Category: KPMG

Former KPMG Employee Now a Bean Slinger; May Have the Best Burrito in London

It’s my understanding that burritos are hard to come by in London. Apparently they just opened the first Chipotle there. For many of you, a life without burritos slapped together in 90 seconds (not including the wait on line) isn’t a life worth living. The Brits have managed to survive for a number of centuries without tortillas overstuffed with sour cream and free-range pork. And while Chipotle can certainly churn out a fine burrito, if you happen to find yourself in Spitalfields, East London you might check out Poncho No. 8. It was started by Nick Troen and Frank Yeung, Troen being the ex-Klynvedlian and Yeung a former equities trader at Goldman Sachs.

The friends spent the next three years living together, talking about going into business one day. After a brief separation — Troen worked for KPMG, the accountancy firm, and Innocent, the smoothie maker, before doing a masters, while Yeung worked for Goldman Sachs, the investment bank — they quit their jobs, moved back in together and four months ago launched a Mexican restaurant.

Although it is early days, Poncho No. 8 (Poncho Ocho), their pocket-sized restaurant in Spitalfields, East London, employs a staff of nine, sees 300 customers a day queue down the street for “gourmet” burritos and took £100,000 in its first quarter.

Troen and Yeung are unashamedly influenced by Innocent, the wildly successful fruit drink company also started by graduate friends. “It was always a company we admired. The branding and style had a big impact on us,” Troen says.

Poncho was a typical back of the envelope idea — “we looked at the numbers and thought ‘why has no one done this?’, ” Yeung says — brought to life via the same mix of ingenious, vaguely hippy branding and healthy ingredients. The restaurant features a green-painted “Guac Shack” while the website offers a “countdown to lunch” for bored office workers.

Starting a new Mexican wave [Times via BI]

Happy Birthday Phil Mickelson!

His Leftyness turns 41 today, as one of the favorites of the U.S. Open and of course he’ll be rocking the KPMG lid. As fans of the links know, Phil seems to come apart at the seams at the Open, not unlike certain KPMG audits. Will this year be different?

Who knows! What we do know that today is Fill’s day of birth and we send him best wishes and best of luck in the Open. Wouldn’t that be a great send off for Tim Flynn? Not that Mick needs the added pressure.

Anyway, as is (what we imagine to be) tradition for the major tournaments, T Fly and John Veihmeyer are holed up in the executive conference room watching the tournament as the rest of you are probably trying to make heads or tails of the Next Level training.

ANYWAY, leave Phil some well wishes in the comments. Don’t worry, we won’t make mention of this again, unless something hat-related occurs.

KPMG, Center for Audit Quality Weren’t Too Keen on PCAOB Inspection Documents Being Subpoenaed

Last week, we told you about Jonathan Weil’s latest scoop exposing a PCAOB issuer in an inspection report. The issuer in question was Motorola and it, once again, featured KPMG as the auditor on the receiving end of the Board’s criticism. It was also noted that PCAOB Chair Jim Doty mentioned this particular case (without naming names) in his speech at USC the previous week when he described “one large firm tam was aware that a significant contract was not signed until the early hours of the fourth quarter. Nevertheless, the audit partner allowed the company to book the transaction in the third quarter, which allowed the company to meet its earnings target.”

J Dubs put this all together in a nice little package, citing court documents from a class-action lawsuit in Chicago. What isn’t mentioned in Weil’s column but is spelled out in other court documents that we’ve reviewed is that KPMG and the Center of Audit Quality fought the release of the documents related to the PCAOB’s inspection report because they’re afraid that more lawsuits could result if issuers’ identities are made public.

The CAQ submitted an amicus curiae brief (in full on the next page) stating:

The supervisory model of regulation created by Sarbanes-Oxley and implemented by the PCAOB has thus far worked well and has improved the quality and reliability of audits of public companies. It has worked to the satisfaction of both the Board and the regulated community.

Since the PCAOB’s own Investor Advisory Group issued a report entitled “The Watchdog that Didn’t Bark … Again,” one might say that the Center’s final point is debatable.

