单选题
Bankers have been blaming themselves for their troubles in public. Behind the scenes, they have been taking aim at someone else: the accounting standard-setters. Their rules, moan the banks, have forced them to report enormous losses, and it's just not fair. These rules say they must value some assets at the price a third party would pay, not the price managers and regulators would like them to fetch. Unfortunately, banks' lobbying now seems to be working. The details may be unknowable, but the independence of standard-setters, essential to the proper functioning of capital markets, is being compromised. And, unless banks carry toxic assets at prices that attract buyers, reviving the banking system will be difficult. After a bruising encounter with Congress, America's Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rushed through rule changes. These gave banks more freedom to use models to value illiquid assets and more flexibility in recognizing losses on long-term assets in their income statement. Bob Herz, the FASB's chairman, cried out against those who "question our motives. "Yet bank shares rose and the changes enhance what one lobby group politely calls "the use of judgment by management." European ministers instantly demanded that the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) do likewise. The IASB says it does not want to act without overall planning, but the pressure to fold when it completes it reconstruction of rules later this year is strong. Charlie McCreevy, a European commissioner, warned the IASB that it did "not live in a political vacuum" but "in the real word" and that Europe could yet develop different rules. It was banks that were on the wrong planet, with accounts that vastly overvalued assets. Today they argue that market prices overstate losses, because they largely reflect the temporary illiquidity of markets, not the likely extent of bad debts. The truth will not be known for years. But bank's shares trade below their book value, suggesting that investors are skeptical. And dead markets partly reflect the paralysis of banks which will not sell assets for fear of booking losses, yet are reluctant to buy all those supposed bargains. To get the system working again, losses must be recognized and dealt with. America's new plan to buy up toxic assets will not work unless banks mark assets to levels which buyers find attractive. Successful markets require independent and even combative standard-setters. The FASB and IASB have been exactly that, cleaning up rules on stock options and pensions, for example, against hostility from special interests. But by giving in to critics now they are inviting pressure to make more concessions.
单选题
Bankers complained that they were forced to______. A. follow unfavorable asset evaluation rules B. collect payments from third parties C. cooperate with the price managers D. reevaluate some of their assets.
【正确答案】
A
【答案解析】[解析] 事实细节题。选项B是对文章内容的偷梁换柱，把value偷换为collect。选项C与原文语义相反。错误一：原文明确说“规则不让按照managers期待的价格评估”，所以这与cooperate(合作)语义相反。错误二：原文中没有提到price manager这个概念，managers and regulators would like them to fetch是定语从句来修饰price。选项D reevaluate(重新评估)无中生有。题目中complain相当于moan，选项A中unfavorable相当于：not fair, asset evaluation相当于 value some assets，所以本项属于同义替换，因此正确选项为A“遵循不利的资产评估准则”。
单选题
According to the author ,the rule changes of the FASB may result in______. A. the diminishing role of management B. the revival of the banking system C. the banks' long-term asset losses D. the weakening of its independence
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】[解析] 事实细节题。选项A与原文意思相反，diminish与文章中的enhance相矛盾。对于选项B，第二段中讲了银行复苏的条件：“银行如果不以能够吸引买家的价格计量有毒资产，银行系统的复苏将会非常困难。”而本选项说FASB的规则变化会带来复苏，与文章内容不相符。选项C是对第三段第二句的断章取义，应排除。从第三段可知FASB通过了规则变化，第二段首句的意思是“不幸的是，银行的游说活动看来已起作用了”。这就意味着：第一段提到的“银行抱怨规则的不公平”得到重视，规则变化了。所以本题题干问的“the rule changes of the FASB”的结果 也就是第二段的第二句。因此选项D“其独立性的削弱”为正确答案。
单选题
According to Paragraph 4,McCreevy objects to the IASB's attempt to______. A. keep away from political influences B. evade the pressure from their peers C. act on their own in rule-setting D. take gradual measures in reform
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】[解析] 事实细节题。选项A是强干扰项，貌似是对第四段中“not in a political vacuum”的同义替换，但是与选项C相比，C选项更加符合本段的中心内容。因为本段并不是强调IASB不能摆脱政治影响，而是强调IASB想要自己独立地制定规则。当两个选项无法分清的时候，符合中心内容的才是正确答案。选项B为偷梁换柱，原文没有提来自同伴的压力(pressure，from their peers)，而是说“在今年下半年完成规则修订时必须屈服的压力”。选项D“在改革中采取渐进措施”属于无中生有。对于选项C，文章中讲欧洲部长对IASB的要求，提到了IASB对其的抵触情绪，但是(but)压力又很大(strong)，McCreevy警告IASB它不是“处在政治真空中”而是“在现实世界里”。这些内容的中心思想是：IASB想自己独立的制定规则(act on their own in rule-setting)，而欧洲部长(包括McCreevy)又想命令其按自己意愿行为，所以C为正确答案。
单选题
The author thinks the banks were" on the wrong planet" in that they______. A. misinterpreted market price indicators B. exaggerated the real value of their assets C. neglected the likely existence of bad debts D. denied booking losses in their sale of assets
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】[解析] 事实细节题。由文章中第五段首句“It，was banks that were on the wrong planet．with accounts that vastly overvalued assets”可知题干中的in that相当于首句中的with，所以with后面就是解题关键，选项B“夸大了其资产的实际价值”，与此句中的overvalued是同义替换，因此正确答案为B。
单选题
The author's attitude towards standard-setters is one of______. A. satisfaction B. skepticism C. objectiveness D. sympathy