If your employer is of a shrewd nature and didn’t spring for Herman Millers, you need to get off your asses right now! Find out why, after the jump.
And yes, Gmail appears to be down.
Related Posts
A Special Holiday Open Items, With a Few Items Of Our Own
As you've gathered by now, I'm far more "hands on" than Colin ever could be, […]
WSJ: Entrepreneurs Win Tax Case Versus IRS
Get some coffee, we’re about to talk some tax law…
In a major win for small businesses, a U.S. Tax Court ruled in favor of farmers in Nebraska who claimed that losses from their LLC were not “passive” as the IRS has been arguing for years.
As a result of the ruling, losses from investments in LLP’s and LLC’s held by active participants will be allowed to offset said individual’s personal and investment income.
Prior to the ruling some losses were being carried forward for years until the investment produced a profit or was sold and because the case was heard in U.S. Tax Court, the ruling applies to all states.
The IRS, as always, seems to have outs. Sayeth the Journal, “The agency could appeal the Tax Court ruling to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. It also could try to get Congress to change the law or try a new strategy to maintain the status quo.”
Okay, we made it through that…
Entrepreneurs Win Tax Case Versus IRS [WSJ]
Auditors, The PCAOB Still Doesn’t Think Too Highly of the Job You’re Doing
The PCAOB is considering telling auditors how to do their jobs issuing guidance on communication with audit committees and a new auditing standard on related parties, according to Compliance Week. Not to worry though, they’re going to ask the bigwigs on the Standing Advisory Group for their $0.02:
The PCAOB also plans to bounce some ideas off the advisory group for a new standard to govern how auditor should communicate with audit committees, in part to establish some new guidance regarding communication about management judgments and estimates. According to a briefing paper provided to SAG members, PCAOB is looking for ideas on how to get past boilerplate dialogue to achieve more effective, robust communications between auditors and audit committees.
Auditors? Boilerplate dialogue? Is the PCAOB questioning your ability to ask substantive questions? For shame. Obviously Peekatboobs will be able to develop much better, non-boilerplate questions than you and then you’ll be required to ask those questions of the audit committee. That’ll get the job done.
Likewise, auditors, you’ve simply dropped the ball on related parties since, “financial relationships with related parties have proved important in recent corporate scandals, and the board’s inspection and enforcement actions suggest some auditors aren’t skeptical enough when evaluating such relationships and transactions.”
The infinite wisdom of the PCAOB is clearly on display here. Auditors, it’s going to become necessary that your skepticism is going to reach a physical level or at least the threat of such. Your skepticism in words and on paper is simply not getting the job done.
You’ll have to get Chuck Liddell to beat some people down or simply laying heat out on the conference table during discussions to get your point across, otherwise, clients are going to just keep taking advantage of you.
This will be the plan until the next financial crisis of course when the PCAOB will assess that the questions and methods developed now turn out to be boilerplate and ineffective and it’ll be back to the drawing board again. Don’t get too comfortable.
PCAOB Considers Rules on Communication, Related Parties [Compliance Week]