Going Concern

CFOs

There’s at Least One Interesting Theory Out There About the Wells Fargo CFO’s Sudden Resignation

Caleb Newquist
February 16, 2011

Last week, we told you about Wells Fargo’s announcement that their CFO gave himself an early birthday gift by throwing a retirement party for himself. As previously mentioned, Howard Atkins’s departure was a little mysterio and no one had any theories (crackpot or otherwise) on the Atkins’s march in. That all changed yesterday when Christopher Whalen, an analyst at Institutional Risk Analytics issued a report that stated that he, for one, wasn’t buying the “personal issues” story put out by the bank:

“The departure of Atkins, we are led to believe, was not merely the result of personal issues, but reflects an ongoing internal dispute within [Wells Fargo’s] executive suite regarding the bank’s disclosure,” he writes.

Whalen then goes on to argue that Wells Fargo’s “public behavior suggests significant problems in the bank’s internal systems and controls as defined by the Sarbanes-Oxley law. We further understand that some officials of [Wells Fargo], increasingly uncomfortable with the bank’s aggressive public disclosure regime, have reached out to regulators because of concerns regarding accounting issues.”

The Stagecoach Gang, for their part, is sticking to their story citing the “personal reasons” and their spokesman dismissed Whalen’s report with “pfffft” and a wave of the hand, saying, “I haven’t heard anything like that. It’s speculation. I’m not going to comment on it.”

Wells Fargo CFO Exit Tied to Disclosure: Analyst [The Street]

PwC Report Shocker: Consumers Who Pirate Video Are ‘Enticed by Free Content’

Caleb Newquist
February 16, 2011

If you can believe that.

[A]ccording to a report by PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC), those lessons don’t relate well to a generation of broadband mobile users who still prefer to go searching for free content rather than pay even the smallest price.

“Many consumers who say they commit online piracy are enticed by free content” despite having access to “an astonishing variety of movies videos and television shows–on multiple platforms–faster than ever before,” the report concludes.

The report’s key findings are topped by the fact that 81 percent of surveyed consumers say they will continue pirating video despite concerns about computer viruses, the legality of their actions and inferior quality/fidelity of the content. It also reported a crossover effect in that “40 percent of those who report pirating content via traditional methods said they will probably also pirate on mobile devices within the next six months.”

PwC: Video pirates “enticed by free content” [FierceCable]
The speed of life [PwC]

Accounting News Roundup: Madoff Speaks; Why a Tax Pro Is Worth the Money; Crime Pays…Behind Bars | 02.16.11

Caleb Newquist
February 16, 2011

From Prison, Madoff Says Banks ‘Had to Know’ of Fraud [NYT]
In many ways, however, Mr. Madoff seemed unchanged. He spoke with great intensity and fluency about his dealings with various banks and hedge funds, pointing to their “willful blindness” and their failure to examine discrepancies between his regulatory filings and other information available to them. “They had to know,” Mr. Madoff said. “But the attitude was sort of, ‘If you’re doing something wrong, we don’t want to know.’ ”

Why It’s Worth Paying for a Tax Pro [WSJ]
To save money last year, Anthony Fasano tried preparing his new business’s first tax return on his own. Then reality sank in. “I realized I really had no understanding of the tax laws from a business standpoint,” says Mr. Fasano, founder of Powerful Purpose Associates, an executive-coaching company he runs out of his home in Ridgewood, N.J. “I was just winging it.”

Nonprofits and International Financial Reporting Standards [AW]
Anyone who has looked at a nonprofit financial statement over the past two years might recognize the term “Fair Value Measurements” in the footnotes. This is just one example of how a joint project between the FASB and IASB has affected the reporting of U.S. nonprofit organizations. On an ongoing basis, U.S. nonprofits can expect to see changes in U.S. GAAP that will impact their reporting requirements for years to come.

Replace the Big Four with Audits by Government? More Heat in the Kitchen — and Less Light [Re:Balance]
An excellent column from Jim Peterson although I feel like he missed an opportunity to include a cockroaches metaphor.

Should Faculty be Required to Fill Out Time Sheets? [TaxProf Blog]
The billable hour goes to school.

