I mean, you know how it is, when you lose $192 million. It’s a tough thing to forget. The Journal reports that the Garden State has renewed its lawsuit against E&Y saying “Those review reports were false, as E&Y knew or should have known that Lehman’s quarterly financial statements were not prepared in accordance with [GAAP].” When reached for comment, E&Y spokesman Charlie Perkins’s voice was barely audible on a nearly worn out tape recording, “Lehman’s demise was caused by the global financial crisis that impacted the entire financial sector, not by accounting or financial reporting issues.” Wouldn’t it be nice if Chuck had Nick DeSanto sing the statement? With a rock accompaniment? At least it would liven up this story again. [WSJ]
Tag: Failure
Deloitte Resents the Notion That They Should Have Known That Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Was a Massive Fraud
As we mentioned briefly, Deloitte has been sued for $7.6 billion by the bankruptcy trustee of Taylor, Bean & Whitaker and Ocala Funding, LLC. If you’ve never heard of Taylor, Bean & Whitaker then check out Jr. Deputy Accountant who’s been all over it since the Feds starting kicking down the doors. Long story short – TBW was a giant fraud perpetrated by its management, Colonial Bank owned a lot of TBW’s mortgages, Colonial failed, Bank of America bought up a bunch of the mortgages, Fannie Mae says they’re owed money, CHRIST, it’s a mess.
Anyhoo, Steven Thomas, who is known for suing the pants of Big 4 firms (and BDO!), is the lead attorney for the plaintiffs and it sounds like the age-old story of auditors BEING COMPLETE IDIOTS:
“Deloitte missed this fraud because it simply accepted management’s conflicting, incomplete and often last-minute explanations of highly-questionable transactions, even though those explanations made no sense and were flatly contradicted by documents in Deloitte’s possession,” one of the lawsuits says.
Of course Deloitte isn’t amused by this, as Deloitte spokesman Jonathan Gandal’s statement attests:
Gandal said the blame for the fraud and losses should rest squarely on Taylor Bean, Ocala Funding and Farkas. “The bizarre notion that his engines of theft are entitled to complain of injury from their own crimes and to sue the outside auditors they lied to defies common sense, not to mention the law,” Gandal said on behalf of Deloitte.
If this statement strikes you as a little confusing, then you’re not alone. First off, when Mr. Gandal is referring to the “the law” he’s probably referring to this. In less legalese, basically what Deloitte is saying is that Lee Farkas and his merry band of crooks are the ones responsible for this shitshow not the Green Dot and therefore, this whole thing is ludicrous. I mean, come on guys, what could a firm that just reported nearly $29 billion in revenue could possibly have done differently? Crooks are just far too smart far auditors. Just ask one.
CFTC Didn’t Think Too Much of McGladrey’s Audit of One World Capital Group
They were so unimpressed with it, in fact, that they are fining the firm $900,000 and partner David Shane $100,000 to settle up.
Mickey G’s issued an unqualified audit opinion for One World Capital Group’s 2006 financial statements and also stated that the company’s internal controls were just fine and dandy. Neither of these things turned out to be true. And when you read the CFTC’s press release, you really have to wonder if anyone was really auditing this company:
[T]he order finds that One World’s 2006 financial statements were materially misstated in various ways including: (1) the 2006 Statement of Financial Condition states that liabilities payable to all customers were over $6.9 million, when in fact information available in One World’s records showed that it may have owed at least $15 million just to forex customers alone, for whom One World served as the counterparty; and (2) the 2006 financial statements materially misstated the nature of One World’s business by failing to reflect that One World served as the counter party to its forex customers for over 90 percent of its business, according to the order.
In addition, McGladrey failed to report material inadequacies in One World’s accounting system and internal accounting controls, including the lack of a customer ledger, and an accounting system that did not properly identify the number of forex customers or the amount of customer liabilities, according to the order. These material inadequacies reasonably could, and did, lead to material misstatements in One World’s 2006 financial statements, the order finds.
No punch and cake for anyone after this fiasco.
[via CFTC]
Can a CPA Exam Candidate Who Failed REG With a 71 Prepare for a Retake in Three Weeks?
Today’s CPA exam question from the mailbag has to do with a familiar topic to many of you: failure.
