Second Draft Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession, 44315-44350 [E8-17441]

Download as PDF mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices The FTA and METRO have completed a SFEIS for the Southeast Corridor Fixed Guideway Transit Project (Southeast Corridor Project). The Southeast Corridor Project will start in downtown Houston; connect to the universities area including Texas Southern University, University of Houston, and the Palm Center; and end at a terminus on Griggs Road and Beekman Road. The light rail will operate in portions of the alignment on both restricted street lanes and an exclusive bi-directional trackway. For the Southeast Corridor Project, METRO will also construct a vehicle storage facility, ten passenger stations, and a traction power electrical system. Final agency actions: ROD signed on July 16, 2008; Section 4(f) de minimis impact finding; Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement signed on June 4, 2008; Project-level Air Conformity determination. Supporting documentation: Southeast Corridor Fixed Guideway Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Statement (SFEIS) signed on April 25, 2008. 3. Project name and location: Portland Streetcar Loop Project, Portland Oregon. Project sponsor: Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District (TriMet). Project description: The project involves the construction of 3.3 miles of double track rail lines in existing streets and public rights-of-way from NW 10th Avenue and Lovejoy Street in the Pearl District of northwest Portland to the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry in southeast Portland. TriMet plans to construct 18 new station pairs with designs similar to those along the existing Portland Streetcar alignment. The project also includes the purchase of 10 streetcars, expansion of the existing streetcar operations and maintenance facility, roadway improvements, and elimination of some bus line service. Final agency actions: FONSI signed on July 2, 2008; Section 106 Finding of No Adverse Effect; Project-level Air Conformity determination; Section 4(f) de minimis impact finding. Supporting documentation: Environmental Assessment on the Portland Streetcar Loop Project issued on February 8, 2008. 4. Project name and location: Central Florida Commuter Rail Transit Project, Orlando, Florida. Project sponsor: Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). Project description: FDOT is proposing to operate a commuter rail project on approximately 61 miles of existing freight rail tracks that traverse Orange, Seminole, Volusia, and Osceola counties in the greater metropolitan area of Orlando, Florida. The project will involve the construction of 17 stations VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 and a new vehicle storage and maintenance facility. On April 27, 2007, FTA issued a FONSI on the Central Florida Commuter Rail Transit (CFCRT) North/South Corridor project stating that the project would not have a significant impact on the environment. Since issuing the FONSI, FDOT made several changes to stations on the CFCRT project and these changes were reviewed in a Supplemental EA approved on May 8, 2008. The final agency actions announced in this notice only concern these project changes which are of limited scope and do not warrant reconsideration of the entire project. Final agency actions: FONSI signed on July 22, 2008; Section 106 Finding of No Effect on Historic Properties dated June 20, 2008; Section 4(f) finding. Supporting documentation: Supplemental Environmental Assessment on the Central Florida Commuter Rail Transit North/South Corridor Project approved on May 8, 2008. Issued on: July 24, 2008. Susan Borinsky, Associate Administrator for Planning and Environment, Washington, DC. [FR Doc. E8–17482 Filed 7–29–08; 8:45 am] 44315 Information Relay Service (FIRS) at: (800) 877–8339]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: RETAC arose from a proceeding instituted by the Board, in Establishment of a Rail Energy Transportation Advisory Committee, STB Ex Parte No. 670. RETAC was formed to provide advice and guidance to the Board, and to serve as a forum for discussion of emerging issues regarding the transportation by rail of energy resources, particularly, but not necessarily limited to, coal, ethanol, and other biofuels. The purpose of this meeting is to continue discussions regarding issues such as rail performance, capacity constraints, infrastructure planning and development, and effective coordination among suppliers, carriers, and users of energy resources. The meeting, which is open to the public, will be conducted pursuant to RETAC’s charter and Board procedures. Further communications about this meeting may be announced through the Board’s Web site at https://www.stb.gov. This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the conservation of energy resources. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 721, 49 U.S.C. 11101; 49 U.S.C. 11121. BILLING CODE 4910–57–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Ex Parte No. 670 (Sub–No. 1)] Decided: July 24, 2008. By the Board, Anne K. Quinlan, Acting Secretary. Anne K. Quinlan, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E8–17375 Filed 7–29–08; 8:45 am] Notice of Rail Energy Transportation Advisory Committee Meeting BILLING CODE 4915–01–P Surface Transportation Board. Notice of Rail Energy Transportation Advisory Committee meeting. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Rail Energy Transportation Advisory Committee (RETAC), pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92–463, as amended (5 U.S.C., App. 2). DATES: The meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, beginning at 9 a.