Category:

What Can Be Purchased at the McGladrey Store?

There are a few things that you take for granted when working at a public accounting firm. First, your superiors will take you to nice lunches. This practice starts at the top and trickles down to the lowliest associates getting approval to throw steaks at interns. Second, you get a computer. It may not be the greatest piece of technology you’ve every used but rest assured, you won’t be crunching numbers using a pencil and paper. Third, you get tchotchkes. Tons of them. Pens, Nalgenes, poorly knit polos. The works. All of the firm swag your little heart desires can be yours. So it’s especially shocking to learn that McGladrey has a “McGladrey Store,” where items can be purchased. We don’t have a copy of the mail-order catalog but it’s safe to assume that there are items emblazoned with “McGladrey” in ample supply.

I learned of this “store” because Mickey G’s is rolling out a “Work Smarter” initiative so that the firm’s employees can maximize their time doing “high-value” work. What “high-value” entails is not entirely clear but presumably it doesn’t involve doing “research on blogs.” ANYWAY, McG boss C.E. Andrews emailed the troops to encourage them to take an online training to learn a few “Work Smarter” tips and to get the creative juices flowing so that they can submit their own “Work Smarter” ideas to the brass. For the first 25 employees that manage to throw out ideas that aren’t completely awful, they will receive “$50 to spend at the McGladrey Store.”

After the training, you will probably find yourself full of good ideas on how McGladrey can Work Smarter. Don’t keep them to yourself! Share them through our Lean thinking website and be eligible to win prizes. The first 25 people who submit an actionable idea will win $50 to spend at the McGladrey Store.

Our tipster in this matter, expands with some details:

[T]his “lean fundamentals” initiative seems irritating similar to KPMG’s “Next Step” program that I’ve seen come across your website. The dangling carrot of $50 in McGladrey bucks (cash value: 1/100 of a Monopoly bill) is particularly patronizing. Just another example of the cheapskate culture that seems to ooze from the brass at Mickey G’s these days…unless of course we’re talking shelling out for putting green-sized cakes and headlining golf tournaments that take place during the freak show of the PGA season (aka the”Fall Series”).

Unfortunately, Oanda doesn’t have a exchange rate for “McGladrey bucks” so there’s no way for us to confirm this valuation at this time. Regardless, it’s still not obvious if the $50 is enough to get you a stress ball, let alone a chance to take Natalie Gulbis out for drinks. We’d love to see a product list with prices in order to confirm/disconfirm some of our suspicions, so do get in touch with any particulars.

Number of U.S. Expatriates Still Growing

Had it up to here [bridge of your nose or so] with taxes in the United States? Giving more thought to GTFO and never coming back? You’re not alone.

More people expatriated from the U.S. in the first quarter of 2011 than in the first quarter of 2010. This after the increase in Q1 of ’10 was more than double than Q1 of ’09. Perhaps this is due to some sort of a “I need to get the hell out of this country” resolution but you could also assume that these folks don’t align themselves with the Patriotic Millionaires.

[ITB via TaxProf]

Fraudbusters Get a Lesson in Internet Stalking

Yesterday I sat in a session at the ACFE Fraud Conference and Exhibit entitled “Effectively Using Social Networks and Social Media in Fraud Examinations” with a few hundred [?] fraudbusters and I got the impression that few people in the room were social media savvy (in the stalk-y sense, anyway). I came to this conclusion after watching most of the hands in the room go up when asked “who thinks social media is a waste of time?” and saw nearly same amount of hands raised when asked “do you have some sort of social network presence?”

Cynthia Hetherington, President of Hetherington Group, described herself as “[A] librarian, a technologist and licensed private investigator. So, I’m a nerd, I’m a geek and I’m a dick,” was the speaker for this particular session and a lot of her talk introduced the crowd to the idea of stalking people on the Internet. She knew her crowd well, as a joke about Laverne & Shirley’s apartment got plenty of laughs, while a quip about Snooki got crickets. This reinforced my suspicion that the idea that of curating information about financial crooks using Facebook and Twitter was new to many in the room.

Now, the majority of people listening may have known it was possible to find partially-nude pics on someone’s Facebook profile or Twitter account (which she demonstrated in one non-Anthony Weiner example) but maybe they hadn’t considered that they could learn a lot of other useful information about someone they were investigating.