Is Your Employee’s Cell Phone a Security Breach Waiting to Happen? [CPA Trendlines]
Not to mention the sexting!

A Question for the CFO of Green Mountain Coffee Roasters [White Collar Fraud]
Sam Antar is puzzled: “How was Green Mountain Coffee Roasters able to report income before taxes in its Timothy’s Coffee of the World Inc. subsidiary that exceeded revenues in the thirteen-weeks ended June 26, 2010?”

Trump and the Mets? Anything Is Possible [NYT]
Or running for President. Whichever.

Cheating IRS nets inmates $39 million [DFP]
Crime Pays!

Oral Arguments Heard in Campbell v. PricewaterhouseCoopers

Caleb Newquist
February 16, 2011

~ Update below with link to audio of the proceedings

Last month we caught you up on Campbell v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, the wage and hour lawsuit filed by employees of the firm, claiming to be non-exempt and thus available for overtime. Oral arguments were heard today at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco and it marks the most recent step in a case that could have wide repercussions in California. Francine McKenna has a good rundown over at Forbes, including sta��rshaw, the plaintiffs’ attorney. PwC and their lead counsel, Dan Thomasch of Orrick, have declined to comment at this time.

In today’s proceedings, both sides were allowed to make their arguments and answered questions from a three-judge panel. We’ve obtained the briefs for both sides and we’ll give you a taste of each. First, from the plaintiffs:

PwC argues that Attest Associates satisfy the Professional Exemption because—notwithstanding the routine and nondiscretionary nature of their work—PwC claims that they are functionally indistinguishable from fully licensed accountants, doctors, lawyers, and engineers. As a matter of law, however, the text, structure, and drafting history of the Professional Exemption limit its application to licensed accountants, and Associates are not licensed. Second, PwC argues that Attest Associates satisfy the Wage Order’s Administrative Exemption because they work “under only general supervision” despite up to six layers of managers who are responsible for Associates’ work. That argument fails, however, because PwC has not pointed to sufficient evidence to create a triable issue of fact that Associates “work along specialized or technical lines”—much less that they do so “under only general supervision”—as required by the Administrative Exemption.

The argument goes into detail from there addressing three key arguments: 1) The Professional Exemption Does Not Apply to Attest Associates; 2) The Administrative Exemption Does Not Apply to Attest Associates; 3) The Rules Governing Professions Other Than Accounting Do Not Help PwC. You can see the brief in its entirety on the next pages.

PwC addresses all three arguments in their brief; this is a portion from the brief’s introduction:

Put simply, nothing in the Wage Order precludes unlicensed accountants from being shown to be exempt under subsection (b) of the Professional Exemption. Plaintiffs’ argument that the “drafting history” of the wage order at issue shows an intention on the part of the [Industrial Welfare Commission] to prohibit unlicensed accountants from being professionally exempt should be rejected, because the language and structure of the Professional Exemption are not ambiguous, and contain no such prohibition. Even the District Court did not accept Plaintiffs’ tortured reading of the text of the Professional Exemption, or claim to find unambiguous intent on the part of the [Industrial Welfare Commission] to exclude from eligibility for the Professional Exemption all unlicensed members of the accounting profession — and inevitably by extension, all unlicensed lawyers, doctors, dentists, optometrists, architects, engineers, and teachers. Doing so is flatly contrary to the overriding principle governing application of exemptions from overtime provisions, which is to consider individual employees’ work duties.

And their brief outlines a direct counter to the plaintiffs’ brief: 1) Plaintiffs’ Argument That Accountants Can Only Qualify for a Professional Exemption Under Subsection (a) Is Unsupportable 2) PwC Is Entitled to Show That Its Attest Associates Satisfy the “General Supervision” Requirement of the Administrative Exemption; 3) The Impact of the District Court’s Order Is Not Limited to the Profession of Accounting.

So what we’ve got here is…failure to agree on how the ambiguous (or not) California law is and how it applies specifically to unlicensed audit associates. Are they really just cogs in the wheel, bowing to their superiors as the plaintiffs argue? Or are they responsible professionals who are engaged in a challenging occupation that warrants exemption? The 9th Circuit will have transcripts and audio from the proceedings available on its website at some point tomorrow and we’ll update this post with them when they’re available. As for a resolution, it will be several months before we find out what the 9th Circuit rules and then, there’s still a trial to be had. Stay tuned.