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the Surface Transportation Board’s hearing room on the 1st floor of the agency’s headquarters at Patriot’s Plaza, 395 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423–0001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott M. Zimmerman at 202–245–0202. [Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Second Draft Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession Office of the Undersecretary for Domestic Finance, Treasury. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession is publishing a Second Draft Report and soliciting public comment. DATES: Comments should be received on or before August 26, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to the Advisory Committee by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Department’s Internet submission form (https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/ comments); or E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44316 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession, Office of Financial Institutions Policy, Room 1418, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220. In general, the Department will post all comments on its Web site (https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/comments) without change, including any business or personal information provided such as names, addresses, e-mail addresses, or telephone numbers. The Department will also make such comments available for public inspection and copying in the Department’s Library, Room 1428, Main Department Building, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. You can make an appointment to inspect comments by telephoning (202) 622– 0990. All comments, including attachments and other supporting materials, received are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen E. Jaconi, Senior Policy Advisor to the Under Secretary for Domestic Finance, Department of the Treasury, Main Department Building, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220, at (202) 927– 6618. At the request of the two Co-Chairs of the Department of the Treasury’s Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession, the Department is publishing this notice soliciting public comment on the Advisory Committee’s Second Draft Report. The text of the Second Draft Report is found in the appendix to this notice and may be found on the Web page of the Advisory Committee at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/index.shtml. The appendices to the Second Draft Report are not included in this notice, but may be found on the Web page of the Advisory Committee at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/index.shtml. The Second Draft Report contains the Advisory Committee’s developed proposals on improving the sustainability of a strong and vibrant public company auditing profession. All interested parties are invited to submit their comments in the manner described above. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 Dated: July 25, 2008. Taiya Smith, Executive Secretary. Appendix: Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession Second Draft Report—July 22, 2008 The Department of the Treasury Second Draft Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession to the U.S. Department of the Treasury Table of Contents I. Transmittal Letter [Placeholder] II. Committee History III. Background [Placeholder] IV. Human Capital V. Firm Structure and Finances VI. Concentration and Competition VII. Separate Statements [Placeholder] VIII. Appendices A. Official Notice of Establishment of Committee B. Committee Charter C. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Remarks at the Economic Club of New York, New York, NY on Capital Market Competitiveness (Nov. 20, 2006) D. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Opening Remarks at the Treasury Department’s Capital Markets Competitiveness Conference at Georgetown University (Mar. 13, 2007) E. Paulson Announces First Stage of Capital Markets Action Plan, Treasury Press Release No. HP–408 (May 17, 2007) F. Paulson: Financial Reporting Vital to U.S. Market Integrity, Strong Economy, Treasury Press Release No. HP–407 (May 17, 2008) G. Paulson Announces Auditing Committee Members to Make Recommendations for a More Sustainable, Transparent Industry, Treasury Press Release No. HP–585 (Oct. 2, 2007) H. Under Secretary for Domestic Finance Robert K. Steel, Welcome and Introductory Remarks Before the Initial Meeting of the Department of the Treasury’s Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession, Treasury Press Release No. HP–610 (Oct. 15, 2007) I. Committee By-Laws J. List of Witnesses K. List of Committee Members, Observers, and Staff L. Working Discussion Outline M. Working Bibliography Transmittal Letter I. Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession [September 2008] The Honorable Hank M. Paulson, Jr., Secretary, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220. Dear Secretary Paulson: On behalf of the Department’s Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession, we are pleased to submit our Final Report. PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 [Contents of letter to be included in Final Report] Respectfully Submitted on behalf of the Committee, llllllllllllllllll l Arthur Levitt, Jr. Committee Co-Chair llllllllllllllllll l Donald T. Nicolaisen Committee Co-Chair Enclosure CHAPTER I: COMMITTEE HISTORY On November 20, 2006, the Secretary of the Treasury, Henry M. Paulson, Jr., delivered a speech on the competitiveness of the U.S. capital markets, highlighting the need for a sustainable auditing profession.1 In March 2007, Secretary Paulson hosted a conference at Georgetown University with investors, current and former policymakers, and market participants to discuss issues impacting the competitiveness of the U.S. capital markets, including