In short, Ms. Herrington explained to the biz casual crowd that you can find out a lot of information about a person just by poking around their social media accounts. Whether it’s Facebook, Twitter, or LinkedIn, you can learn someone’s likes, dislikes, their political leanings, where they’ve lived, who their friends are, etc. and use that information to build a profile, analyze behavior or in some cases, find out where someone maybe hiding.

What does all this mean? Opportunity my friends. If you fancy yourself social media and Internet savvy, you probably have a leg up on many of the vets in the fraud and forensics business when it comes to poking around the Web and finding information on people of interest to you. Sure you may not have their years of investigative expertise, extensive contacts or an aging wardrobe but you may have successfully Web-stalked ex-significant others, crushes and completely random people to learn things that they’ve volunteered into cyberspace. And here you thought your creepy behavior was completely worthless.

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

Note: Private Lap Dances Are Not Tax Exempt in New York

This one is for you, ladies of the night.

A 2005 audit by the New York Division of Taxation found gentlemen’s club Nite Moves owed over $125,000 in sales tax on door admissions and private lap dance sales. The club argued that dances are a performance, not a taxable “service.” We’ll leave that one alone.

A New York State appellate court ruled last Thursday that private lap dances are not a dramatic or musical art performance, despite Nite Moves’ claims to the contrary. It is unclear whether any state taxation authorities partook in said private lap dances to make this determination.

In this case, the burden of proof rested on the club, who did not provide enough evidence to satisfy their claim, according to the five judge panel that made the ruling. “In short, petitioner was denied the requested relief due not to the nature of its business but, rather, because of the inadequacy of its proof,” they said.

The club’s lawyer, Andrew McCullough, plans to appeal the decision. “We brought in the foremost expert in the field,” he said. “She is the one in this country who has made a complete and detailed study of the art of exotic dance and if they are not going to believe her I don’t know who you believe.”

That expert had not actually seen Nite Moves’ dancers but other, similar exotic performances. As any connoisseur of naked gyrating women knows, not all naked gyrating is created equal.

Tax laws in New York State require sales taxes to be collected and paid on admission to or the use of any place of amusement except for dramatic or musical arts performances.

Maybe if the strippers wore historical costumes or mime makeup they’d have a case.

Hey, Nite Moves, you really should have called the Tax Domme, she knows all about this stuff.

New York court rules private lap dances not tax exempt [Reuters]

Accounting News Roundup: Chinese Investors Say ‘Meh’ to Accounting Scandals; Cat Lady Beats IRS; A $90 Million Mistake Will Get You Fired | 06.13.11

Richest Americans Get $1.4 Million Tax Cut in Pawlenty Plan [Bloomberg]
The top 0.1 percent of U.S. taxpayers would save an average of $1.4 million in taxes under the economic plan of Republican presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty, according to an independent analysis. Pawlenty’s $11.6 trillion tax-cut plan, which reduces rates on income, capital gains, interest, estates and dividends, is almost three times larger than the proposals endorsed by House Republicans.

Chinese investors shrug off U.S. accounting scandal fallout [ two dozen Chinese retail investors gathered at the dimly lit public hall of a brokerage firm in Shanghai, the accounting scandals involving U.S.-listed Chinese companies are far from the hot topic of the day’s trading as they swap strategies over tea and cigarettes. Many of the investors, mostly retirees, have not even heard about the saga over fake numbers among some Chinese firms that has shaken U.S. investors and stunned regulators there.

Stray Cat Strut: Woman Beats IRS [WSJ]
When Jan Van Dusen appeared before a U.S. Tax Court judge and a team of Internal Revenue Service lawyers more than a year ago, there was more at stake than her tax deduction for taking care of 70 stray cats. Hanging in the balance were millions of dollars in annual tax deductions by animal-rescue volunteers across the nation—and some needed clarity on the treatment of volunteers’ unreimbursed expenses for 1.55 million other IRS-recognized charities. Early this month, Ms. Van Dusen learned she had won her case. “I was stunned,” she said. “It feels great to have established this precedent.”

Fuzzy Accounting Enriches Groupon [NYT]
Groupon, the Internet coupon company, had an operating loss of $420 million last year. But it thinks investors in its initial public offering should instead look at “adjusted consolidated segment operating income,” or adjusted C.S.O.I. It is easy to see why Groupon wants prospective shareholders to view its accounts this way. Strip out marketing expenses, acquisition-related costs, stock compensation, interest expense and payments to the tax man and, presto, the start-up earned $60.6 million.