UPDATE: Audio is now available for those interested. You can listen to the proceedings here.

2010 01 29 Br of Appellees

Efiled Reply Brief

News
Tax

More Appeasement in Obama’s Proposed Budget

GoingConcern
February 16, 2011

President Obama presented his nearly $4 trillion budget, proposing to cut more than $1 trillion from Federal programs over the next ten years, with $200 billion in cuts to occur over the next two years. Although these cuts may appear, at first glance, significant to the average American, in light of the recently enacted tax cuts of $858 billion over the next two years, that $200 billion of proposed spending cuts leaves $658 billion of thoted for.

In balancing our national budget, Obama and Congress are focusing on the wrong side of the financial equation. The projected deficit in 2011 is $1.65 trillion; however, the whole non-defense discretionary spending budget in 2010 was $477 billion. Even if all non-defense discretionary spending were eliminated, there would still remain a deficit of over $1.1 trillion. The math is clear that Congress cannot eliminate deficit spending by budget cuts. Taxes will need to be raised.

Some of the cuts that President Obama is proposing in his budget include $300 million for community block grants, $2.35 billion for low income home energy assistance program, and $400 billion from a five-year domestic spending freeze, as well as reductions in pell grants, graduate school loans, community access, etc. But all of these cuts do not come close to offsetting the lost revenues from the extension of the tax cuts to the rich.

A pattern has emerged in Obama’s dealings with the Republicans. Obama agreed with the Republican argument to give tax cuts to the rich to help the economy. Now he is proposing to cut programs for the middle class and the poor to balance the budget. In doing such, Obama is moving the political fulcrum to the right. His approach of pre-emptively offering something—whether it be tax cuts for the rich or budget cuts affecting the poor and middle class—instead of negotiating a quid pro quo, is effectively pushing the Republicans further to the right, seeing the prospect of gaining even more ground.

Although compromise is demanded in politics, leadership cannot be defined by compromise alone. There are principles worth fighting for; and leaders must be willing to mobilize public opinion in support of those principles. Since our political system is rigged because of campaign finance and lobbying, a leader professing change and reform needs to present a different narrative to the populace. Churchill, Teddy Roosevelt, and Franklin Roosevelt recognized the value of the bully pulpit. Despite his rhetorical skills, Obama has failed to do so. His posture of appeasement will in all likelihood allow the Republicans to balance the budget on the backs of the working class and low income Americans to the benefit of Wall Streeters and Multinational Corporations, who offshore jobs, brought about the financial crisis, and robbed trillions from the American people. Since Obama is seeking re-election in 2012, and is charting his own course, he will not lead the American people to the Promised Land.

America needs major tax reform. The extension of tax cuts to people who need them the least was the last thing Congress needed to do. Some Democrats want to cut $40 billion in subsidies to the oil companies for five years; however, Republicans refuse to cut these subsidies to the oil companies, preferring to cut programs for the poor and middle class. Moreover, in spite of two wars costing $120 billion per year and an inflation adjusted military budget larger than those in the Bush years and the Cold War, neither party desires to cut military spending, which constitutes 58% of the discretionary spending budget.

Reform will never come from Congress nor a President like Obama. It will require people outside of Washington working with allies inside Congress in order to stop this disconnect between what is transpiring in Washington and what this country needs. It will require people coming together as they did in Egypt in a pro-democracy movement. The question is, can and will the people of America come together before it is too late.

The JDA

New Research Suggests Accrual Revelation About Earnings and Trading Strategy

Adrienne Gonzalez
February 15, 2011

Professor Russell Lundholm may not have intended it to turn out this way but may have inadvertently revolutionized the accrual anomaly and not so incidentally points out that no one else seems to have figured this out. “It’s about the composition of earnings and what percent were due to accruals,” he said about his recent paper, published in the January/February American Accounting Association’s Accounting Review.

