While we were ragging on EY yesterday for taking it up the AS5 from the PCAOB, we happened to notice some interesting new language in the inspection report. Now, this is not surprising as the PCAOB clarifies itself often, but let's see what you think about this: Certain of the deficiencies identified were of such […]
Audit firms are still having some trouble pleasing the audit overlords at the PCAOB — particularly with Auditing Standard No. 5. ICFR is the new WTF, though the PCAOB sees audit firms making progress. Unfortunately, the firms are also kinda missing the point of this whole exercise. Compliance Week has the details: The next round […]
The PCAOB news is not letting up. Today, the Board released the 2012 inspection report for Deloitte. Considering the turnaround time in years past, this is pretty fast. The 2011 report was issued last December. If you count yourself as one of those people who enjoy A) reading these reports and B) quality auditing, then you will […]
Okay, remind me — there's a saying about "three" and "trend" or "pattern" or something? Forget it, not important. What is important — at least we've made the argument that it is — is that the PCAOB released Part II of Ernst & Young's 2009 inspection report. That makes three out of four Big 4 […]
I know what a lot of you are thinking — "The PCOAB is a bunch of couldn't-hack-it-in-public know-nothings that like nothing more than making hard-working auditors' lives a living hell. And, oh, Part II doesn't mean jack squat." FANTASTIC! Then you won't mind that I'm going to spend the next few hundred words telling you […]
Oh I bet you guys think you're slick for this one! Thanks so much for ruining my Doomsday. So here's what we've got. Let's start with Deloitte: The PCAOB identified a few particular deficiencies it didn't like: The inspection team considered certain of the deficiencies that it observed to be audit failures. Specifically, certain of […]
PCAOB Auditor Wrecking Ball Tour 2012 rolls on with the an interim report on the auditors of broker-dealers. And this time there's 100% deficiency! From the Executive Summary of the Report on the Progress of the Interim Inspection Program Related to Audits of Brokers and Dealers: This report presents observations from inspections of portions of […]
The PCAOB continues tearing through audit firms like a Texas twister on a random Tuesday during tax season, as it unleashed its fury on McGladrey yesterday. How bad was it? Well, Deloitte can certainly feel better about itself. The Board reported deficiencies in nine of the nineteen (~47%) audits inspected. Deloitte, if you remember, had […]
They really, really, really don’t appreciate it when you blow off their recommendations. Here’s the statement from the Board:
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, in anticipation of questions about the publication of previously nonpublic portions of its May 19, 2008 inspection report on Deloitte & Touche LLP, issued the following statement today:
“The quality control remediation process is central to the Board’s efforts to cause firms to improve the quality of their audits and thereby better protect investors. The Board therefore takes very seriously the importance of firms making sufficient progress on quality control is n inspection report in the 12 months following the report. Particularly with the largest firms, which are inspected annually, the Board devotes considerable time and resources to critically evaluating whether the firm did in fact make sufficient progress in that period. The Board can and does make the relevant criticisms public when a firm has failed to do so.”
So to clarify, Deloitte had until May 19, 2009 to get their methods up to par but failed to do so. To put this into a little bit of context, Jim Doty was not yet the Chair of the PCAOB and Barry Salzberg was still the CEO of Deloitte’s U.S. firm. Does this mean that the PCAOB has been stepping up its game and this is the first instance of many to come? Hard to say but the audits that this inspection report cover are nearly five years old, so it’s debatable as to the value of Part II being made public now.
For Deloitte’s part, here’s current CEO Joe Echevarria’s statement:
“Deloitte is committed to the highest standards of audit quality and as newly elected CEO, it is my foremost priority. Our commitment extends from the top and cascades throughout our entire organization. We place great value on the PCAOB’s input and continue to work with the Board in support of our shared objectives. We recognize that audit quality is fundamental to protecting investors and ensuring the effective functioning of the capital markets.
“We have complete confidence in our professionals and the quality of our audits, and agree that there were and always will be areas where we can improve. In our drive for continuous improvement, we have been making a series of investments focused on strengthening and improving our practice, and will continue to do so to make Deloitte the standard for audit quality.”
In other words, a non-response response. However, it’s much more measured than Deloitte’s response to the initial release of the report. Their response letter spelled out their feelings quite clearly:
Professional judgments of reasonable and highly competent people may differ as to the nature and extent of necessary auditing procedures,conclusions reached and required documentation. We believe that reasonable judgments should not be second guessed and therefore disagree with a number of comments as indicated[.]
Deloitte’s letter is located Appendix C. You can read the full report, including all the details from Part II that were previously unpublished, on page 2.
Now that FEF v. PCAOB has come and gone, the PCAOB didn’t waste any time getting right back to work, as they posted ten new inspection reports today for firms including some of those pesky international firms that have been so resistant.
That should make bring a smile to everyone’s face who was thrilled with today’s decision.
Firm Inspection Reports [PCAOB]