VF to Buy Timberland for $2 Billion in Cash [WSJ]
Branded-apparel company VF Corp. agreed to buy Timberland Co. for about $2 billion, taking advantage of the footwear company’s beaten-down stock price to boost its outdoor and action-sports businesses. VF’s offer of $43 a share represents a premium of 43% to Friday’s close. Shares of Timberland, which specializes in boots and outdoor apparel, traded above $45 as recently as late April, but a first-quarter report that fell well short of estimates sent the stock tumbling. Its earnings in the period fell 30% as it spent more on planned initiatives and saw higher product costs.

$90 million accounting mistake costs county official his job [WBEZ]
The former worker, Faisal Abbasi, 36, of Prospect Heights, accidentally made double entries for county cigarette and sales tax revenue from 2009, said Cook County Chief Financial Officer Tariq Malhance. “It was really a human error that one person booked it, and then, not realizing that it had been booked before … he [duplicated it], and booked again,” Malhance said. But Abbasi, who was laid off from his county job when the Preckwinkle administration took office in February, said he is simply a scapegoat for the mistake. The idea that he alone could have caused such an error is “a bunch of hogwash and smoke and mirrors,” Abbasi said. “You can’t just put in a $20 million or $30 million dollar entry without the external auditors looking at it.,” he told WBEZ on Friday.

Vote to end ethanol subsidies revives Coburn-Norquist tax revenue battle [The Hill]
Coburn successfully pushed for a Tuesday vote on a measure to cut subsidies for ethanol, a proposal that the Oklahoma Republican and Norquist, the anti-tax crusader, feuded over earlier this year. Both Coburn and Norquist have said they opposed a tax credit that gives refiners and gasoline blenders 45 cents for every gallon of ethanol bought and combined with gasoline – a policy the Government Accountability Office says cost about $5.4 billion in 2010.

Yes, the SEC *Has* Heard About the Trend of Accounting Problems at Reverse Merger Companies

The Securities and Exchange Commission warned investors about the risk of fraud, accounting problems and other abuses at companies that obtain stock listings through so-called reverse mergers.

The warning on Thursday comes amid a rash of accounting scandals involving China-based companies listed on U.S. exchanges through reverse mergers, or mergers with U.S. shell companies. “Many companies either fail or struggle to remain viable following a reverse merger,” the SEC said in an investor bulletin. Investors should be especially wary of reverse merger operating companies that are “nonreporting,” meaning they are not required to file reports with the SEC, the agency said. “Keep in mind that information from online blogs, social networking sites and even a company’s own website may be inaccurate and sometimes intentionally misleading,” the SEC said. [Reuters]

You May Have Noticed People in Deloitte T-Shirts Running Around Your City Today

That’s because it’s Deloitte IMPACT Day which means no one is actually “billing” but instead providing services and time pro bono at 800 events across the country.

Three-quarters of the firm’s people are participating in various events including some in Boston working on fund Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the Memphis Botanic Garden. Surely some people just called in sick and started drinking at noon but let’s not focus on that. If you’ve got pics or other stories to share from your event, get in touch. [Deloitte]

There’s Some Fuss About Groupon’s Revenue…or Profits…or Something

You may have heard that the company that encourages people to go broke by saving money, Groupon, filed a S-1 with the SEC last week to go public. It’s been a matter of hot debate as to whether this company is the real deal or simply another house of coupons. One matter that has several people sc is how the company accounts for its revenue. A reader dropped us this note yesterday:

Caleb

I am not one to bring up accounting questions on your blog as its not your web site’s background [Ed. note: Uh, you mean, accounting?]. I was wondering if you could post one question and make an exception as it relates to Groupon. How on earth did Groupon get away with Gross Revenue treatment and not net revenue? All my accounting friends from the Big 4 and even people who do not work on the Groupon audit at E&Y are stumped. All the literature points to net revenue which means they would not report gross revenue of 900 million but rather 200 million or so which represents their cut. Given how companies are valued on multiple of revenue this seems like a big issue. Any help would be appreciated by your readers.

Now it’s not exactly clear what our reader is referring to (feel free to comment below if you understand) but here’s a clip from the S-1:

Sorry for the squishiness. As you can see, Groupon is reporting revenue for 2010 of over $700 million (not sure about $900 million). They have a cost of revenue (aka cost of goods sold) of over $400 million with a “gross profit” of $279 million. Now, if you’re thinking “gross profit” should be “net revenue” you’re not alone.