Think about it this way: a company with a lot of cash…has a lot of cash. It’s obvious that cold, hard cash can be used by a company at any point. Accruals, on the other hand, aren’t always as easily converted into a pile of dollar bills that can be shoved into a truck and sent to debtors or suppliers for items the company needs. Forgive me for going out on a limb here but it then seems obvious that a company low on accruals (or accounting tricks) should reasonably underperform. That’s not the point of the work, though. It’s about looking at earnings minus accruals:

Employing corporate data spanning 19 years, the authors — [Russell] Lundholm, [Nader] Hafzalla (now deceased), and Matt Van Winkle of Voyant Advisers, LLC of San Diego — compare results computed via the traditional method and via the new method for both operating accruals and total accruals. For both operating and total accruals the new method yields significantly better returns, with the sharpest difference being seen for operating accruals (net income minus cash from operations); there, the traditional model yields an annual return that is about 6.5% greater than that of a portfolio of similarly-sized firms, and the new model produces an abnormal annual return that is about 11.7% greater than that of similarly-sized firms.

People have figured out this strategy but the new bit is that Lundholm, Hafzalla and Van Winkle look at it as a new equation: is picking out a stock dud as easy as figuring out who has a bunch of accruals?

Lundholm points to examples where a high level of accruals preceded poor stock performance.

Accruals at Monsanto Co, the world’s biggest seed producer, were 58 percent of earnings for the previous four quarters when the company reported results on January 6, 2010, according to Lundholm. That was in the top 10 percent of all U.S. companies.

Since then, its shares have dropped 13 percent, while the S&P 500 index is up about 16 percent.

Recommended reading in relation to this subject, Lundholm’s paper in its entirety: Percent Accruals by Lundholm, Hafzalla and Van Winkle. We’ll take all the accounting revolutions (or revelations) we can get.

Career Center

Busy Season Problem Du Jour: The Kleptomaniac Co-worker

Caleb Newquist
February 15, 2011

Today’s round of minor irritations from our British sister from another mister:

Further to the “snorting employee” post, any ideas on how to deal with a colleague who goes into my desk drawers to get labels and paper clips and the like, when I am actually sitting at my desk?

They are a relatively new employee and I have been showing them some aspects of how to do their job. It is really my own fault for not stopping them when they started doing it, but now it really irritates me and I’m not sure of the most painless way to deal with it other than to just tell them to stop and use their own drawers! I hate any kind of confrontation, especially since we have to sit next to each other.

Any diplomatic ideas?

I don’t know about you all but diplomacy just doesn’t fly over here in States, so an accounting firm version of the Bush Doctrine seems to be the way to go. Let’s kick a few ideas around shall we?

When your fellow cube farmer comes digging around your drawer do you:

A) Allow them to find the item they need and walk back to their desk, wait five minutes, then proceed to their workspace and violently snatch said item off their desk/out of their hand?

B) Calmly get up with your beverage of choice in hand, walk over to the offender’s cube and pour the contents of your drinking receptacle on their computer?

C) Belch in their face?

D) Do a full spin in your aeron chair and crush their hand/wrist/lower arm in the drawer?

E) Your ideas

Oh, By the Way, There’s Still a New 1099 Reporting Requirement for 2012 in the Proposed Budget

Caleb Newquist
February 15, 2011

As you know, the bane of small businesses across this great land, the 1099 reporting requirement, was repealed by the Senate earlier this month. Despite some maneuvering amongst Senators to be crowned the biggest champion of small business, it seems that everyone agreed that this little sliver of the healthcare reform bill needed to go.

Now the House has taken up the charge but The Hill reports on a portion of President Obama’s proposed budget that is already annoying the hell out of some:

President Obama’s fiscal year 2012 budget still contains a portion of the 1099 provision while eliminating the requirement for goods but retaining it for services. The proposal is expected to raise about $10 billion over 10 years.

The National Federation of Independent Business blasted the new 1099 proposal as a “bait and switch.”

“We are disappointed that the president has not clearly heard what small businesses are saying,” NFIB senior vice president of Federal Public Policy Susan Eckerly said in a statement. “We at NFIB remain committed to helping the president and Congress understand the needs of small business as the budget process moves forward.”

