Category: Big 4

If it happens at a Big 4 accounting firm, we’re talking about it here.

How Do I Get into a Big 4 Tax Specialty Group Without a ‘Preferred’ Degree?

Today in “fish my career out of the crapper,” a recent grad has started a masters program hoping to get into a speciality tax practice with a Big 4 firm. However, the reader is concerned that their program won’t be attractive the speciality groups. HELP!!

Have a question about your career? Worried that your porn star spouse might derail your path to partner? Need advice on broaching the subject of the shitty coffee in your office? Email us at advice@goingconcern.com and we’ll be sure that you get the help you need.

Back to our accountant-to-be in jeopardy:

I graduated from undergrad with a degree in accounting in April of this year and immediately began a masters of accountancy program in the Boston area. I did not have an internship since I chose to study abroad instead. I am fluent in Korean, and am interested in tax issues encountered by expatriates and multinational corporations. I am also interested in valuations for M&A. I have wanted to work in a Big 4 or other large accounting firm in the business advisory or tax divisions. However, looking at the job requirements for the positions in these two divisions, the firms prefer students with degrees in economics, finance, taxation, and even JDs and LLMs. My program, on the other hand, is more of a general accounting program geared towards auditing and preparing students for the CPA exam. So, my question is, “how can I get a job in tax or advisory–preferably dealing with tax issues–without experience or a ‘preferred’ degree?” The simple answer would be to just apply and point out the interests that I have, but would this accomplish anything more than alienating myself from potential employers and positions in assurance that could get me in the door and eventually onto the career path that I desire?


While your advanced degree will help your chances with the Big 4, we are wondering why you didn’t go with a program that would have allowed you to pursue a tax concentration, since that is your primary interest.

But never mind that, the issue at hand is how you get into these specialty groups without experience or a preferred degree. The answer is: it will be tough. You do have the advantage of being bilingual which will be extremely attractive, especially for any international speciality groups. If you can land a tax position, leverage this strength and communicate your interest in areas of expats and multinational issues. If you’re feeling really ambitious and learning a new language is easy for you, consider picking up a little Mandarin or Japanese to give you an even bigger advantage over your peers.

That may sound crazy but it will make you stand out from other people competing for these sexier jobs in specialty tax and advisory and like you said, if you just have a plain-Jane Masters and not the ideal background, you’ll need to make yourself stand out somehow. These groups are small and they don’t take on many new hires and yes, they do prefer people with the degrees you mentioned.

You also ask, “would this accomplish anything more than alienating myself from potential employers and positions in assurance that could get me in the door[?]” Again, if you’re interested in tax, why are you thinking about interviewing for audit positions? It will make your path to the speciality groups longer and even more difficult. Only pursue this if it’s the last resort.

Get into the tax practice if you can and go from there; your interest in international groups will seem less self-serving. You’ll probably have to do some time in compliance but that will serve as a good foundation for your career goals.

Promotion Watch ’10: KPMG Admits 58 New Partners in U.S.

Despite the Irish blowing it against Michigan, John Veihmeyer managed to compose himself and still allow a few more lucky girls and boys take a seat at the big table.

Congratulations to Our New U.S. Partners

A Message from John Veihmeyer and Henry Keizer 8:56 AM ET, September 15, 2010

We are proud to announce our 58 new partners in the United States!

Through their passion for quality and unyielding commitment to integrity and outstanding service, these new partners are role models for high performance within our organization.

Their dedication to the highest standards of technical excellence, professionalism, teaming and relationship building has helped us make great strides in achieving each of our strategic priorities. And their continued leadership will be essential in capitalizing on the opportunities ahead.

Each of these women and men strive every day through their support and mentoring of fellow professionals to make KPMG an Employer of Choice. They have unique perspectives and experiences – 38% of this year’s new U.S. partner class are women and ethnic minorities. In addition to their diverse backgrounds, over half have worked in more than one office — many on global assignments — and almost 1 in 5 have worked in more than one function. These impressive individual accomplishments exemplify that KPMG truly is a “great place to build a career.”

The significant contributions that these outstanding individuals have made to our firm would not have been possible without the encouragement of spouses, family, friends, co-workers, and mentors, so we also want to thank all those who have supported our new partners through their careers.

Congratulations again to all of our new U.S. partners. Our partners across the firm are proud to welcome them into the KPMG partnership.

Breakdown by practices
Audit: 24
Tax: 12
Advisory: 21
Office of General Counsel: 1

Congrats to all the new partners!