From CNBC, there appears to be a debate over semantics:

Groupon accounts for its revenue differently than say eBay, and in a way that some say is misleading to potential investors. The company defines revenue as “the purchase price paid by customers.” Then there’s the issue of “the cost of revenue,” leaving the company with what it calls “gross profit,” which is “the amount of revenue we retain after paying an agreed upon percentage of the purchase price to the featured merchant.”

Here’s the thing: Many companies like eBay […], which also take a fee for transactions, would consider that “gross profit” number a “net revenue number.” UCLA Anderson School’s accounting lecturer Gordon Klein says the S-1 uses terms in a way he’s never used them before, and this unusual accounting tells him that investors should “run from the stock.” Others say this is a non-issue: Wedbush securities analyst Lou Kerner says that the company has done a totally adequate job outlining its accounting approach. Kerner says whether the company reports its revenue before or after direct costs should have zero impact on investors evaluation of the company.

And co-founder Andrew Mason admits that Groupon does things a little differently. Under a section entitled “We don’t measure ourselves in conventional ways” he writes, “we track gross profit [as a metric], which we believe is the best proxy for the value we’re creating.” But that’s all the explanation he gives. Later the filing states, “We believe gross profit is an important indicator for our business because it is a reflection of the value of our service to our merchants.” And under “How we measure our business” things are equally vague:

Gross profit. Our gross profit is the amount that we retain after paying our merchants an agreed upon percentage of the purchase price to the featured merchant. We believe gross profit is an important indicator for our business because it is a reflection of the value of our service to our merchants. Gross profit is influenced by the mix of deals we offer. For example, gross profit can vary depending on the category of product or service offered in a particular deal. Likewise, gross profit can be adversely impacted by offers that we make for the principal purpose of acquiring new subscribers or establishing our brand and building scale in a new market.

Throughout the S-1, the term “gross profit” is used 52 times. If you’re used to reading SEC Filings, the term may throw you off but ultimately the numbers are what theyare and the terms used seem secondary. If you believe “gross profit” is a bullshit metric for this business, fine that’s one thing but if they choose to use slightly unorthodox terminology, does that mean investors should ‘run from the stock’? Personally, I don’t happen to be customer of any of the banks underwriting this thing, so this of little consequence but accountants like to sweat the details, so feel free to make a case either way in the comments.

Confirmed: There Is a Shortage of Good Accountants in the Sex Industry

Way back in March of 2010, we shared with you a plight in our country: there simply are not enough good accountants serving professionals working in the sex industry. At the time we learned of Companions (NSFW unless looking at semi-nude women is kosher), an escort service in Salt Lake City whose proprietors slightly underreported their income which resulted in a tax evasion conviction. We wondered if this particular industry was dry of good accountants and tax advisors who might be able to assist entrepreneurs such as these and the professionals they employ to avoid similar situations.

As happens from time to time, someone with direct knowledge reached out to us and we now have at least one person on record confirming our suspicions:

Hello Caleb,

I came across your March 23, 2010 article, Is the Shortage of Good Accountants in the Sex Industry an Opportunity? and felt compelled to write. You see, I am a tax preparer that has been servicing the adult industry since 2006, doing my best to help those in the industry with knowledge and compassion. What began as helping a few phone sex operators and dancers file their tax returns with dignity has grown into a big part of my business. So, the answer to your question is, yes, the shortage of good accountants in the Sex Industry is indeed an opportunity – for those who wish to practice with ethics and respect. If you wish, you may find more about me and what I do from my website www.taxdomme.com.

I am now eager to peruse the rest of your website.

Best,
Lori, The Tax Domme

For anyone in need of services, the Tax Domme has a new office location in downtown Seattle and if you’re looking to carve out your own niche practice, you can get in touch with Lori for tips on anything you might want to know. For example, what happens when a well-to-do john needs a companion on a round-the-world trip? If animals are a regular part of the business, is it better to lease or buy? Would whips, chains, spreaders, etc. purchased by dominatrix be eligible for a §179 deduction? All relevant questions that have no doubt come up in the world of the Tax Domme.

So here’s an opportunity to be had people. As long as you manage to keep things professional you can cater to a virtually recession-proof industry. Can’t say we never told you.