But before you get your panties in a bunch, the Office of Management and Budget can explain:

“The administration recognizes the burden that this expanded information reporting provision will put on small businesses and proposes to repeal the provision,” the document says. “Instead, the administration proposes that a business be required to file an information return for payments for services or for determinable gains aggregating to $600 or more in a calendar year to a corporation (except a tax-exempt corporation); information returns would not be required for payments for property.”

If you call that an explanation.

Ways and Means schedules mark up of 1099 provision [The Hill]

Accounting News Roundup: Auditing, Consulting and Credibility; IASB Coming to Connecticut?; Bad Boss Clues | 02.15.11

Caleb Newquist
February 15, 2011

Bernanke Would Defend Lehman Actions to His `Deathbed’ [Bloomberg]
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, in a confidential talk with the commission probing the causes of the financial crisis, said he wo

Career Center

When Should a Future Auditor Mention to His Firm That He’s More Interested in Forensic Accounting?

Caleb Newquist
February 15, 2011

Welcome to the dead-seven-Irish-guys-in-a-garage edition of Accounting Career Emergencies. In today’s edition, a future Big 4 auditor wants to get into forensics ASAP but is concerned about appearances. How should he broach?

Have a question about your career? Need a post-Valentine’s Day/busy season break-up plan? Want ideas for cheering up your co-workers? Email us at advice@goingconcern.comDear Caleb,

I’m starting with a Big 4 firm in October. I had an audit internship last summer where they spoke about all of the ‘flexibility’ within the firm. I was always more interested in the fraud/forensics side of accounting than audit; however, I felt that I had a better chance of getting an internship in audit due to the larger number of positions available. After taking a fraud course in my masters program this year, I confirmed my initial thought that I would much rather work in that field instead of audit.

How realistic is it to try to switch from audit to forensics within a Big 4 firm? How long should I wait until I ask about switching without burning any bridges? I feel like I already know about the normal downsides of a career in auditing, are there any unique differences (good or bad) from a career in forensics?

-Confused New Hire

Dear Confused,

We’re impressed. It was quite the sly move on your part, playing the numbers game. And per usual for a new associate, you’re thinking WAY ahead, which is fine but don’t forget you haven’t even set foot on hallowed Big 4 ground yet.

Regarding the “realistic” question, we’d venture that it falls somewhere in between “somewhat” and “not very” given the fact that your start date is months away. It’s closer to “not very” at this juncture because you have no work experience whatsoever. Forensics involves turning over lots of rocks and that simply takes time and it’s helpful if you have experience in another investigative career. Now, a switch is “somewhat realistic” for you because you know exactly what career path you’re interested in taking. You have many of your future colleagues (and some superiors) beat in this regard. To appropriately address this with your firm, discussing your interest in forensics with your career counselor and mentors is the best way to go. Simply asking about a transfer in your first year or two at the firm is coming on a little strong. Besides, a few years of auditing will serve your skills well as you prepare for a career in forensics.

As for pros and cons in forensics versus auditing, you’ve already discovered one advantage – the work is far more interesting. It’s also a specialized area, so it can be potentially more lucrative and is a unique skill set. As for disadvantages, forensics is a hot area right now and the groups are relatively small. The groups and demand for services may be growing but lots of people have are exploring this area and spots will fill up quick.

Another big disadvantage is that there’s an intangible quality that forensics experts have, that some people don’t and that is an inherent skeptical attitude and investigative intuition. Here’s what forensic expert Tracy Coenen told us last year:

It’s common for people to think that a good auditor makes a good forensic accountant, and that’s simply not the case. Some people have a gift for thinking outside the box and can get a gut feel for what’s wrong. Others only have a gift for reconciling numbers and using checklists. The [AICPA] survey addressed investigative intuition, but it didn’t even make it into the top five of core skills. I think that’s wrong on many levels.

In that same post, GC friend Sam Antar talked about having additional qualities:

An effective forensic accountant must have a pair of double iron clad balls and a triple thick skin. Prospective forensic accountants can count on making many enemies in the course of their work and must be unhinged by the retaliation that normally follows uncovering fraud and other misconduct. […] Effective forensic accountants must at least think like a scumbag to understand criminal behavior, techniques, and countermeasures.