Hi Adrienne,
I slaved for an HOA audit firm and our busy season just officially ended. I found out last week that the very last day I can schedule to sit for REG is on 5/27 so that give me approximately 3 weeks to cram for the materials. I sat for that section in January and failed at 71. I am planning to spend 4 hours studying during the week and 8 hours to cram on Saturday and Sunday so I can study at most 36 hours per week. Should I go try for 5/27 or postpone the exam until July when I am more prepared?
Also, I am using both Becker & Gleim to review. In the past, I watched the Becker lectures, completed MCs and simluations on both Becker & Gleim and using Becker book to review. Due to not having enough time, should I just work on MCs and simluations and forgo re-watch the lectures?
Your advice is greatly appreciated.
Our candidate has also sent in her score report, included below:
We should point out here that our candidate admitted in a follow-up e-mail after very little badgering that she had, in fact, done poorly on the simulations as she suspected, telling us “I went into Regulation knowing that I was weak on simulations and as you can see on my score report, not making an effort reviewing and re-doing the simulations led to my failure.” And yes, it’s pretty clear to us that’s exactly what happened here.
With only three weeks to study before the new test date, it wouldn’t make sense to spend much time reviewing lectures or even entire chapters as a 71 shows an excellent command of the information and her score report confirms that suspicion. Unfortunately, the days of “kind of blowing the simulation part of the exam” are over with the advent of CBT-e, meaning you’re obviously going to have to do better in that area if you want to pass.
The good news is you get it, overall, except maybe for that federal tax process area. Check the CSOs (page 25 of the PDF) for more detailed info on what is tested in that area (naturally it has a lot to do with federal taxation) and practice problems in those areas. If you feel particularly lost in any one area, go ahead and read the chapter or watch a lecture over again but since time is of the essence, try not to use the lectures at all. Don’t get too focused on your one weak area, though, since you presumably haven’t studied any of this stuff for months. You’ll need a good once over (that means all your MCQ at a minimum) before exam day, so try to set aside at least three hours a day, more if you can fit it in. If you have more than three hours a day to study, try not to study for more than three hours at a time, break it up to some in the morning and some in the evening if you can.
As for the simulations, practice working through simulation problems while timing yourself. Set your cell phone alarm or an old school kitchen timer to work out 10 – 15 minutes per problem and start blasting through them on whatever software you still have access to in hour-long intervals. Work towards finishing each simulation in no more than 10 minutes as that will allow you time on exam day to review your sims once you have finished.
Good luck!
Chart of the Day (From Yesterday): Audit Failure Edition
As if the combination of March Madness and St. Patrick weren’t enough, this slide from yesterday’s Investor Advisory Group meeting should drive many to drink.
After yesterday’s findings on the usefulness (or lack thereof) of the auditor’s report, we bring you “The Watchdog that Didn’t Bark … Again.” It’s not as caught up on surveys and whatnot, as it is just pointing out some of the well, failures by auditors during the financial crisis.
The presentation was prepared by The Working Group on Lessons Learned from the Financial Crisis of the IAG and includes past comments from critics like Francine McKenna and Jonathan Weil on the expectations gap between auditors and basically everyone else. But don’t worry, it also presents the audit profession’s defense of itself including past statements from the Center for Audit Quality and PwC’s Richard Sexton the head of audit it the UK, who said this:
Now, one could come to the conclusion that Mr Sexton works for his clients first and not investors but you might not agree with that.
Now before all the Big 4 auditors get in a huff, the presentation has some criticisms of the PCAOB as well, specifically on the report the Board issued in September 2010:
If you can manage to stop drinking your breakfast for two, check out the full presentation below and discuss.
How Will the Senate Screw Up the 1099 Repeal Bill This Time?
The upper chamber is making yet another run at repealing the 1099 requirement that was part of the healthcare overhaul despite miserable failures in the past.
The Hill reports that the new bill has 52 co-sponsors which lead you to believe that this time, repeal will be a cinch:
Senators reintroduced bills that would eliminate the 1099 requirement for businesses to report annual purchases of at least $600 from each vendor. Most Democrats, including the Obama administration, support repealing the provision, but lawmakers have clashed over how to offset the $19 billion in lost revenue.
A bill introduced Tuesday by Sens. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) and Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) authorizes the Office of Management and Budget to identify unobligated federal funds to cover the cost of repeal.
“It’s a bad policy; it hurts businesses and it should be repealed, enough said,” Johanns said in a conference call with reporters.
