Ecolab's announcement that it is "deconsolidating" its businesses in Venezuela might look like a creative accounting approach to get a bad business off the books.
But Ecolab really had no choice. The maneuver met the test of technically correct accounting as well as the test of common sense, to reflect operating in a country that's coming apart.
Some of the accounting is easy to understand, but some aspects of it had to be new to even savvy investors, including the idea that Ecolab would "deconsolidate" the operations in Venezuela from its financial statements.
That might sound like the company has just cut these operations loose to fend for themselves, but Ecolab still owns them and they are still open this week and trying to take care of customers. The deconsolidation is only about how to account for them.
Starting with the first quarter of this year, they will be accounted for under what's called the cost method. That's an approach far more commonly used when a big company like St. Paul-based Ecolab buys a small minority stake in some other company.
A minority investment wouldn't give a company like Ecolab control, so under the cost method the investment would be accounted for at just what it cost. That number would go on the balance sheet and stay there until the investment is sold. Any profit or loss would hit the income statement then.
That idea of control when figuring out how to properly account for something is an important one. If a big company became the principal beneficiary of another company and took control of it, then it would give investors a far clearer picture if everything related to that subsidiary got added to the parent's financial statements. That means adding assets and liabilities on the balance sheets as well as the profits and losses on the income statement.
What Ecolab is saying, and what big multinationals like Ford Motor, PepsiCo and Procter & Gamble have said, is that in Venezuela these days what happens in their businesses is really beyond their control.