Yet, the CAQ argued that if the PCAOB inspection documents were released, “the [Sarbanes-Oxley] Act’s carefully supervisory model will be adversely affected.” That is, the confidentiality afforded to the communication between auditors and the PCAOB would be compromised and would allow Board information into the ‘hands of litigating lawyers.’ The CAQ declined to comment for this post, saying that they did not “have anything to add to the amicus brief.”

In her ruling denying KPMG’s motion (in full, on page 3) to squash the subpoena of the PCAOB documents, Judge Amy St. Eve cited KPMG’s argument that sounds very similar to the CAQ’s:

KPMG argues that “if litigants can compel production of materials related to the PCAOB’s confidential inspection process notwithstanding section 105(b)(5)(A), open and constructive engagement between the PCAOB and accounting firms could be chilled by the threat of increased civil litigation, and the statutory framework carefully crafted by Congress to improve the quality of public company audits could be frustrated.”

So basically auditors are afraid that if their super-special-secret discussions with the PCAOB are out there for all the world to see, they’ll get sued more often. But hasn’t suing audit firms already reached critical mass? Can they really fear more litigation? The only thing that keeps audit firms from being on the same level of litigation risk as tobacco companies is that they aren’t killing people.

Weil and those that agree with him argue that the PCAOB owes it to investors to name names in their inspection reports. To continue keeping issuers confidential protects them from legitimate criticism for shoddy accounting and perpetuating equally shoddy audits. Of course, if you’re an investor and that doesn’t bother you, then maybe you’re okay with auditors trying to stop the release of more information related to their work. Work that cost the investors in Motorola $244 million from 2000 to 2010.

caqamicusbrief

Minute Order 1

Another KPMG Client Gets ID’d in a PCAOB Inspection Report

Back in March, Bloomberg’s Jonathan Weil called attention to a PCAOB report that was pretty harsh on KPMG-Bermuda’s audit of Alterra Capital Holdings. At the time he wrote the column, KPMG, the PCAOB and Alterra weren’t talking but then Alterra filed a 8-K admitting that they were the filer in question.

Today Weil lets the cat out of the bag again and yes it’s another KPMG client, Motorola:lockquote>Four years ago, inspectors for the auditing industry’s chief watchdog discovered that KPMG LLP had let Motorola Inc. record revenue during the third quarter of 2006 from a transaction with Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM), even though the final contract wasn’t signed until the early hours of the fourth quarter. That’s no small technicality. Without the deal, Motorola would have missed its third-quarter earnings target.

The regulator, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, later criticized KPMG for letting Motorola book the revenue when it did. Although KPMG had discussed the transaction’s timing with both Motorola and Qualcomm, the board said the firm “failed to obtain persuasive evidence of an arrangement for revenue-recognition purposes in the third quarter.” In other words, KPMG had no good reason to believe the deal shouldn’t have been recorded in the fourth quarter.

This may sound familiar to some of you that read PCAOB Chairman James Doty’s speech from last week when he said this:

PCAOB inspectors found at one large firm that an engagement team was aware that a significant contract was not signed until the early hours of the fourth quarter. Nevertheless, the audit partner allowed the company to book the transaction in the third quarter, which allowed the company to meet its earnings target. Although the firm discussed the timing of the transaction with the customer, it failed to obtain persuasive evidence of an arrangement for revenue recognition purposes in the third quarter. The company had been an audit client of the firm for close to 50 years.

Weil writes, “KPMG has been Motorola’s auditor since 1959; it had been Motorola’s auditor for 47 years at the time of the Qualcomm deal.” So, yeah. How did he piece this one together? Elementary, my dear auditors:

Motorola’s identity was disclosed in public records last month as part of a class-action shareholder lawsuit against the company in a federal district court in Chicago. The plaintiffs in the case, led by the Macomb County Employees’ Retirement System in Michigan, filed a transcript of a September 2010 deposition of a KPMG auditor, David Pratt, who testified that Issuer C was Motorola. KPMG isn’t a defendant in the lawsuit.