The measure has 52 co-sponsors including 12 Democrats: Sens. Mark Begich (Alaska), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Maria Cantwell (Wash.), Kay Hagan (N.C.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), Manchin, Ben Nelson (Neb.), Mark Pryor (Ark.), Debbie Stabenow (Mich.), Jon Tester (Mont.), Mark Udall (Colo.), Mark Warner (Va.).
With such an overwhelming show of bipartisan support the only issue now is who will get the credit for saving small business as we know it?
Both parties have seized on the 1099 requirement to score political points. Republicans are posing repeal of 1099 as part of their promise to chip away at the reform law, while Democrats are touting it as a sign of their willingness to improve the current law.
Just for the sake of spiteful mischief, we’re hoping this goes nowhere (any and all theories on how they manage to do that are encouraged). Stay tuned!
Senators introduce bipartisan 1099 repeal bill [On the Money/The Hill]
Accountants Aren’t Saving Any Personal Finance Savvy for Themselves
This is the risk to providing excellent client service to anyone and everyone; you forget to keep any of that wisdom for yourself.
A support group says it has received a record number of calls from accountants in personal debt over the past few months.
The Chartered Accountants’ Benevolent Association (CABA) for UK chartered accountants says that it has seen a sharp rise in calls from accountants with debt problems over the past few months.
CABA said that it has received its highest ever number of calls from accountants asking for help in dealing with personal debt – and expects the problem to worsen over the next few months.
Kath Haines, chief executive of CABA, said: “The number of calls that we are receiving about debt is probably at a record high and we believe that this will grow quite substantially during early 2011.
Accountants racking up record level of personal debt [Accountancy Age]
The Bell Effect: City of Riverside Won’t Renew With Mayer Hoffman McCann
If you’re a small city in California, you probably won’t be looking to Mayer Hoffman McCann to do your audits. If you’re already with them, it’s time to go auditor shopping.
Following the debacle that was Mayer Hoffman McCann’s completely blown city of Bell audits, the city of Riverside has joined the angry mob and will not be looking to renew with MHM any time soon. Riverside’s CFO Paul Sundeen said “given that the firm’s five year contract with the city is at its end and the controversy at the city of Bell, we will not include them [when seeking proposals for an auditor]”. Sorry, MHM, don’t wait by the mailbox for that invitation because you aren’t invited to the party.
Now that’s not nearly as harsh as getting fired by the client but sends a clear message to MHM (and any other questionably-equipped-to-do-their-job auditors out there) that ineptitude will not fly with the client. Unless, of course, there’s a conspiracy at work to defraud TPTB, in which case ineptitude is totally welcome if not encouraged.
Once again, it comes down to scope. No audit firm should be expected to look at every receipt and every statement but in the case of the Bell audit, auditors obviously missed some very large accounts either on purpose or because the firm sent a bunch of fresh-faced neophytes down there (this rarely happens) to actually perform the audit (Note to MHM: $8.89 million is significant unless you’re auditing the King of Saudi or the Federal Reserve). What happened to the accountability SOX promised us?
Said Riverside city controller Jason Al-Imam, “They want to do the right amount of work because they don’t want to lose their license, but they can’t audit everything. Sometimes something might go wrong and that just might be an area that they didn’t look at.”
Scraping by isn’t doing it anymore for the profession, so Riverside is more than welcome to go track down some new auditors but who wants to bet the kids doing their next audit will be just as fresh-faced and clueless as the last bunch MHM sent to fetch the client’s bank recs and invoices?
City of Riverside to drop Bell’s financial auditor [The Riverside Press-Enterprise]
Doing It Wrong Twitter Case Study: The Runaway Tweeter
Continuing our series on those in the industry who attempt to use Twitter but fail miserably in one way or another, today’s case study has to do with a tweeter all too frequent among the accounting set: the abandoned account.
You’ve probably come across more than one of these if you’ve attempted to look up certain state societies of CPAs or organizations that appear in Twitter search results but, sadly, feature no picture and maybe one or two tweets from two years ago. It’s obvious, upon checking out the empty bio and single tweet that these accounts belong to tweeters who really wanted to get into the whole Twitter thing but either gave up or got confused and let that drive them away.
