Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Footnotes: The New Accounting; Deloitte Tops Diversity; Insider Trading For All | 05.12.14

Posted on by Adrienne Gonzalez

Some hack at EY shares the secret for attracting and retaining top Millennial talent (spoiler alert: you've heard it all before) [Forbes]

What can you learn from Tim Geithner's new book? [NYT]

Neil Barofsky has some things to say about Geithner's book [LinkedIn]

Re-imagining accounting and no, it’s not boring – part 1 What most people don’t know is the reason this arcane system was invented and became popular. It was for the prevention of fraud. It is a remarkably successful mechanism that often requires ne’er do well’s to go completely outside double entry with transactions that never hit the books. In short, Pacioli’s system has largely done a very good job of helping keep control and maintain governance over the transactions everyone understands. But…it is almost completely useless at helping in running or managing the business. [Diginomica]

Deloitte Ranked No. 1 on DiversityInc's Top 10 List for Global Diversity How much diversity could Deloitte diversify if Deloitte could diversify diversity? [PRN]

A man in Washington state is using the 5th amendment to claim the state cannot tax him for a crop — marijuana — that is illegal on a federal level [RT]

To be successful, you need this one trait [Lifehacker]

Wait a minute… so now you can get in trouble with the SEC for insider trading if you trade on PUBLIC news? [BV]

Now We Write Resumes Like Douchebags, Too Like, so cringe. [Valleywag]

Related Posts

Footnotes: McGladrey Classic More Classic Than Ever; Your Future; Stupid Emails are the Problem | 10.22.14

Divided U.S. SEC adopts mortgage rule, decries lax lending U.S. securities regulators adopted a rule […]

Deloitte May Be the #1 Firm of No Fun

heelys.jpgRegardless of who a client is or what their business is, accounting firms don’t like to lose them. Lost revenue, a little bit of a slap in the face, a promise that wasn’t delivered (which, let’s be honest, really isn’t all that rare).
For whatever reason, we find the story that Heelys, the skate shoe company, having fired Deloitte as their auditor, has to be an especially tough pill to swallow for the Big D.
Why, you may ask? How about the fact that Heelys MAKES SHOES THAT HAVE WHEELS ON THEM which might be something fun.
According to Reuters, Heelys gave Deloitte-period the heave-ho primarily because of cost considerations. That may be true but something tells us that the real reason might have been Deloitte putting the kibosh on Heelys request of the audit team to wear the skate shoes while working at the client’s HQ.
Deloitte, like all Big 4 firms, being the fun killer, likely argued that skate shoes did fall under acceptable attire in its dress code.
It was probably only a matter of time until the Heelys audit committee concluded that they had to find another audit firm with smaller sticks up their asses. Partners on the engagement are now quietly stewing with their decision that may have put their firm solidly in the #1 slot for hating all things fun.

Heelys dismisses accounting firm [Reuters]

Jeremy Newman: See? I Told You That There Were ‘Big 4 Only’ Clauses

BDO Global CEO — and infrequent blogger — Jeremy Newman would like everyone to know that he wasn’t dreaming when he stated that some financing agreements included “Big 4 only” clauses.

Apparently Newman was thought to be a little Patrick Byrne-ish on this particular point:

These are views that I have been expressing for some years, although many have questioned the prevalence of such clauses and indeed some have sought to deny their existence.

It was comforting therefore for me to read in the report published by the UK’s Financial Reporting Council in October 2009 entitled ‘Choice in the UK Audit Market’ that reference was made to restrictions in loan covenants. The report from the FRC noted:

‘..it is too early to determine how widespread such obligations are; however, the FRC continues to receive examples of banks imposing loan covenants with ‘Big 4 only’ clauses, including one which imposed a higher rate of interest if the borrowing company chose a non-Big 4 auditor.’

Surely there is now sufficient evidence to recognise that such clauses are a potential constraint on choice in the market place and regulators should be urged to ban them.

So despite the lack of evidence that these obligations are widespread, this remains a matter of “urgency,” according to Newman. There are examples, people. That should be enough for you. The man is trying to build a Global 6 firm after all. Kindly throw in a little additional bank regulation to help him out.