Pratt also identified the Motorola customers cited in the board’s inspection report. It’s his deposition that allows me to describe the report’s findings using real names.

The oversight board said a significant portion of the company’s earnings for the 2006 third quarter came from two licensing agreements that were recorded during the last three days of the quarter. One was the Qualcomm deal that wasn’t signed until the fourth quarter. The board also cited other deficiencies in KPMG’s review of Motorola’s accounting for the transactions.

As is their wont, KPMG isn’t talking. Motorola isn’t talking (but maybe there’s another 8-K in our future?). The PCAOB, bound by the law -which, some say, is debatable – isn’t talking. My guess is that Jon Weil will continue to talk…er…write columns shining the lights on shoddy audits until the Board breaks its silence.

Dirty Secrets Fester in 50-Year Relationships [Jonathan Weil/Bloomberg]

KPMG’s ‘Next Level’ Is Here and You’re Probably Going to Be Very Disappointed and/or Confused

For those of you that have been anxiously awaiting the details on KPMG’s “Next Level” like the Royal nuptials, we have the details straight from John Veihmeyer and Henry Keizer (via a couple of tipsters). Before we get to the message from The Gipper and Hank, you should be warned that if your excitement was piqued by the “Next Level” movie-trailer video, you might – MIGHT! – not be that enthused with the actual “Next Level.”

With that said, let’s turn it over to the boys:

Welcome to the Next Level: Our High-Performance Culture
A Message from John Veihmeyer and Henry Keizer

It’s no secret that we operate in an increasingly cve environment, one in which our clients—both internal and external—are demanding more from us every day. More than ever, they need the skills and services we can bring, as long as we continue to raise the bar on our own performance and add more value and insight than ever before. To meet these demands and take full advantage of the opportunities ahead of us, we must be committed to fostering a High-Performance Culture, one in which we have the best people, with the skills and determination to deliver above and beyond.

If you managed to make it through that paragraph, you’re probably queasy already. The bad news is, it gets worse.

By now you’ve likely heard about our focus on high-performance culture. But chances are you still have some questions about exactly what it is, as well as what it means for you and for the firm as a whole. That’s why we’ve created The Next Level, a Web-based orientation for all partners and employees.

This mandatory 1 CPE credit self-study program will help you to:

• Articulate the key elements of our High-Performance Culture (HPC) initiative, including why it is critical to our firm’s success and your individual success
• Describe what the firm is doing to drive HPC, as well as what’s expected of you
• Identify and model the key attributes of high performers to elevate your own performance
• Effectively use our streamlined performance development process
• Give and receive feedback more effectively
• Most important, you’ll learn how high-performance culture will help you to share in our collective firm success, build skills for tomorrow, and have pride in being part of something extraordinary.
• The deadline for completion of The Next Level is July 7. (Note: All partners and employees are required to participate in this self-study program.)

Thanks in advance for your participation! And keep in mind that this is only the jumping-off point… you’ll be hearing a lot more about our HPC efforts in the weeks and months ahead.

Okay Klynveldians, I don’t know about you all but I’m still not sure if I understand what the “Next Level” is. What is clear is there is nothing in this email about loyalty bonuses, allegations of gender discrimination or the opportunity to wear jeans (given that you’ve got a five-dollar bill in your pocket).

BUT! There is something about a “high-performance culture,” which gets its own acronym so that might be the “Next Level.” Then there’s stuff about a web-based orienation, feedback, streamlined something or other and MANDATORY PARTICIPATION FOR EVERYONE (this means you, 30+ years partner who can barely turn on your laptop). Granted, I’ve been out of the HoK for quite some time so maybe I’m misinterpreting John and Hank’s prose but this “Next Level” seems like the same “level” only with a few more hoops to jump through and definitely more emails from J&H that may or may not explain how this will “foster a high performance culture.”

If you’re more hip to this, please enlighten everyone. But if you’re confused, annoyed or mortified with disappointment you can share those feelings too.

