The PCAOB announced earlier today that it will hold an open meeting next Tuesday to vote on the disclosure rules for naming the audit partner and other accounting firms that participated in the audit. I'm told that it will be a unanimous approval.
With that in mind, it's more than a little bit ironic that there's such an outpouring of auditor pride today, but it took over 6 years (and counting) to convince people that audit partners need to put their names on their work.
Have something to add to this story? Give us a shout by email, Twitter, or text/call the tipline at 202-505-8885. As always, all tips are anonymous.
Comments are closed.
While the general investing public is asking “where were the auditors?” in regards to the recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, the banks’ auditors are insisting that, having exercised requisite due professional care, their unqualified opinions were based on the information available to them at the time and as such, the firm […]
The Financial Reporting Council has fined PwC £7.5 million ($8.9 million USD) for work related to Babcock, a multinational corporation headquartered in the UK providing, among other things, engineering services. Babcock conducts most of its business with the government, particularly the Ministry of Defence (don’t @ us, that’s how they spell it across the pond). […]