I won’t name any names (but one starts with Idaho and ends with Society of CPAs) but one has to wonder what would inspire a media department to go through the trouble of getting their account validated and deciding on that first tweet only to be spooked by the lack of interest or the pure unadulterated excitement of tweeting. What is it? And why bother opening an account in the first place?
We’ve given you guys this lovely piece of advice before (see our interview with New Jersey Society of CPAs’ Don Meyer) but it’s important to remember that you won’t become Ashton Kutcher with 1,000,000 followers overnight and possibly never if you’re tweeting mostly about accounting and all related awesomeness. The niche is small and interest is limited to the couple thousand folks out there who are actively using social media to connect with other like-minded accounting enthusiasts and sources of accounting information. Reactions can be slow to come, if at all, and if you’re trying to break into social media you shouldn’t let the oftentimes frigid audience keep you from trudging ever-onward to meet your social media goals.
You may never get a reaction. You may not get many followers. You may not feel like your message is getting through. But keep doing it and please, don’t end up one of these phantom accounts abandoned in the Twitter junkyard with all the dirty Britney videos and busted dot coms.
Memo to the Wealthy: Death Is Looking Like a Good Option
“I have no confidence that this Congress will address the estate tax.”
~ Joe Kristan has a morbid outlook.
Michel Barnier: The Big 4 Audit Model Is a Failure
Okay, those weren’t the EU financial services commissioner’s exact words but you get the sincere impression that he’s had it up to his silver coif with how things are going.
“The crisis highlighted failings in the audit sector,” Barnier said today. “These need to be explored and we need to see what improvements can be made. I believe it is important to approach this discussion in a frank and open manner. No subject should be taboo.”
Right! No subject is off limits. So what will be discussed? Well, for starters this Big 4 thing has to stop. The Telegraph reports, “If one of the Big Four – PricewaterHouseCoopers, KPMG, Deloitte and Ernst & Young – were to collapse the Paper suggests it could create systemic risk for the financial markets.”
Secondly, the notion of independence and “putting shareholders” first is a sham. ‘Berg reports:
Restrictions on auditor choice may reduce “distortion within the system” caused by auditing firms acting in the interests of their clients rather than shareholders when compiling reports on a companies’ financial health, the commission said in a report outlining possible measures.
[…]
The commission said it’s also considering rules that would force companies to change their auditing firms after a fixed period of time.
Forcing companies to rotate their auditors would “enhance the independence of auditors” and “operate as a catalyst to introduce more dynamism and capacity into the audit market,” the commission said.
Lastly, can a Frenchman get some choice up in this mofo?
The top four accounting firms have a market share of about 90 percent in the majority of EU member states, according to the commission’s report.
“The market appears to be too concentrated in certain segments and deny clients sufficient choice when deciding on their auditors,” the commission said.
Barnier isn’t asking for a full-blown cafeteria but for crissakes, the choices right now are chicken, chicken, and….chicken. Sure, they might have slightly different recipes (e.g. KPMG a little spicy/sweet, PwC is in a cream sauce) but it’s all chicken. And Barnier HATES chicken.
Companies May Lose Right to Pick Auditing Firms Under European Union Plans [Bloomberg]
EU markets chief Barnier plans radical overhaul of audit industry [Telegraph]
Here’s Some Stuff You Didn’t Buy at PwC’s Lehman Brothers Auction in London
Gosh, team. It’s been over two years since Lehman bit the big one and now all that’s left is bits and pieces (Barclays, pink sheets, Dick Fuld’s stonewalling testimony) and charges from the SEC that could eventually see the light of day (unless the sun burns out first). Oh! And Ernst & Young. They’re in the mix too, although some people we talk to have their doubts about any repercussions.
Anyhoo, there was a big auction at Christie’s in London today directed by the newly-branded PwC. After everyone got done ribbing the P. Dubs partner in attendance about the Atari design, the bidding started. Here’s a little taste of what’s been sold so far, courtesy of the Times:
• Corporate Sign from Canary Wharf building – £42,050. Bidding started at £5,000
• Gary Hume’s Madonna – £120,000 (most expensive item so far)
• A collection of five maps from circa 1720 – £1,875
• An 1870 collection of the works of one Bill Shakespeare
• Two etchings by Lucian Freud
• Photographs by Sebastião Salgado
• A 43.5-inch painted pine model of a 62-gun ship
Overall, the auction has topped £600,000, according to Accountancy Age but is still rising. You can probably still get a bid in if you hurry.