July 23, 2018

A Running List of Unanswered Questions About the KPMG Audit Inspection Conspiracy

questions kpmg pcaob conspiracy

Updates appear below

If we learned anything from yesterday’s indictment of six accountants — five of whom were employed by KPMG — it’s that there are even more questions that remain unanswered. Some of these questions are simple and some of them are complicated, but it seems worth the time to list them here.

  • Is the U.S. Attorney or the Securities and Exchange Commission conducting other investigations related to this matter? Is the threat of criminal charges being used by the SEC to wrestle more settlements? UPDATE: Francine McKenna’s post from yesterday stated that during a call with reporters “the SEC’s co-director of enforcement Steve Peikin told reporters that the investigation regarding additional individuals or organizations is continuing.”
  • Is KPMG under investigation for criminal or civil offenses? At what point, if at all, do the activities of these partners, and their proximity to the top of the firm, implicate the entire firm?
  • If criminal charges are not pending against KPMG, what led the Department of Justice to reach that conclusion? Same question goes for the SEC.
  • Why is Scott Marcello, the former vice chair of audit not named in the indictment or the SEC orders? Did he, or is he currently, cooperating with authorities?
  • To what extent were Partners 1 through 4 from the indictment aware of the nature of the information or instructions they were given as it related to the work they were being asked to do?
  • What about the conversation between Brian Sweet and Partner-5 caused Partner-5 to report the information — that his engagement would be inspected by the PCAOB — to his superior, who then informed KPMG’s Office of General Counsel?
  • Why was Brian Sweet the only person to cut a deal? Are any of the others facing charges being given a chance to cooperate? (Considering the penalties, I suggest they take a deal if offered.) UPDATE: Here is indictment against Sweet. He pleaded guilty to the conspiracy charge and one count of wire fraud.
  • Were Sweet, Cynthia Holder, or Jeffrey Wada approaching their contacts at other Big 4 firms about positions?
  • Who is the data analytics firm that KPMG retained to help predict which engagements would be inspected by the PCAOB? Have other Big 4 firms used this firm to help with their efforts to predict the PCAOB’s selections? What other tactics are firms using to predict these selections?
  • UPDATE: Tammy Whitehouse at Compliance Week rightly wonders if the inspection results should be restated.

This will suffice for now. If you have others that you think belong. Let me know and I’ll update this list.

 

Related articles

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]

Our Speculation About the Motivation Behind Deloitte’s Most Recent Survey

heelys.jpgBig accounting firms like doing surveys. We’ve often thought about the motivation behind the constant surveys and further wonder if firms ever josh the numbers around out of a personal vendetta against its rivals, enemies, former clients, etc.
Deloitte’s survey that states that American consumers are planning on spending less this back-to-school season causes us to speculate as to why the Big D would do such a survey? It’s a nice little press release we suppose. Shows that the firm is plugged into the current state of the economy, etc., etc. But then we got to thinking about how Heelys, the obnoxious shoes with wheels, recently dumped Deloitte because their fees were too high in favor of Grant Thornton.
Far be it from us to speculate about the temperament of a Big 4 accounting firm when it has business swiped away by a second-tier firm but isn’t it possible that Deloitte is bitter about the whole sitch? Isn’t it possible that Deloitte is merely putting out this survey as a way to scare consumers out of spending money on back-to-school junk like Heelys?
Back-to-School Shoppers Plan to Spend Less, Save More [Bloomberg]