KPMG, Ernst & Young Sneak on to U.S. News Tax Firm Ranking

You may or may not be aware that U.S. News & World Report is the shot caller when it comes to ranking law schools (much to the chagrin of some) and now (to even more chagrin) the magazine is delving into extensive law firm rankings and the Big 4 will enjoy a little bit of perceived prestige that comes along with these rankings.

Christ. We’re barely into rankings/list season and they’ve already chalked up working moms and consulting rankings and U.S. News is now throwing around its weight with this new list.

Granted, virtually no accounting firms will even get a whiff of this list but something tells us that because U.S. News has decided to dive head first into ranking law firms by practice are the Big 4 will be jockeying to make the tax list, even though it is a sliver of a much larger and broader ranking that they won’t be included on at all.

Excuse us while we choke down the vomit that we caught making it’s way out.


Why the hell not?!? U.S. News figured that the world couldn’t do without it’s rankings-for-hire in one more area for the legal field but this time the Big 4 will enjoy a bit of a ride on this wave.

Right. The list. The two of Big Four of course, make their way on the ranking for tax firms: Ernst & Young falls into the coveted Tier 1 (includes 36 firms) and KPMG drops on Tier 2 (47 firms). There were a total out of 119 firms across three tiers.

Admittedly, this is an opportunity for both KPMG and E&Y to boast their tax practice prowess over Deloitte and PwC who don’t appear on the list at all. That being said, Deloitte and PwC enjoy higher spots on the consulting rankings so they’re probably not overly concerned although no one turns down a notch on the bedpost if they can get it.

What this new ranking ultimately will be is one more marketing tool for the firms to use on the impressionable recruits and experienced hires who want to work in top notch – TOP NOTCH! – tax practice. Be it lawyers or CPAs, the firms will tout this ranking to their tax professionals (if not firm-wide) to throw around ONE. MORE. LIST. to impress the trousers off the masses but now people will be saying, “Oh, this is a U.S. News ranking.”

So for the Big 4 to be included in this “prestigious” ranking is a little bit, as Elie Mystal states, like “Christmas morning – if only Santa were a jolly red prestige whore.”

U.S. News Tax Firm Rankings [TaxProf Blog]
Best Law Firms [U.S. News & World Report]
U.S. News Launches First Official Law Firm Rankings [ATL]

Extreme Big 4 Makeover: KPMG Edition

Yesterday we told you about Extreme Big 4 Makeover: PwC Edition. Today we’ve learned that KPMG is getting into the act, although the House of Klynveld had the sense to avoid changing their team colors to match the autumnal palette (Braddock says it reminds him of Pizza Hut).

But more on colors later. We feel that the motivation for the rebranding is likely twofold: 1) They got wind of PwC sexing themselves up and 2) They’re pissed about Dick Bové playing dumb and they’re trying to get the old girl’s attention.

Naturally, it makes the Masters Champ who, after coming of his video extravaganza on Phil Mickelson’s KPMG website, is appearing in this ad in Golf Magazine (or so we’re told, we don’t have a subscription):

Phil m Golf World


In addition to His Leftness being included in the campaign (reminiscent of T. Dubs with Accenture) apparently the firm took out an ad in today’s Financial Times that rocks their new slogan, Cutting Through Complexity™:

KPMGCuttingThroughComplexityprintadvertising


Last but not least, the firm rolled out this internal Brand Book that tells you everything you don’t want to know about the rebranding including the firm’s commitment to it’s favorite hue, ” To bring our brand to life we have a refreshed visual identity and tone of voice which reinforces the essence of our brand. It builds on our current brand equity and the strong ownership we have of the color blue, while placing greater emphasis on the warmth of our wider color palette.”

KPMGBrandBook

One of sources already weighed in saying, “I’m so excited about the opportunities that will be generated by these HUGE changes I don’t know how I will contain myself.” We invite you to share your own thoughts on blue, Phil or whatever you think about KPMG’s new do.

KPMG Pleased That Premature Audit Sign-offs Weren’t on Failed Audits

If you’re the partner on an engagement and you know, deep down in your plums, that the numbers are fine, you probably get pretty anxious to sign off on this bad boy. You want to go on vacation or a golf date with Phil or – if they’re lucky – spend some time with the family. With that in mind, it’s not so unusual that he/she might jump the gun a little and slap down the Johnnie Hancock before all the work gets done.

Unfortunately, as anyone studying for the audit section of the CPA exam will tell you, this is against the rules.


