trend continued with losses of $423 million and $495 million respectively. As of September 30, 2001, Lucent had tax credit carry forwards of $898 and federal, state and local, and non-U. S. net operating loss carry forwards of $ 1,640 (tax effected), most of which expire primarily after the year 2019.

As of September 30, 2001, Lucent has recorded valuation allowances totaling $ 742 against these carry forwards, primarily in certain states and foreign jurisdictions in which Lucent has concluded it is ‘more likely than not’ that these carry forwards will not be recognized. The components of deferred income tax assets and liabilities are as follows; Year Ended September 30, | 2001| 2000| |  | $ in ‘000’| $ in ‘000’| Deferred Income Tax Assets|  |  | | Bad Debt and customer financing reserves| $ 1,004| $ 2|  | Inventory reserves| 685| 314| | Business restructuring reserves| 632| -|  | Other operating reserves| 536| 407|  | Postretirement and other benefits| 2,386| 2,352|  | Net operating loss/ credit carry forwards| 2,538| 240|  | Other | 636| 364| | Valuation allowance| (742)| (197)| Total deferred tax assets| 7,675| 3,562| |  | | |

Deferred Income Tax liabilities| | | | Pension| 1,971| 2,480| | Property, plant and equipment| 5| 417|  | Other| 521| 734| Total deferred tax liabilities| $ 2,497| $ 3,631| Keeping in view the above figures, it turned out that the company’s remaining deferred tax assets amount to $ 5. 2 billion and since it is a substantial amount the company’s management may however believe that it would be realized based on forecasted taxable income.

However, as per FAS # 109, paragraph 17, issued February 1992, whereby it stipulates that a valuation is required when it is ‘more likely than not’ that all or a portion of a deferred tax asset will not be recognized. Therefore, forming a conclusion that a valuation allowance is not needed is difficult when there is negative evidence such as cumulative losses in past recent years as mentioned above. Hence, cumulative losses weigh heavily in the overall assessment.

During the fiscal 2002 third quarter end review, the company should need to consider several significant developments in determining the need for a full valuation allowance including; * The continuity and recently more severe market decline * Uncertainty and lack of visibility in the telecommunication market as a whole * A significant decrease in sequential quarterly revenue levels * A decrease in sequential earnings after several quarters of sequential improvements The necessity for further restructuring and cost reduction actions to attain profitability As a result of this assessment, the company has established a full valuation allowance for its remaining net deferred tax assets as at June 30, 2002. Lucent recorded a non-cash charge of $ 5. 83 billion, or $ 1. 70 per share, to provide a full valuation allowance on its remaining deferred tax assets as June 30, 2002. This charge was partially offset by a third quarter income tax benefit of $282 million on a pro forma basis, and $ 505 million on as-reported basis.

In order for the company’s management to determine whether a valuation allowance is required, managers should consider all available evidence. FAS # 109 divides this evidence into negative (that is, the asset is unlikely to be realized) and positive evidence. Negative evidence includes items such as cumulative losses in recent years; a history of operating loss carries forwards expiring unused, losses expected in early future years, or assets expected to reverse in a single year in a cyclical business.

The statement declares that forming a conclusion that a valuation allowance is not needed is difficult when there is negative evidence. In contrast, positive includes a strong earnings history (exclusive of any current loss), existing contracts that will produce taxable income in the period of the asset turnaround, or a large excess of appreciated asset value over a tax basis and tax planning strategies.

Accordingly, based on the two types of evidences mentioned above, the views of the SEC staff with respect to valuation allowances on deferred tax assets and the types of questions that they might ask if they reviewed the Lucent’s financial reports are as follows; * With respect to valuation allowances the SEC is likely to look at the basics for having or not having a valuation allowance, the timing of recording changes, or consistency with other forward-looking information * Comments relating to the adequacy of disclosures, the actual descriptions of rate reconciliation items, deferred tax assets and liabilities, uncertain ax positions, timing of reversals, or expiration of net operating losses in various jurisdictions. * The SEC may also ask questions relating to contractual obligations * The SEC may also ask for clarification related to management’s material estimates and/or judgments. It is important that changes in estimates be well documented. * Disclose the amount of pretax income that the company needs to generate to realize the deferred tax assets. The SEC staff may ask to include an explanation of the anticipated future trends included in the company’s projections of future taxable income. Confirmation to them that the anticipated future trends included in the company’s assessment of the realizability of its deferred tax assets are the same anticipated future trends used in estimating the fair value of your reporting units for purposes of testing goodwill for impairment and any other assessment of your tangible and intangible assets for impairment. Disclose that the deferred tax liabilities that the company is relying on in its assessment of the realizability of its deferred tax assets will reverse in the same period and jurisdiction and are of the same character as the temporary differences giving rise to the deferred tax assets. * Indicate the nature of the uncertainty and the nature of each event that could occur in the next twelve months that would cause the change for each significant tax position.

