Forum Home Page [see Broadridge note below]

 The Shareholder ForumTM`

Fair Investor Access

This public program was initiated in collaboration with The Conference Board Task Force on Corporate/Investor Engagement and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies. The Forum is providing continuing reports of the issues that concern this program's participants, as summarized  in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

"Fair Access" Home Page

"Fair Access" Program Reference


Related Projects 2012-2019

For graphed analyses of company and related industry returns, see

Returns on Corporate Capital

See also analyses of

Shareholder Support Rankings


Forum distribution:

Renewed regulatory attention to renewed reporting of fantasy numbers


Source: Wall Street Journal, October 27, 2016 article


Markets  Financial Regulation

SEC Probes Whether Companies Are Misusing Adjusted Earnings Metrics
SEC’s inquiries focusing on if companies use adjusted earnings too prominently

A primary focus of the SEC’s latest inquiries is whether companies have featured customized measures too prominently in earnings releases and other disclosures. PHOTO: STEPHEN VOSS FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL


By Michael Rapoport

Updated Oct. 27, 2016 10:23 a.m. ET

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s enforcement division has informed some companies in recent weeks that it is examining their use of adjusted earnings measures, according to people familiar with the matter.

The inquiries are the latest in a series of steps by the agency this year to discourage use of these metrics, which critics contend allow companies to flatter their financial performance. The SEC’s focus on this issue has occurred as the difference between these adjusted measures and results under generally accepted accounting principles showed their widest difference last year since 2008.

A primary focus of the SEC’s latest inquiries is whether companies have featured customized measures too prominently in earnings releases and other disclosures, the people familiar with the matter said. It isn’t known how many companies the SEC is targeting, or when or whether it might take any action.

“The SEC has made it clear it is serious about trying to put at least some of the non-GAAP genie back in the bottle,” said David Trainer, chief executives of New Constructs, an investment-research firm. “Non-GAAP” refers to results provided by companies that don’t conform to generally accepted accounting principles.

The SEC declined to comment on the latest inquiries.

Companies that use non-GAAP metrics contend they provide a truer picture of performance, often by stripping out noncash and nonrecurring items. But their growing prominence has stoked memories of similar usage during the dot-com bubble.

In May, the commission issued new guidelines on non-GAAP use, and there have been a series of sometimes-pointed comment letters from the agency to companies about the practice.

In the May guidance, the SEC detailed some ways it might find use of non-GAAP numbers objectionable—tailoring numbers to remove costs that are important to measuring the company’s performance, for instance, or spotlighting non-GAAP measures so much they obscure the official GAAP numbers.

The commission suggested companies should use their next earnings reports to “self-correct” any problems, and many did so: More than a quarter of S&P 500 companies reporting earnings in July and August shifted to giving GAAP numbers the greatest prominence in their earnings releases instead of non-GAAP numbers, according to an analysis from consulting firm Audit Analytics conducted for The Wall Street Journal.

That hasn’t completely alleviated the SEC’s concerns, however. Since the May guidance, the SEC’s corporation-finance division has sent more than 100 comment letters to companies questioning whether their non-GAAP disclosures comply with it.

The Securities and Exchange Commission in May issued guidelines on use of non-GAAP measures and is trying to discourage the practice. Photo: Andrew Harnik/Associated Press

The latest SEC enforcement inquiries appear to be separate from the May guidance because they pertain to companies’ disclosures from before it was issued, one of the people with knowledge of the situation said. “I think the enforcement people think (the companies) have violated longstanding rules,” this person said.

Even after the May guidance, some companies kept using non-GAAP metrics in ways the SEC had cautioned against, though some have since said they plan to change. “There are some judgment calls that need to be made,” said Matthew E. Kaplan, a securities attorney at law firm Debevoise & Plimpton.

Electric-car maker Tesla Motors Inc., for instance, reported adjusted non-GAAP revenue of $1.6 billion when it announced second-quarter earnings in August. In doing so, it added back nearly $300 million in deferred revenue the company collects up front but doesn’t book until future quarters. The SEC said specifically in its May guidance that companies shouldn’t report non-GAAP revenue that way.

Tesla has since said it would stop reporting non-GAAP revenue in that fashion; it didn’t include non-GAAP revenues in its third-quarter earnings announcement Wednesday. A Tesla spokeswoman said the company had no further comment.

Another example: Medical-device maker Syneron Medical Ltd. touted its second-quarter non-GAAP earnings of 9 cents a share in the headline of its August press release, and didn’t disclose until much further down in the release that its GAAP net income was only 3 cents a share.

The SEC had said in its guidance that if companies use non-GAAP measures in earnings-release headlines, they must include the comparable GAAP measure as well. Hugo Goldman, Syneron’s chief financial officer, said the company wasn’t under SEC investigation and was “changing the format of our non-GAAP reporting to comply with SEC rules and the recent guidance.”

Write to Michael Rapoport at


Copyright ©2016 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

This Forum program was open, free of charge, to anyone concerned with investor interests in the development of marketplace standards for expanded access to information for securities valuation and shareholder voting decisions. As stated in the posted Conditions of Participation, the purpose of this public Forum's program was to provide decision-makers with access to information and a free exchange of views on the issues presented in the program's Forum Summary. Each participant was expected to make independent use of information obtained through the Forum, subject to the privacy rights of other participants.  It is a Forum rule that participants will not be identified or quoted without their explicit permission.

This Forum program was initiated in 2012 in collaboration with The Conference Board and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies to address issues and objectives defined by participants in the 2010 "E-Meetings" program relevant to broad public interests in marketplace practices. The website is being maintained to provide continuing reports of the issues addressed in the program, as summarized in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

Inquiries about this Forum program and requests to be included in its distribution list may be addressed to

The information provided to Forum participants is intended for their private reference, and permission has not been granted for the republishing of any copyrighted material. The material presented on this web site is the responsibility of Gary Lutin, as chairman of the Shareholder Forum.

Shareholder Forum™ is a trademark owned by The Shareholder Forum, Inc., for the programs conducted since 1999 to support investor access to decision-making information. It should be noted that we have no responsibility for the services that Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., introduced for review in the Forum's 2010 "E-Meetings" program and has since been offering with the “Shareholder Forum” name, and we have asked Broadridge to use a different name that does not suggest our support or endorsement.