Comp Watch ’11: KPMG Kicking Around the Idea of Loyalty Bonuses for Senior Associates

We’re still waiting to hear what the Next Level is but this should tide you over in the meantime.

I’m a second-year audit senior associate at KPMG in the New York Office. This past Wednesday there was a round-table discussion with about a dozen seniors to discuss compensation. I’ve been looking on Going Concern to see what has turned up, and since I’ve yet to see anything i figured I would send along what was discussed…

The meeting was run be a couple of our heads of compensation, and they were certain to tell us that in no way has this been approved by leadership, but as long as feedback from the round-table sessions is positive, they think it has a good chance of happening. They asked us about how the above and beyond award [Ed. note: aka utilization bonuses] was received, to which everyone responded negatively, and they unveiled their plan for future bonus compensation to reward loyalty for the firm. They said that this plan would be in addition to any raises and variable comp that the firm already has, so this would act as a reward for loyalty to the firm. I will highlight the details below.

-This plan is applicable for senior associates
– In December everyone makes an election that they classified as immediate, one-year, and two-year. The immediate pays $1,000, the 1-year pays $4,000, and the 2-year pays $8,000. This election would be made each December by senior associates. One example they gave of a first-year senior associate entering this bonus program was as follows:

December 2011: two-year election – pays $8,000 in May 2014
December 2012: two-year election – pays $8,000 in May 2015
December 2013: one-year election – pays $4,000 in May 2016

They were selling us on the fact that you would be paid out $20,000 in the span of twelve months, which of course sounds pretty great. One thing to keep in mind is that the terminology “immediate”, “one-year”, and “two-year” isn’t completely accurate. In reality it is more like one, two, or three busy seasons. Some of the particulars are that once you make an election you’re stuck with it, so if you take the immediate payout and happen to stay another few years, you are less loyal than someone who knew ahead of time. Also, if you leave the firm before you reach your payment date you obviously get nothing.

The plan was generally well received in the meeting, but didn’t get good reviews at all when I told some of my co-workers about it. I am curious to see how others feel about it. We all seemed to agree that it didn’t seem worth it to take the $1,000 payout because after taxes you’d barely notice it, and that it would take real guts to take the $8,000 payout, because as a first-year senior associate the length of your deferral is longer than your employment at the firm to date, so you never really know if you’ll still be there to collect.

Say what you will about the KPMG, they are trying to get creative with the bonus structure. Whether or not it takes with Klynveldians is another matter entirely but you can get started by commenting with your reactions below.

Several KPMG Denver Employees Go Rogue, Wear Jeans Without Approval

I agree with our tipster who wrote, “I’m just sitting here in disbelief that it’s such a big deal (in Denver of all places) that it merited an officewide email.”

From: [Denver OMP]
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 2:03 PM
To: US-DEN KPMG Office Everyone List
Subject: Today

It appears as though many of you thought that today was a regularly scheduled jeans day for the Denver office. This was not a scheduled jeans day; however let’s turn this into a positive. If you are wearing jeans today, please [see the] receptionist, and pay your $5. All monies will be donated to the Red Cross to benefit the tornado victims in the south. Thanks everyone for your generosity to those in need.

A source in HoK Denver told me that he saw “several partners wearing jeans” so it’s entirely possible there’s a Rocky Mountain mutiny in the works but I’ll try not to jump to any conclusions.

(UPDATE) KPMG Sued for $350 Million in Gender Discrimination Lawsuit

~Update includes KPMG statement.

Former KPMG Senior Manager Donna Kassman is suing the firm in the Southern District of New York. She worked for the firm for seventeen years, resigning in October 2010 after “relentless gender discrimination and harassmentle, and it was clear that the Company had no interest in remedying the situation.”

Plaintiff Kassman alleges that KPMG engages in systemic discrimination against its female Managers, including but not limited to Managers, Senior Managers and Managing Directors. The lawsuit is intended to change KPMG’s discriminatory pay and promotion policies and practices, as well as its systemic failure to properly investigate and resolve complaints of discrimination and harassment. The Plaintiff is filing this action on behalf of a class of thousands of current and former female employees who have worked as Managers at KPMG from 2008 through the date of judgment.

