A “Ghost Asset” quite simply is an asset that is on the books of a company, but is no longer there. It is gone (the most frequent occurrence). The asset may have been sold, scrapped, cannibalized, stolen, eaten, etc. Conversely, an asset may be in use and in place but not on the books (occasionally). One can be guaranteed that every single company over say three years old has ghost assets on its books. For fun, let’s coin another phrase, “Opaque Assets”. These are assets that are abandoned in place, on standby but will never be used, just hanging around, and so forth. So what! Well if it’s a tax reporting purchase price allocation, it may not matter since one gets more depreciation out of the ghost (but this may be improper reporting). But for financial reporting, earnings (EBIT) are reduced, and likely the execs / shareholders / owners / bankers would not be pleased. In an insurance loss, don’t fool yourself; you likely will not be compensated as if the asset was new and in use. In property tax matters one is paying tax on an asset that is not there (being obviously not good). And, if for whatever reason “trending and bending” is required, such factors / treatment will be applied to assets that are not in place or in use.  Nonsense one may say, even so, ghost assets are not a material element of the fixed asset data. Aha, the writer replies, this is not necessarily so at all. Based on seeing too many fixed asset systems over 40 years of practice, ghost assets are a systemic problem, regardless of the company size. Just ask any specialist in Ad Valorem taxation matters. For these practitioners the elimination of such assets from tax “renditions” is the very basic and easy element of their practice, thereby “paying for the lights”. Further one may say, but the elimination of ghost assets from a fixed asset system is easy. Again, not necessarily so says the writer. Many, he says many, fixed asset systems are so bad that such assets can not be identified. For example, eliminate the ghost asset when the identification is “machinery”, not XYZ machine, model XXX, serial number YYY. And what of the opaque assets, again difficult to identify. For fun, let’s coin another phrase, being “Bionic Assets”. These assets are on the books but have been upgraded in one way or another, say an arm has been replaced by a new and better arm. Such assets are lounging on the books, without reduction of cost for the arm that is gone. Yet, the new arm often is placed on the books and then depreciated. And the new asset may have been created out of parts of other assets that remain on the books, as well as capitalized or expensed components. Writer’s Comment: • How in the world can an accountant or an appraiser intelligently “trend and bend” the subject assets without having knowledge of ghost, opaque or bionic assets? Definitions Within The Above Article: • “Trend(ing) and Bend(ing)” is an appraisal phrase for indexing up / down for inflation / price increases and then possibly applying depreciation factors for physical deterioration, functional obsolescence, and economic / external obsolescence. • Tax “renditions” refers to fixed asset data reported to taxing jurisdictions for property tax purposes, i.e. asset XYZ purchased for $100,000 in 1998.