It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports - Who can read this?

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 06:06 PM
How many of us watched with Walter J Burien video where he discussed, in no uncertain terms, what the CAFR is and what it means? Well I decided to go ahead and look one up for the sake of argument. The idea was starting to fester in my mind and I needed to be able to put this baby to rest.

I figured I wouldn't be able to find the report too easily or that if I did find the report it wouldn't have a clear statistical breakdown as Mr. Burien showed in his videos. Well I was wrong.

It took me about 30 seconds to pick a small town in central Texas and to do a search for their Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. The only problem is, I don't know how to respond to this report. I want everyone on ATS that's interested, and especially people that are familiar with finances, to break this report down a little bit and see what it means.

Here's what I've gathered so far. (2007 fiscal)

Total primary government net assets: $153,690,618
Total primary government expenses: $67,741,537
Total primary government program revenues: $30,102,668
Total Primary government net expense: $37,638,869

Now obviously this report is huge so I don't expect anyone to research this thing from top to bottom just to ease my pretty little head. But comments are appreciated. And if anyone has any direct knowledge of this type of report it would be much appreciated to hear the ins and outs of what this means.

Mr. Burien was either dead on accurate or didn't have a clue what he was talking about. All the information appears to be right here so this thing can be put to bed right away if the right people respond to this.


posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 10:02 PM
bump -

second line

posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 10:52 AM
does no one seriously know anything about this? there were dozens of stars on the burien thread.

second line.

posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 10:52 AM
does no one seriously know anything about this? there were dozens of stars on the burien thread.

second line.

posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 10:13 PM
Bump and flag for you, I can't read it but we'll find someone who can.

posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:15 PM
well thanks, i figured some would be interested in this. i called my city manager's office today and the secretary that answerd knew the "caffer" as she said it right off the top of her head. she transferred me to the treasury and i got an answering machine. left my name and number and asked for a call back.

nothing yet.

posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:25 PM
I'm very interested in figuring this out as well. I already stated in the "The Biggest Game in Town" thread, that I haven't got a clue what to look at.

Why is it that this guy is seems so very informative, yet can't give an easy way to decipher these reports?! Maybe too smart for our own good?

If this is real, then....I just don't know. If this could be simplified, proven true, and brought out to the public, there would be no excuse to not be incredibly mad, or at least realize that a major reform of our system is needed.

If anyone out there can figure this out and pass the word along in a layman's way, this would be so very appreciated.

posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:33 PM
I don't totally understand what you are looking for, but I can give you a simple list of what I see.

Total primary government net assets: $153,690,618 (the value of the assets after paying the liabilities (think car value, less existing loan)

Total primary government expenses: $67,741,537 (expenses to operate, total spent to operate.)

Total primary government program revenues: $30,102,668 (monies received from taxes and other revenue sources)

Total Primary government net expense: $37,638,869 (take the total expense above $67k and remove the portion paid by revenues above $30k) This could be viewed as your shortfall. This shortfall would then be paid with some of the $153k above if it was liquid like cash.

I hope this helps in some way.
Or are you looking for something else?

posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:35 PM
I had worked in an audit dept. of a big firm for quite a few years. 2 things tip me off. First is that it's an "unaudited" report, so it's pretty much guesses and not actual number and it's also based on the Accrual basis of accounting, which makes modifications to the numbers based on yearly changes listed in the Federal Register.

These reports are usually done every so often to cut costs on accounting for the end of the year, but will be fixed in future reports that are audited by an independent accounting firm. The taxes are not based on an unaudited report, it's more of an "informational" piece to appease the gods, so to speak.

I used to run the department that created these reports for Cities, Counties, Non Profits and For Profit entities.


posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:48 PM
Looking into CAFR now and located this:

Government promotes annual "Budget Reports" and at the same time virtually not a peep as to their Annual Financial Report (AFR) or the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) that came forward in 1946 to become the standard for all local government come 1978. Do a Google search on CAFR

The shell game in simple analogy that has been played out by government per the CAFR vs. The Budget is as follows: If you have a basket of 40 apples and a basket of 200 oranges, if you audit the basket of apples you will find 40 apples and then government implies "an audit of the fruit basket shows 40 apples, look no oranges!"

The budget does not have oranges in it so they don't exist when I report to you. Or a budget is not the actual truth financially.

Biggest Game

posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:05 AM
absum thanks for replying but we have a report right in front of us. there's no need for analogies.

the question is pretty simple.

1. based off of this report, can it be determined that the govt. is making a significant amount more than they are spending. and in turn, are they investing this money for their gain?

2. if it can be determined then what is the answer. how much is the difference. and is it worth being pissed off about.

one of the previous posters made it seem that the report shows that the expenses and income are comparable. however they net assests would still be worrying. is it normal to have such a large bankroll in reserve?

posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:15 AM
reply to post by another_lurker

so you mean to say that this report isn't a good way to get any accurate measurement. i don't suppose you'd know of any way to actually find out?

posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:30 AM
I watched it.
There was much more than just the CAFRs.