But hey! If the numbers are hunky-dory, there’s not much cause for concern and everyone has a good laugh:

In the case of KPMG, the FRC’s Audit Inspection Unit looked at 15 audits and found that in three cases the auditor’s report had been signed too soon. Significant changes were subsequently made to the accounts in one case.

Paul George, director of auditing at the FRC’s Professional Oversight Board, which includes the AIU, said the early sign-off problem was not limited to KPMG: “It is a profession-wide challenge to some degree.”

KPMG said it accepted the AIU’s comments. “We are pleased to note that in no case did they think that the audit opinion we issued was incorrect,” said Oliver Tant, head of its UK audit arm.

See? It happens everywhere! Plus, it’s not like accounting and auditing are based on rules that anyone takes that seriously, anyway.

Okay, sure signing off early on 20% of the audits sampled sorta looks bad but at least the numbers weren’t wrong. It would be really awkward to explain that.

Watchdog raps KPMG over early audit sign-off [FT]

Grant Thornton Didn’t Promote Me, Do I Go to PwC?

Today in accounting firm musical chairs, a SA3 who got passed over for promotion at GT has an offer to joining soon-to-be rebranded PwC as an SA1/2. WHAT TO DO?!?

Have a question about your career? Worried that you’re too hot for the Big 4 and your hot brain will be overlooked? Trying to decide if you should give it all up and join the circus? Email us at advice@goingconcern.com and we’ll let you know if you should consider becoming the next human cannonball.

Back to our accountant in peril:

I’m a recurring S3 (financial) who was passed up on the manager position because of internal politics [Ed. note: reader admits that this is their opinion]. I have a offer with PWC to join their asset management group as a S1/S2.

Is this career suicide? I have until today to tell GT if i’m leaving or tell PWC that i have to rescind the offer.

I’ve had it with GT and although they said there is a good chance next [year] to make manager, i dont believe the hype.


Timing if of the essence, so we’re on this – Looking forward to a promotion to manager and getting passed over is a tough pill to swallow. All of your hard work that you’ve put in over the last five or so years (that feel like ten) no feels wasted. As you say, you’re not buying the hype any more and we don’t blame you. However, succumbing to your frustration and allowing PwC to knock you down a notch (or two) on the ladder is the last thing we think you should do.

You shouldn’t let any firm take advantage of your vulnerability and devalue your experience just because you were in Casa de Chipman. If you were an associate, the situation might be different but if you’re on the throes of making manager and now it might be at least another year before you’re even being considered for manager, feels like a disservice.

That being said, it doesn’t sound like you’re happy at GT. And being miserable at work sucks. If you’re crawling out of bed, hating your commute and the faces of your co-workers make you want to projectile vomit on their laptops, that’s a serious sign that you need to GTFO.

Luckily, you’ve got options, friend. If you trust your performance coach/counselor, ask them if there are possibilities within GT that you can explore (possibly a practice rotation?).

But if you’re truly burned out on GT, don’t do something rash like take the first offer thrown in front of you. Take your time and make the next career move that’s perfect for you. Don’t settle for the glitz of PwC just because they make it sound like the best shit since paperless audits (they aren’t that cool anyway). Your experience is valuable, go find a company that will reward you for it.

Is PwC Getting a Makeover?

This morning we received an anonymous tip pointing us to a URL that appears be a new look for PricewaterhouseCoopers. The image below is what is can be found over at brand.pwc.com.


It almost looks as if PwC is dropping the “PricewaterhouseCoopers” in favor of simply “PwC,” but that’s just us thinking out loud. If this is, in fact, a rebranding, we have a few questions:

1. When is going down? Just in time for the holidays?

2. Who voted on these Halloween colors? And why all lowercase letters?

3. Why no more PricewaterhouseCoopers? Too big of a mouthful for clients, spouses, kids, etc.?

PwC spokesman Kelly Howard declined to comment. But if you’ve got questions, comments, concerns, chapped hides and so on and so forth with regard to any of this, discuss below.

UPDATE: It’s our understanding that the branding will go “official” internally on Monday and be live October 4th (subject to change?) for the rest of us. Also, it sounds like “PricewaterhouseCoopers” will be used in some “certain cases.” The re-branding is apparently an attempt to create a more “consistent brand.” If you know more, get in touch.

UPDATE 2, September 15th: We’ve got it on good authority that TPTB rolled out the new look today, however it’s not entirely clear whether that’s due to us spoiling the surprise.

