The findings in "New Public Company Auditor Disclosures: Who Audits the Company You Invest In? How Long Have They Been the Auditor," were compelling, particularly on gender diversity.
Mickey Mantle, the UCLA Bruins, the seven seas — what do they have in common with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board’s disclosure requirement? What three main changes should investors know?
The just-issued Public Company Accounting Oversight Board plan takes incremental steps to larger objective — transparency for investors.
Investors, not the company, are the auditor’s client. Changing this paradigm, where auditors are beholden to management, is essential to fully resolving independence and objectivity challenges.
The debate continues regarding the PCAOB proposal to require disclosure of the name of the engagement partner in the auditor’s report.
A recent PCAOB proposal intends to enhance transparency and thus improve audit quality through the engagement partner’s increased sense of accountability — a move that has strong investor support.
Investors are closely following separate initiatives of the FASB and the PCAOB to improve the way both company management and the independent auditor report the company’s future financial health.
In response to the financial crisis, the quality of bank audits has been in the regulatory reform spotlight.
FASB proposal would make warnings about a company’s failing financial health the responsibility of firm management.
Will the alleged insider trading scandal involving ex-KPMG partner Scott London compel the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to finally require disclosure of the lead partner on public company audits?
The PCAOB recently updated its 2009 and 2010 inspection reports for PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) covering audit years 2008 and 2009. Originally, the PCAOB identified quality control deficiencies associated with those audit years and gave PwC 12 months from the date of each report to implement corrective action.