Abstract
We propose a minimal set of commonly acceptable principles to consistently formulate amortization schedules in accordance with different contractual clauses. Our goal is bringing to the fore premises that are sometimes left implicit, and yet seem to draw a wide consensus in practice. We demonstrate by means of examples how these principles may be used to deal with risk or financial innovations, and to fill gaps arising from unforeseen contingencies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
There is no connection with the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), usually associated with the Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) published by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB).
That is, the GAP are meant to fill some gaps—pun intended.
We are aware that the norms of a specific country may impose stronger restrictions, but the legalities of different countries are out of the scope of this paper. Yet, to the best of our knowledge, the GAP are compatible with the legal frameworks currently in force across the European Union.
In the literature, A2 is known as the elementary equivalence whereas the financial equivalence states the equality between the initial outstanding debt and the present value of all payments. We argue that the elementary equivalence is a simpler and thus better candidate for a generally acceptable principle.
Throughout the paper, we carry out exact computations but show numbers rounded to the second digit. This explains seeming incongruities such as \(D_3 - C_4 \ne D_4\) in Table 1.
We assume a male borrower and a female lender.
References
“amortization, n.” OED Online, Oxford University Press, Dec (2022) www.oed.com/view/Entry/6566, accessed 14 Feb 2023
Ayres, I., Gertner, R.: Filling gaps in incomplete contracts: an economic theory of default rules. The Yale Law J. 99, 87–130 (1989)
Broverman, S.A.: Mathematics of Investment and Credit. ACTEX Learning, New Hartford (2017)
Dye, R.A.: Costly contract contingencies. Int. Econ. Rev. 26, 233–250 (1985)
Filiz-Obay, E.: Incorporating unawareness into contract theory. Games Econ. Behav. 76, 181–194 (2012)
Green, R.: Introduction to Mortgages and Mortgage Backed Securities. Academic Press, Oxford (2013)
Pressacco, F., Beccacece, F., Cacciafesta, F., Favero, G., Fersini, P., LiCalzi, M., Nardini, F., Peccati, L., Ziani, L.: Anatocismo nei piani di ammortamento standardizzati tradizionali, Rapporto Scientifico Amases 1. FORUM Editrice Universitaria Udinese, Udine (2022)
Richardson, C.H., Miller, I.L.: Financial Mathematics. Van Nostrand, New York (1946)
Tirole, J.: Cognition and incomplete contracts. Am. Econ. Behav. 99, 265–294 (2009)
Zhao, X.: Framing contingencies in contracts. Math. Soc. Sci. 61, 31–40 (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work. They have no financial or proprietary interest to disclose. One of the authors is a member of the Editorial Board for Decisions in Economics and Finance.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
We wish to thank Margherita Cigola, Gino Favero, and Laura Ziani for their comments.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Beccacece, F., LiCalzi, M. Generally acceptable principles for financial amortization: a modest proposal. Decisions Econ Finan (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10203-023-00420-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10203-023-00420-2