Conclusion It has been evident from the above analysis that Lucent has been facing poor performance and as many of its assets have very long lives but it’s still not indicative of future viability of these assets. Until an appropriate level of profitability is reached, Lucent should not expect to recognize any significant tax benefits in future results of its operations.

The company must use judgment in considering the relative impact of negative and positive evidence. The weight given to the potential effect of negative and positive evidence should be commensurate with the extent to which it can be objectively verified. The more negative evidence that exist (a) the more positive evidence is necessary and (b) the more difficult is to support a conclusion that a valuation is not needed for some portion or the entire deferred tax asset.

Calculate the price
Make an order in advance and get the best price
Pages (550 words)
$0.00
*Price with a welcome 15% discount applied.
Pro tip: If you want to save more money and pay the lowest price, you need to set a more extended deadline.
We know how difficult it is to be a student these days. That's why our prices are one of the most affordable on the market, and there are no hidden fees.

Instead, we offer bonuses, discounts, and free services to make your experience outstanding.
How it works
Receive a 100% original paper that will pass Turnitin from a top essay writing service
step 1
Upload your instructions
Fill out the order form and provide paper details. You can even attach screenshots or add additional instructions later. If something is not clear or missing, the writer will contact you for clarification.
Pro service tips
How to get the most out of your experience with MyStudyWriters
One writer throughout the entire course
If you like the writer, you can hire them again. Just copy & paste their ID on the order form ("Preferred Writer's ID" field). This way, your vocabulary will be uniform, and the writer will be aware of your needs.
The same paper from different writers
You can order essay or any other work from two different writers to choose the best one or give another version to a friend. This can be done through the add-on "Same paper from another writer."
Copy of sources used by the writer
Our college essay writers work with ScienceDirect and other databases. They can send you articles or materials used in PDF or through screenshots. Just tick the "Copy of sources" field on the order form.
Testimonials
See why 20k+ students have chosen us as their sole writing assistance provider
Check out the latest reviews and opinions submitted by real customers worldwide and make an informed decision.
Criminal Justice
This has been the greatest help while I am recovering from an illness. Thank your team so much.
Customer 452671, May 2nd, 2021
Human Resources Management (HRM)
excellent
Customer 452773, July 11th, 2023
English 101
great summery in terms of the time given. it lacks a bit of clarity but otherwise perfect.
Customer 452747, June 9th, 2021
DATA565
The support team was late responding , my paper was late because the support team didn't respond in a timely manner. The writer of the paper finally got it right but seems there was a problem getting the revisioin to me.
Customer 452773, April 7th, 2024
Business and administrative studies
great job as always
Customer 452773, February 26th, 2023
Business and administrative studies
excellent paper
Customer 452773, March 3rd, 2023
Nursing
Impressive writing
Customer 452547, February 6th, 2021
Leadership Studies
excellent job
Customer 452773, July 28th, 2023
ACC/543: Managerial Accounting & Legal Aspects Of Business
EXCELLENT JOB
Customer 452773, January 10th, 2024
Leadership Studies
excellent job
Customer 452773, August 26th, 2023
History
Looks great and appreciate the help.
Customer 452675, April 26th, 2021
Business and administrative studies
excellent, got a 100
Customer 452773, May 17th, 2023
11,595
Customer reviews in total
96%
Current satisfaction rate
3 pages
Average paper length
37%
Customers referred by a friend
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat
Close

Sometimes it is hard to do all the work on your own

Let us help you get a good grade on your paper. Get professional help and free up your time for more important courses. Let us handle your;

  • Dissertations and Thesis
  • Essays
  • All Assignments

  • Research papers
  • Terms Papers
  • Online Classes
Live ChatWhatsApp