Duoyuan Printing Is All Kinds of Screwed Up After Firing Deloitte

By “all kinds of screwed up” we mean “screwed 17 ways to Sunday”. After firing Deloitte last week, two top DY executives (CEO Christopher Holbert and CFO William Suh) have bailed, DYP shares are in the tank (down 47% as of publication) and, oh, they’re going to need to find a new audit committee chairman as their last one, James Zhang, ran for the hills.

Before running, however, he sent this really nice note explaining his motivations:

To: The Board of Duo Yuan Printing(DY).

6th Sept, 2010.

Dear Mr. Chairman and the follow directors of the Board:

Subject: My resignation as Company Audit Committee (AC) Chairman and Independent Director with immediate effect.

It has been almost one year since DY listed in the NYSE. I have to say that working closely with the Chairman, CEO and CFO of the company has been a great pleasure for me.

From Roughly one month ago, I got the phone call from Frank Li, the Audit Partner of Deloitte (DT) to express concerns to the Audit Committee over several financial irregularities and management control weakness. After hearing the full story, I immediately called an AC meeting and upon receiving unanimous approval from the AC as a well as support from the Chairman, the AC immediately engaged Latham Watkins, the US Law Firm, to handle the independent investigation not only to report back to the AC, but also as a part of the audit process requested by DT to give an opinion to the 2010 DY company financials. As our Chairman put it in the board Meeting just now that maybe due to the cross culture differences between US style work and maybe because of the second tier management don’t fully understand the US listing requirements, the investigation has not progressed in the last month. This delay could potentially render the company not filing its annual financial statements on time to the SEC.

In the past week, the Management has suggested to change the auditors of the company from DT to Frazer Frost (FF) who was the company prior auditors. This proposal has just been resolved in the full board meeting and Full AC meeting with voting taking place of 4 against 3 in favor and 2 against 1 in favor.

As the AC chairman and independent Director of the company, I respect the company democratic decision process as stipulated by the company Memorandum and Articles of Association. However, as a qualified UK Chartered Accountant and a trained Professional, I have brought to the attention of the board the following potential risks related to the change of auditors. These risks can be summarized as follows:

1. FF has not yet signed engagement letter with the company which is a risk to the company.

2. Change of auditors during the investigation process could potentially lead to further investigation from the SEC.

3. To change from a Big4 audit firm to a non-Big4 could have very negative impact in the investment community in terms of corporate governance thus lead to potential share price drop and subsequent US class law suit.

4. Even the Company US counsel has indicated in the meeting against change of auditors at this particular time frame.

Keep it classy, JZ, and good luck wherever you end up after this disaster of a company.

Big 4 Land on Vault Consulting Firm Rankings by Practice Area

For those of you that love all-things-lists, Vault unleashed a few more rankings yesterday for the consulting folks, breaking it down to practice area. We’ll dispel with the pleasantries and get right to where the Big 4 (and their spin-offs) crash-landed on various lists.


Economic
9. Deloitte

Energy
4. Accenture
6. Deloitte

Financial
2. Ernst & Young
3. Deloitte
4. PwC
6. KPMG
10. Accenture

Human Resources
5. Deloitte
10. Accenture

Operations
3. Accenture
4. Deloitte
10. KPMG and PwC (tie)

Pharmaceutical and Health Care
6. Deloitte

Business Advisory
5. Deloitte
6. Accenture
7. PwC
8. Ernst & Young

Oh, and because you’re wondering, McKinsey & Co. finished #1 in all but three of the practice areas. Carry on.

Earlier:
Big 4 Have Big Presence on Vault’s Prestige List, Less So in Top 50

Will Defecting from E&Y to PwC Change Anything?

Today in makeshift accounting therapy, a fed up E&Y vet is contemplating a move to arch-rival PwC and wants to know if this is a suicide move.

Have a question about your career? Need advice on how to explain why your Fantasy Football league is always up on your laptop? Looking for advice on how to best flirt with recruits without being creepy? Send us an email with your query to advice@goingconcern.com and will give you the best free advice you’ll ever get.

As for our potential E&Y Benedict Arnold:

I’m at EY, looking at a position one-level above where I am at PWC. Is this a frying-pan/fire situation?

EY as “more people friendly” is a concern, because EY is horrifically NOT people friendly.

I’ve know the guy I would be working for at PWC very well and I think I’m maxed out at EY.