So, in other words, you need to have raw talent and instincts. You may have wanted to be a professional baseball player when you were a kid but still couldn’t manage to hit a ball off a tee or catch a cold.

So to wrap it up, express interest in forensics but we don’t think you should come on too strong. If you do some time in auditing and perform well, you’ll give yourself a better chance of dipping a toe into a forensics group down the road. Good luck.

Be Prepared for a New Flood of GOP ‘IRS Agents Will Be Invading Your Homes’ Rhetoric

Caleb Newquist
February 15, 2011

President Barack Obama proposed increasing the budget for the Internal Revenue Service by 9.4 percent to hire more than 5,000 new employees, most of whom would pursue tax cheats. The president’s fiscal 2012 budget released today sets funding for the tax-collection agency at $13.3 billion, an increase of $1.1 billion from 2010, the last time a full appropriation was made for the IRS. Almost half of the increase, or $460 million, would support the agency’s tax-enforcement programs. Under the plan, the IRS would focus on fighting tax evasion through the use of offshore accounts and cheating by corporate and high-wealth taxpayers. It also would seek out fraudulent tax preparers. [Bloomberg]

PwC Talent Leader Talks 2011 Hiring Spree, ‘Competitive’ Poaching, Autumnal Hues

Caleb Newquist
February 15, 2011

As we’ve discussed, Big 4 firms are doing their part to marginally improve the frightening national unemployment number by embarking on epic hiring bonanzas in the coming years. FINS reporter Kyle Stock ran down Paula Loop, PwC’s Global and U.S. Talent Leader to find out the details on the firm’s plans and here are a few highlights:

Starting off – if unemployment doesn’t improve by 2012, Obama won’t be able to blame PwC:

KS: It seems like the firm is always hiring, how does that 45,000 compare with 2008 and 2009?

PL: It’s certainly higher than it has been in recent years. For the US, we’re hoping to hire around 10,000 this year. Those numbers are about 60% higher than they were for 2009 or 2010. About 6,000 of those are campus hires and 4,000 are on the experienced side.

Rumors of our acclimating to social media at a snail’s pace have been greatly accurate but only because we were waiting for The One:

KS: When PwC announced the LinkedIn [partnership], some articles said PwC has been slow to embrace social networking — is that accurate?

PL: Well, we were waiting for the right place at the right time. LinkedIn was a really good match for us.

Poaching, on the other hand, we’re all over that:

KS: I always try to ask about poaching. Is PwC hiring from competitors much these days?

PL: Because I think we are hiring more people, there’s more activity there. That’s always been a place we like to stay competitive.

Once you land those people, how do you keep them? Well, it helps if you come to grips with the fact that the last week of the year is pointless and you tell everyone to stay home. Secondly, you replace the old swag:

KS: Is PwC doing anything new to increase retention?

PL: We’ve had some great stuff on the retention front. We had an annual shutdown between Christmas and New Year’s where we closed our firm. That’s a terrific thing for us. I can tell you, you really get a chance to disconnect. Not only are you on vacation, but no one else is working. It gets people rejuvenated.

And we’re always doing stuff. Our new brand was a really great and exciting thing. We all have new bags for our computers that have our new colors for the new brand.

Right, the new brand! That was exciting. Sure, there might have been some kvetching at first but now that everyone has calmed down it’s really what makes us different from other firms:

KS: So how does the culture differ from a company like Deloitte?

PL: It’s hard for me to say on that, because I haven’t been a part of their culture, but I would say our new brand launch this fall really defines our culture. The colors are really vibrant and warm. We took that really long name and shortened it up. Our new logo can be really animated. I think that’s really what we’re trying to bring out in our culture.

PwC’s Paula Loop on Hiring 45,000 and the Firm’s Big Change [FINS]

Careers

Big 4

News

Technology

Practice Management

Site Search

Twitter Feed

Get the Accounting News Roundup

Quick Reads

Sponsored Content

Get the Accounting News Roundup

Staff Accountant

Remote Senior Tax Manager, CPA

Remote Tax Manager

Staff Accountant

Remote Senior Tax Manager, CPA

Remote Tax Manager