Ms. Kassman and the class are represented by Janette Wipper, Siham Nurhussein, and Deepika Bains of Sanford Wittels & Heisler, LLP and they don’t spare the details:

Despite Plaintiff Kassman’s long tenure and stellar performance, KPMG refused to promote her along the partnership track. Ms. Kassman’s supervisors repeatedly told her throughout 2008 and 2009 that she was next in line for a promotion to Managing Director. Around the time Ms. Kassman was to be promoted, however, two male employees complained that she was “unapproachable” and “too direct,” thinly-veiled gender-based criticisms designed to derail her career advancement. Based on these unfounded, discriminatory comments, KPMG removed Ms. Kassman from the promotion track, subjected her to numerous hostile interrogations, and advised her to meet with a “coach” to work on her supposed issues. Instead of disciplining the two male employees for their campaign of harassment, KPMG rewarded them by putting them up for promotion.

KPMG’s female Managers are not only under-promoted, but underpaid as well. In one particularly egregious act of discrimination, KPMG slashed Ms. Kassman’s base salary by $20,000 while she was on maternity leave because she was paid “too much.” KPMG cited no business justification for slashing her salary. When Ms. Kassman complained about the salary cut, her male supervisor asserted that she did not need the money because she “ha[d] a nice engagement ring.”

“Unfortunately, Ms. Kassman’s story is completely representative of the treatment of women at KPMG,” Siham Nurhussein said. “Ms. Kassman repeatedly complained up the chain of command about the gender discrimination and harassment she was experiencing, and the Company reacted with neither surprise nor concern. Her supervising Partner told her matter-of-factly that her male colleague might have a problem working with women, and the Office of Ethics and Compliance told Ms. Kassman that men had ganged up on women at KPMG before. KPMG not only tolerates gender discrimination, but displays an active interest in perpetuating it.”

In addition to the systematic discrimination faced by female Managers at KPMG, female employees with children also face discrimination based on their status as caregivers and/or being pregnant. After she gave birth to her first child, Ms. Kassman’s career advancement at KPMG came to a screeching halt. Without any warning or provocation, KPMG abruptly cut her salary while she was on maternity leave and placed her on a Performance Improvement Plan upon her return to work. Ms. Kassman felt that she had no choice but to move to a “flexible” schedule, under which she retained all the responsibilities of a full-time employee, but was paid less. KPMG frequently touted Ms. Kassman as a role model for other working mothers, even though one of the Partners acknowledged that women on flexible schedules were “not going to get anywhere [at KPMG].”

An email to a KPMG spokeswoman was not immediately returned.

UPDATE: KPMG spokesman George Ledwith provided us with the following statement, “KPMG is recognized as a leader for its strong commitment to supporting women in the workplace. In fact, among the Big Four accounting firms, KPMG is tied with the highest percentage of women partners. We believe this lawsuit is entirely without merit.”

We’ll keep you updated with any developments.

(UPDATE, VIDEO) What Is the ‘Next Level’ Coming to KPMG?

From the mailbag:

Relatively ominous link on our internal homepage saying “get ready” “the next level is coming” as of 6.6.11.


We’ve confirmed this “next level” with several people and also that there is a video that Klynveldians are watching. We’d really like to see some screen shots of this, just to get some context. In the meantime, we encourage you to speculate about this “next level” and why you have to “get ready.” I’ll kick things off:

A) Tim Flynn’s retirement party is going to be epic.

B) Omaha Steaks announces a special “KPMG Package” that will drive the other, non-meaty firms crazy.

C) KPMG seeks revenge on PwC with their own competitive poaching efforts by offering the head of the mailroom at 300 Madison a 10% raise and a Phil Mickelson autographed hat.

D) Your ideas.

