July 19, 2018

U.K. Audit Regulator Encouraged to Slap Big 4 Wrists Slightly Harder

big-4-punishment

Despite what you might hear, Big 4 audit firms have it pretty easy when it comes to compliance. Yes, there a ton of rules to follow, but in the event that a firm, one (or several) of its partners and employees run afoul of those rules, the consequences range from a mild rebuke to a small fine to a brief time-out from accepting or pursuing clients.

This environment of relative impunity is not lost on anyone. Which is why this judge in the U.K. is recommending stiffer fines:

Misdeeds by the world’s “Big Four” accounting firms should be punished with much bigger fines, Britain’s accounting watchdog was advised in a report released on Tuesday.

“Fines greater than those that have heretofore been imposed may be appropriate in really serious cases,” former judge Christopher Clarke said in the study published by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC).

What are “really serious cases” you might ask?

“If one of the Big 4 firms was guilty of seriously bad incompetence, in respect of the audit of a major public company… a financial penalty of ten million pounds or more before any discount could be appropriate,” the report said.

Oh, man. Can I volunteer to establish the standards of “seriously bad incompetence”? The nuances of what constitutes mere “incompetence” and “seriously bad incompetence” would require an acute sensibility for the jackassery of auditor behavior, and I think I’m uniquely qualified to adjudicate these matters.

For example, I’d love to grapple with the question about the severity of an audit partner banging the chief accounting officer of a client. Or if a partner is a little too chummy with a CFO. Or if a firm’s leadership is engaged in elaborate cover-ups, or ignored widespread corruption for decades.

Yes, I think I could do an excellent job of deciding if these types of situations were worthy of an eight-figure fine that would have a limited success deterring audit firms from seriously bad incompetence. I stand ready for the call.

[Reuters]

Image: iStock/maximkabb

Related articles

Face It People, Nothing Much Can Be Done About the Revolving Door

Revolving_Door2.jpgThere’s constant conspiracy theories bellyaching about certain companies getting their former big shots into public service and regulatory positions (we’re talking about you, Maxine Waters).
Well now there’s speculation about former Big 4 partners working at the IASB.
We get it, those who used to work at the big firms shouldn’t be writing the rules. So who the hell is going to do it? Shall we have the likes of Friehling & Horowitz appointed as the standard setters?
The large firms have the biggest pool to choose out of, so natch they’re going to have some of the better candidates to delve into this wonky rule-writing stuff. We’re probably lucky that there are people out there that actually want to serve on these boards, lots of Big 4 partners can barely turn on their computers.

Ernst & Young Is Here to Help (For a Small Fee)!

ernst_young.jpgWe thought that Ernst & Young was advising the New York Fed on the winding down of AIG out of the goodness of their hearts but it turns out it’s actually about the money.
E&Y could make as much as $60 million advising the New York Fed, which is 50% more than the initial agreement, according to Bloomberg. The NYF is also reimbursing E&Y for expenses, up to 10% of the professional fees. This occurs after the parties had initially said $40 million would be the cap but $60 mil is it, we swear, no more.
And because E&Y is solid like that, the firm is billing out partners and directors at discounted rates ($775/hour). I mean, ’cause, let’s face it, this thing’s a mess and E&Y is going to be working hard, working late, working weekends.
Ernst & Young’s Maximum Pay for AIG Advice Swells [Bloomberg]