I did, however, download my states 2008 CAFR and went through it fairly thouroughly.
What really stuck out was that the '05-07 real estate excise taxes were up like 18.5% from the usual 1-3% in any other bi-yearly budget, which is how this state does their budget, every two years.

This and comments on earned income and "other income" which included refinancing or selling which during the peak of the bubble was creating unprecidented equity assets to those who went for it. This in turn kept the property taxes ballooning, also in unprecidented amounts.
Now, it seems that the assessors office has been increasing the values even though the retraction and defaults have brought values down, (imagine how much further upside down people would be should the 70% of defaults NOT put on the market were included.

That was what my first inclination was on this whole ponzi scheme from the get go and the CAFR does seem to cooborate this as well.

I do find it ironic that the report is split into many facets that does make a quick review difficult as reading tax codes.

posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:58 AM
reply to post by Mozzy

It's just a set of common financial statements, plain as daylight. You might want to look up 'restricted' and 'unrestricted' - I haven't seen that on a balance sheet before, but then I've never looked at a US city administration's annual report before, either. Apart from a few special terms like those (which probably pertain to laws and regulations about the ways in which government agencies and institutions are allowed to spend and receive money), it's a very straightforward document. Amusing to see taxes and revenues marked on the credit side of the ledger, but then you would expect that.

I see you're concerned that the government might be making money out of your taxes. That's rather funny. Most government agencies are short of money. Anyway, the usual practice among government agencies and departments the world over (and I would be very surprised if the US were any different) is that if there is a budget surplus at the end of the financial year, those funds are rolled over into next year's budget, while the allocation for that year is correspondingly reduced. I used to work as a consultant for international economic cooperation agencies for a while; they budgeted January to December, and by about November they were in a terrible flap trying to spend their year's allocation before 31 December, otherwise they'd receive less money from their counterparty governments the next year.

[edit on 13-3-2009 by Astyanax]

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 05:53 AM
reply to post by Mozzy

If I may, in the thread Original CAFR thread There is a link to Mr. Burien's page and in it an email addresse. One which several among the original contributing members of the thread used to contact Mr. Burien about coming on the site to weigh in on some of the questions and concerns we had in understanding his theory. You might try it and ssee if he responds.If I can I will find it and link it to this thread for you. For those interested I'd just like to say that I think Mr. Burien has a very real and alarming message of Deceit among ALL levels of government from local and state right up to Federal and (not surprisingly of course) right on in to the highest echelons of the Federal officials. This message NEEDS attention more attention now then ever before as people everywhere are suffering. Police are getting cut, Veterans are getting their healthcare pulled out from under them, Teachers are and continue to be screwed over, families are losing their homes, Breadwinners of family's everywhere are getting axed and on large scales, leaving any hope of pension's and stability in the wind, Education costs are astoundingly expensive and basic degrees mean almost nothing anymore yet the cost to achieve one is almost unfeasible, all along we have people like the AIG top brass making millions on bonus's not including their yearly salary and skating along through the nastiest recession in American history while the masses are slowly losing everything. The message Mr. Burien Brings, that the government is fooling us into believing all this economic failure is important and more relevant than ever. These reports are ominously in plain sight yet their name was blacked out all over by all media outlets and government networks purposefully, why? I believe Mr. Burien and if even a shred of his findings are true, we are in the grandest deception the world has ever seen and it is scary how apathetic we are to it....Wake up and spread the word friends, we are among those who know and must spread the word because knowledge is the only tool that can motivate the rest of us to rise up and refuse the cattle prod they wish to implement on us.

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 06:03 AM
nah i don't think it's that serious. this thread has answered all the important parts that you need to know.

1. the CAFR is an estimate
2. it's made to reduce the cost of accounting.

end of story. it's not a big deal. maybe the govt is making some money off of us but it's not near as bad as mr. burien is stating.

there is some personal information on burien's site that would go a long way into explaining his stance IMHO.

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 06:21 AM
well have you watched his movie in entirety? its boring at first but it is alarming as it goes deeper in...He does not sound looney and actually his discussion on the 9/11 incident lended further credibility to his findings as he made valid and worthwhile points and discussed issues still not definitively put to rest. skepticism is part of the thinning of bs but this does not appear to be bs to me. Look around us. Everyone at the top is making billions but not the little man, why is that?

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 06:36 AM
i'm not saying burien is nuts, just vindictive. he's been an accountant for so long he knows what to show people to get their wheels spinnin.

i posted this thread to find out what was goin on and that's pretty much what happened. no need to drag it though the mud.

posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 07:43 AM
I dont know, there arent many familiar with the CAFR and even less are familiar with how to read it in a way that those who understand it thoroughly and are hiding it do. We know very little about it and about how much could be estimated is being withheld from public knowledge country wide. It could be astronomical. More than abundant to take care of the crisis at hand, or it could be nothing at all but I'm still quite hopeful there is more to this story than we have available to us right this minute.

top topics


log in