UPDATE:
Supposedly, this is the transcript to the video (still no screen shots, it’s called “Print Screen” people!). Our tipster wrote, “Interesting video that gives very little hint to what the ‘Next Level’ is other than lots of talk of a ‘high-performance’ culture. Maybe it has something to do with changing performance review structure a la PwC. The video definitely gives an ominous feeling as if the KPMGers in it are running out of time and people aren’t adapting to the changing market fast enough for their liking. All in all pretty strange vibes.”

Welcome to the Next Level – Video Transcript

[VARIOUS VOICES DELIVERING SHORT PHRASES]:

The market’s changed…

In order to compete in today’s world we have to keep up with change…

It’s a mindset… It’s a way of behaving…

It’s about a continuous journey…

Our ambition is greater than where we are today…

The attitude is contagious…

We’re not satisfied…

It’s really about taking it to that next level.

Keep us updated.

UPDATE 2:
Another tipster hears that it has something to do with the-next-level.com but “[I] don’t really know what they plan to do with it.” Poking around the site, it appears that it would be related to “Developing the Next Wave of Senior Leaders” but I’ve checked out for the week and don’t have the will to dig further right now.

UPDATE 3:
Well, the video finally made it’s way into my inbox and I’ve posted it on the next page for your viewing pleasure (I realize Klynveldians have seen it already).

After watching it a number of times I still can’t make heads or tails about what the “next level” will be but hopefully it’s does just to this movie trailer-esque video.

Some KPMG Employees Are Asking ‘Where’s the Beef?’

It was brought to my attention earlier today that at this time last year, KPMG had announced their Summer Blast which included everyone’s favorite Klynveld tradition: a package of Omaha Steaks. But in 2011, we’re only a few short days away from the Memorial Day weekend and so far, no such communication has occurred.


If the House of Klynveld has, in fact, down away with spreading the flesh around, there could be a number of reasons for it. One possibility is that Phil Mickelson still isn’t touching the stuff and won’t have any company endorsing him encourage the consumption of meat. The other reason could be that the firm has to save the extra cash for Tim Flynn’s retirement party. Of course it could also be that information coming out of partner exit interviews indicated that they were getting tired of hosting BBQs for employees. Of course, this is all speculation on our part but all seem plausible.

If you have your own theories, are otherwise privy to the meat info, getting antsy for your package or have other ideas for Summer Blast 2011, tell us below.

(UPDATE) Promotion Watch ’11: KPMG Managers-in-waiting

From the mailbag:

The last few years KPMG announced manager promotions by this time, but I haven’t heard a peep from anyone so far. Have they changed the timing?

Digging through the archives, it’s true that around this time last year, chatter around the announcements of promotions at KPMG had begun but as our tipster said, so far it’s been strict Radio Station silence. Last year, details were rolling out through early June, so it could be that they’re dragging it out for effect.

Anyway, one rumor that we just heard is that in some KPMG offices, SAs up for manager are being asked to interview for their promotions. Personally, I’ve never heard of this but considering the need at SA, it would be a strategic way to hold some people back, chalking it up to “he/she didn’t interview well” versus the cryptic “he/she isn’t ready.”

If you’ve recently gotten word on promotions in your office, heard anything about these interviews or are simply in the know, email us the details and discuss below.

UPDATE:This just in:

PA leadership told us manager promotions would be approved on 5/20/11, with announcements in the following weeks after the approvals. haven’t heard anything about the ‘interviewing’ but i’m not up for Manager promotion so i guess i wouldn’t know.

Nice. Just in time for the end of the world.

UPDATE, May 26th, circa 12:35 pm:
According to a Klynveldian close to the situation in New York, “they seem to be making calls to those up for manager.”

PwC Snags Another KPMG Partner

Is PwC offering these partners a lifetime supply of Girl Scout Cookies or something?

Ellen Rotenberg will join PwC to head up the Banking, Capital Markets and Insurance group as a tax partner in New York. She was most recently the National Tax Leader for Banking and Finance at KPMG. Prior to that position she did a stint in KPMG’s Washington National Tax Practice.

If you’re keeping score at home, this is the fourth KPMG partner/principal to join PwC since February (that we know about). Kinda makes you wonder if Tim Flynn is really retiring. [PwC]