RECENT POSTS
Tuesday, January 8, 2019
A Look at Climate Change Disclosures

Wednesday, January 2, 2019
Quants: Point-in-Time Data for Backtesting

Friday, December 28, 2018
Now Showing: Controls & Procedures

Thursday, December 27, 2018
A Reminder on Non-GAAP Reporting Rules

Monday, December 17, 2018
Researching PG&E’s Wildfire Risk

Wednesday, December 12, 2018
Tracking Brexit Disclosures

Thursday, December 6, 2018
Campbell Soup: Looking Behind the Label

Sunday, December 2, 2018
SEC Comment Letters: The Amazon Example

Wednesday, November 28, 2018
Measuring Big Pharma’s Chemical Dependency

Monday, November 26, 2018
Analysts, Can You Relate? A True Story

Monday, November 19, 2018
Digging Up Historical Trend Data: Quest Example

Sunday, November 11, 2018
Cost of Revenue, SG&A: Q3 Update

Monday, November 5, 2018
Lease Accounting: FedEx vs. UPS

Saturday, November 3, 2018
New Email Alerting Powers

Wednesday, October 31, 2018
PTC and Two Tales of Revenue

Tuesday, October 30, 2018
10-K/Q Section Text Change Detection

Sunday, October 28, 2018
Finding Purchase Price Allocation

Sunday, October 21, 2018
Charting Netflix Growth in Three Ways

Wednesday, October 17, 2018
Interesting Data on Interest Income

Thursday, October 11, 2018
The Decline of Sears in Three Charts

Archive  |  Search:

If any skeptics still wonder whether the Securities and Exchange Commission takes XBRL exhibits seriously, look no further: the regulator recently dinged Goldman Sachs for errors in its most recent Form 10-K annual report, and ordered the esteemed bank to file an amended version.

The mistakes seem to be in XBRL tagging only; Goldman did not have any errors in the original Form 10-K itself and all its financial data remains unchanged. (Annual revenue of $33.82 billion, net income $5.55 billion, if you’re curious.) Still, in the narrative that accompanied the revised Form 10-K filed on March 1, Goldman says it filed the revision because of errors in Exhibit 101—the exhibit that contains XBRL-tagged data.

So there we have it: yes, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance does pay attention to XBRL submissions and will insist on corrections where warranted.

The amended 10-K identified four tagging errors in net income, a bundle of errors in fair value of “Level 3” assets (where the assets have no external data to help a filer determine fair market price), and a few errors in segment reporting. The single most notable error was in net income, where one item tagged as $1,491,000,000 in the original Form 10-K was revised to $1,686,000,000—an increase of $195 million. One fair value item was revised upward by $142 million, and another was marked down $219 million.

You may see such revisions in the picture here.

Goldman Sachs blamed the errors on its financial printer.

-30-


FREE Calcbench Premium
Two Week Trial

Research Financial & Accounting Data Like Never Before. More features and try our Excel add-in. Sign up now to try the Premium Suite.