Abstract Previous literature has documented that securitization gains were used for income smoothing in the era before FAS 166 and FAS 167, 1 which tightened the requirements for sale accounting for securitizations. Using securitizing bank holding companies, we examine whether FAS 166/167 has reduced this income smoothing behavior. Our findings include two facets. First, at the aggregate level, time series statistics show that both the frequency of non-zero securitization gains reported and the magnitude of reported securitization gains are significantly reduced in the post- FAS 166/167 period. Second, at the firm level, our regression results indicate that even though the extent of this income smoothing behavior decreased after the issuance of FAS 166/167, securitization gains continue to be used to smooth earnings by securitizing banks in the post-FAS 166/167 period. Overall, our findings convey that FAS 166/167 has reduced the securitization gains recorded by banks but that after the regulation, banks still use securitization gains to smooth earnings.

中文翻译：

---

在FAS 166/167之后的时期，银行管理者是否使用证券化收益来使收益平稳？

摘要以前的文献记载，在FAS 166和FAS 167 [1]收紧证券化销售要求的时代之前，证券化收益已用于收入平滑。使用证券化银行控股公司，我们检查了FAS 166/167是否减少了这种收入平滑行为。我们的发现包括两个方面。首先，从总体上看，时间序列统计数据显示，在FAS 166/167以后的时期内，报告的非零证券化收益的频率和报告的证券化收益的幅度均显着降低。其次，在公司一级，我们的回归结果表明，即使在发布FAS 166/167之后收入平滑行为的程度有所降低，在FAS 166/167之后的时期，证券化收益继续用于通过对银行进行证券化来使收益保持平稳。总体而言，我们的调查结果表明，FAS 166/167减少了银行记录的证券化收益，但是在监管之后，银行仍然使用证券化收益来平滑收益。