KPMG UK Head of Audit Explains Rentokil Arrangement

KPMG_chair.jpgKPMG’s new arrangement with Rentokil has brought some differing opinions amongst the firms, even prompting PwC to take a not-so direct jab at the Radio Station for scooping Rentokil.
Today, KPMG’s head of audit in the UK, Oliver Tant, wrote a piece for Accountancy Age explaining the firm’s new “extended assurance”:
Continued, after the jump

Under the service, those responsible for corporate governance may ask KPMG to perform work beyond that which is required for the statutory audit, for example by testing a larger sample of controls or additional transactions and balances of lower value than the materiality level set for the statutory audit.
This work does not replace, conflict with or undermine the independence of the external audit it simply extends our understanding of the business and its controls and hence the breadth and depth of insight we can offer. That is why we call it extended assurance.

Mr. Tant also cites the savings passed along to the client, which is so hot these days. He also explains what “extended assurance” is NOT:

The service is not about merging the external and internal audit functions. A company can continue to have its own internal audit function and those charged with corporate governance will still be responsible for assessing the overall adequacy of a company’s control environment and the need for skilled internal audit expertise.
Ethical standards do not prevent the auditor from doing more than the bare minimum to support the audit opinion. We will identify and plan the work necessary to support our audit opinion independent of any further work we may be requested to perform.

As we mentioned, PwC has already made their opinion known and E&Y’s head of assurance in the UK, John Flattery has stated that they will not be “mirroring the arrangement.”
It’s already been speculated that this type of arrangement would not be allowed in the U.S. but there has been no indication that the U.S. firm is pursuing such arrangements.
Since independence is kinda, sorta important for auditors, and many of you are ramming these rules into your brains as we speak (or just waiting to see if you learned anything) discuss in the comments how you feel about the arrangement. Would it pass the smell test Stateside? Is KPMG evolving to the market or are they on thin ice? Are P. Dubs and Ernie being self-righteous dicks since they didn’t think of it first? Feel free to get ugly about it.
KPMG audit head defends controversial Rentokil role [Accountancy Age]

KPMG_chair.jpgKPMG’s new arrangement with Rentokil has brought some differing opinions amongst the firms, even prompting PwC to take a not-so direct jab at the Radio Station for scooping Rentokil.
Today, KPMG’s head of audit in the UK, Oliver Tant, wrote a piece for Accountancy Age explaining the firm’s new “extended assurance”:
Continued, after the jump

Under the service, those responsible for corporate governance may ask KPMG to perform work beyond that which is required for the statutory audit, for example by testing a larger sample of controls or additional transactions and balances of lower value than the materiality level set for the statutory audit.
This work does not replace, conflict with or undermine the independence of the external audit it simply extends our understanding of the business and its controls and hence the breadth and depth of insight we can offer. That is why we call it extended assurance.

Mr. Tant also cites the savings passed along to the client, which is so hot these days. He also explains what “extended assurance” is NOT:

The service is not about merging the external and internal audit functions. A company can continue to have its own internal audit function and those charged with corporate governance will still be responsible for assessing the overall adequacy of a company’s control environment and the need for skilled internal audit expertise.
Ethical standards do not prevent the auditor from doing more than the bare minimum to support the audit opinion. We will identify and plan the work necessary to support our audit opinion independent of any further work we may be requested to perform.

As we mentioned, PwC has already made their opinion known and E&Y’s head of assurance in the UK, John Flattery has stated that they will not be “mirroring the arrangement.”
It’s already been speculated that this type of arrangement would not be allowed in the U.S. but there has been no indication that the U.S. firm is pursuing such arrangements.
Since independence is kinda, sorta important for auditors, and many of you are ramming these rules into your brains as we speak (or just waiting to see if you learned anything) discuss in the comments how you feel about the arrangement. Would it pass the smell test Stateside? Is KPMG evolving to the market or are they on thin ice? Are P. Dubs and Ernie being self-righteous dicks since they didn’t think of it first? Feel free to get ugly about it.
KPMG audit head defends controversial Rentokil role [Accountancy Age]

Have something to add to this story? Give us a shout by email, Twitter, or text/call the tipline at 202-505-8885. As always, all tips are anonymous.

Related articles

KPMG U.K. Chairman Diagnosed with COVID-19

The Financial Times reported this afternoon that Bill Michael, chairman of the Queen’s KPMG, has tested positive for COVID-19 and has been hospitalized. Mr Michael, who took over the Big Four accounting and advisory firm in 2017, has been in hospital for one week after becoming unwell but was only diagnosed with the Covid-19 virus […]

KPMG CEO Lynne Doughtie Assures Employees No Layoffs Are Coming

We got a tip this morning which we were able to confirm with two other sources that in an internal firm video we think was sent to employees last night, KPMG CEO Lynne Doughtie said protecting KPMGers during the crisis caused by the COVID-19 outbreak was her first priority and that layoffs would be an […]