Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Footnotes: Netflix Up; More On Online Taxes; Anonymous Auditors Should Be Outed | 04.22.13

Posted on by Adrienne Gonzalez

Netflix is on the move, in a good way. I'm sure we can thank Kevin Spacey. [CNN]

There is still at least one dude who believes in Microsoft. Maybe a little too much. [WSJ]

Let's just tax online purchases already so we can stop talking about it, mmkay? [US News and World Report]

Headline of the day: "Accountant Allegedly Steals To Pay For Divorce, Breast Implants," it's a far better take on this than the link Colin provided you this morning [AOL]

And from FT (so it's subscriber only), Regulator urges end to auditor anonymity [FT]

Dylan Matthews of WaPo seems to believe high alcohol taxes will curb crime. Might I say that I mostly only drink at home, alone, and pass out before I can commit any crimes? [Washington Post]

Just read FASB Issues Standard on the Liquidation Basis of Accounting and your day is complete [Herald Online]

Posted in Uncategorized

Related Posts

Accounting News Roundup: New PwC Leadership and a Non-GAAP Task Force | 06.01.16

New PwC leadership Yesterday we talked a little about Deloitte UK's new partner class. Now […]

Accounting News Roundup: Brits Going After Olympus; FASB Panel Pushes Back on Lease Proposal; Dress (like the Boss) for Success | 09.04.13

British fraud agency to prosecute Olympus over accounting scandal [Reuters]Britain's fraud agency will prosecute Olympus […]

Here’s What Charlie Rangel Missed at His Ethics Trial

He really should have stuck around. He won on a couple of ’em, which is probably better than most people were expecting.

 


Of course Chuck isn’t going quietly:

How can anyone have confidence in the decision of the Ethics Subcommittee when I was deprived of due process rights, right to counsel and was not even in the room? I can only hope that the full Committee will treat me more fairly, and take into account my entire 40 years of service to the Congress before making any decisions on sanctions.

[…]

The Committee’s findings are even more difficult to understand in view of yesterday’s declaration by the Committee’s chief counsel, Blake Chisam, that there was no evidence of corruption or personal gain in his findings.

From here forward, it is my hope that the full Ethics Committee will take into consideration the opinion of its chief counsel as well as the statement by Rep. Bobby Scott, a member of its investigatory subcommittee who said that any failings in my conduct were the result of “good faith mistakes” and were caused by “sloppy and careless recordkeeping, but were not criminal or corrupt.”

Earlier:
Charlie Rangel Has Heard Enough