Okay, so not a lot to go on here but we’ll take a stab at this. First off, if you’re maxed out at E&Y then looking for a new gig is the right move. The timing isn’t bad (assuming you’re not in the tax practice) and it sounds like you’ve got a decent lead at PwC. That said…

What makes you think PwC will be better than E&Y? Has the guy that you would be working for told you explicitly that he’s having the time of his life over there? That, besides the PwC Experience, you’ll be getting 40-50 hour weeks, happy hours devoid of assaults and access to professional oral sex providers on a regular basis?

More questions to consider: Does “the guy” stand to get a referral bonus for poaching you? Can you see yourself working for him? This could turn out to one hell of an epic mistake if he gets a few thousand bucks and you end up working for a whip-wielding taskmaster.

Now that we’ve planted the skepticism seed, if “a position one level above” is a legit promotion (title and salary bump), that might be worth considering. If it’s more of a lateral move, then we’d suggest passing unless there were perks like we described above.

Other important things to consider: 1) You will be torching many bridges at E&Y. Are you okay with that? 2) Is your potential new job really what you want to do. We’re making the assumption that you like your work but you’re over life at E&Y. If you don’t like your work then you’ve got a whole other problem. 3) Do you really, really, really, really want to stay in Big 4? Have you seriously asked yourself that question?

Ultimately, the opportunity may be a great one but you’re still taking a big risk assuming your life will be infinitely better working at PwC over E&Y. Proceed with caution.

Are Big 4 Audits in Russia Worthless?

Maybe not in so many words but this whole PricewaterhouseCoopers/Yukos situation has got some people wondering. The FT and the Wall St. Journal both published articles yesterday about the Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Platon Lebedev trial that is close (?) to wrapping up after 18 months. The two men are accused of embezzling mega bucks from Yukos, the Russian oil company.

Khodorkovsky and Lebedev’s lawyers are now claiming that PwC “acted improperly” by withdrawing ten years worth of audits under pressure from the Kremlin. Pressure, the lawyers say, in the form of “a prriminal investigations and a slew of court cases threatened to undermine its ability to operate in the fast-growing Russian market.” Basically, they threatened to throw PwC out of Russia. And it’s pretty difficult to grow your BRIC business without the “R” so PwC pulled the audits.

The firm claims that they up and changed their minds after the prosecutors showed them some evidence that led them to believe that they had been lied to by Yukos management.


Douglas Miller was the lead partner on Yukos – and who is also reportedly under investigation by the California Board of Accountancy – claims that the accusations are is more or less bullshit and that he stands by his decision to pull the audits.

However, Miller also said in his interrogation by prosecutors that “I believe these issues are being examined not so much by the
company’s Russian office managers, but by executives at PriceWaterhouseCoopers’ global, world level.” The Journal reported, “a PWC official said the decision to withdraw the audit opinions was made by Mr. Miller and others in PWC’s Russia office.” Miller is obviously speculating about what the BSDs at PwC Global were discussing over their muffins but obviously this is a problem.

As is pointed out in the FT, this doesn’t really bode well for audit firms – hell for anyone – trying to do business in Russia:

Regardless of where the truth lies, what is emerging is a situation where global audit firms operating in Russia may all be vulnerable to the double jeopardy of auditing the books of notoriously opaque companies, while being regulated by a government able to launch arbitrary attacks. This lose-lose situation could call into question the value of audits that have been hotly sought as a western seal of approval ever since Russian companies began to access international financial markets.

[…]

[I]t underlines how all who operate in Russian finance – from global audit firms to oligarchs to pension fund investors – may still be vulnerable as the legacy of the chaotic era of Boris Yeltsin and the ensuing Putin clampdown lingers on.

In other words, audits seem to have even less value in Russia than they do in the United States. And here in the U.S. more or less everyone agrees that, at best, auditors are of limited usefulness and at worst, they should be stacked alongside the Charmin™.

But as we said before, PwC (or any other firm that wants to take advantage of Russia’s expanding economy) has billions of reasons to buckle to any pressure put on them by the Russkis. And nobody blames them – not even people close to the Khodorkovsky and Lebedev defense team quoted in the FT saying, “We don’t hold anything against them: they had a gun to their heads.”

Wall Street Journal and Financial Times Expose Serious Allegations of PwC Wrongdoing in Auditor’s Reversal on Yukos [Khodorkovsky & Lebedev Communications Center]
Oil Tycoon Says PWC Caved to Pressure [WSJ]
Russia: Chain retraction [FT]
More on PwC and Yukos:
Never Say Nyet – PwC and Moscow Update [Re: The Auditors]