the sustainability of the auditing profession.2 On May 17, 2007, Secretary Paulson announced the Department of the Treasury’s (the ‘‘Department’s’’) intent to establish the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (the ‘‘Committee’’) to consider and develop recommendations relating to the sustainability of the auditing profession.3 At the same time, Secretary Paulson announced that he had asked Arthur Levitt, Jr. and Donald T. Nicolaisen to serve as Co-Chairs of the Committee. The Department published the official notice of establishment and requested nominations for membership on the Committee in the Federal Register on June 18, 2007.4 Secretary Paulson announced the Committee’s membership on October 2, 2007, with members drawn from a wide range of professions, backgrounds, and experiences.5 The Department filed the 1 Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Remarks on the Competitiveness of U.S. Capital Markets at the Economic Club of New York (Nov. 20, 2006), in Press Release No. HP–174, U.S. Dep’t of Treas. (Nov. 20, 2006) (included as Appendix C). 2 Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Opening Remarks at Treasury’s Capital Markets Competitiveness Conference at Georgetown University (Mar. 13, 2007), in Press Release No. HP–306, U.S. Dep’t of Treas. (Mar. 13, 2007) (included as Appendix D). 3 Press Release, U.S. Dep’t of Treas., Paulson Announces First Stage of Capital Markets Action Plan (May 17, 2007) (included as Appendix E); Press Release, U.S. Dep’t of Treas., Paulson: Financial Reporting Vital to U.S. Market Integrity, Strong Economy (May 17, 2008) (included as Appendix F). 4 Notice of Intent to Establish; Request for Nominations, 72 FR 33560 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. June 18, 2007) (included as Appendix A). 5 Press Release, U.S. Dep’t of Treas., Paulson Announces Auditing Committee Members to Make E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices Committee’s Charter with the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, the Senate Committee on Finance, the House Committee on Financial Services, and the House Committee on Ways and Means on July 3, 2007.6 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Committee Activities The Committee held its initial meeting on October 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C.7 Then Under Secretary for Domestic Finance Robert K. Steel welcomed the Committee members and provided introductory remarks.8 Also on October 15, 2007, the Committee adopted its by-laws 9 and considered a Working Discussion Outline to be published for public comment.10 The Working Discussion Outline identified in general terms issues for the Committee’s consideration. A Working Bibliography, updated intermittently throughout the course of the Committee’s deliberations, provided the members with articles, reports, studies, and other written materials relating to the auditing profession.11 All full Committee meetings were open to the public and conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.12 The meetings of the full Committee were also Web or audio cast over the Internet. The Committee held its second meeting on December 3, 2007 in Washington, DC. The agenda for this Recommendations for a More Sustainable, Transparent Industry (Oct. 2, 2007) (included as Appendix G). This press release describes the diverse backgrounds of the Committee members. For a list of Members, Observers, and Staff, see Appendix K. 6 See Committee Charter (included as Appendix B). 7 The Record of Proceedings of this and subsequent meetings of the Committee are available on the Department’s Web site at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance//acap/ press.shtml. See Record of Proceedings, Meeting of the Committee (Oct. 15, 2007, Dec. 3, 2007, Feb. 4, 2008, Mar. 13, 2008, Apr. 1, 2008, May 5, 2008, June 3, 2008, and [____]) [hereinafter Record of Proceedings (with appropriate date)] (on file in the Department’s Library, Room 1428), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/press.shtml. 8 Under Secretary for Domestic Finance Robert K. Steel, Welcome and Introductory Remarks Before the Initial Meeting of the Treasury Department’s Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (Oct. 15, 2007), in Press Release No. HP–610, U.S. Dep’t of Treas. (Oct. 15, 2007) (included as Appendix H). 9 The Committee By-Laws are included as Appendix I. 10 The Working Discussion Outline is included as Appendix L. 11 The Working Bibliography is included as Appendix M. The Working Bibliography was subsequently updated in December 2007, February 2008, and July 2008. 12 5 U.S.C.____App. 2 et seq. VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 meeting consisted of hearing oral statements from witnesses and considering written submissions that those witnesses had filed with the Committee. The oral statements and written submissions focused on the issues impacting the sustainability of the auditing profession, including issues mentioned in the Working Discussion Outline. Nineteen witnesses testified at this meeting.13 The Committee held a subsequent meeting on February 4, 2008 in Los Angeles, California at the University of Southern California. The agenda for this meeting consisted of hearing oral statements from witnesses and considering written submissions that those witnesses had filed with the Committee. The oral statements and written submissions focused on the issues impacting the sustainability of the auditing profession, including issues mentioned in the Working Discussion Outline. Seventeen witnesses testified at this meeting.14 The Committee held additional meetings on March 13, 2008, April 1, 2008, May 5, 2008, June 3, 2008, and [____]. All were face-to-face meetings held at the Department in Washington, DC, except for February 4, 2008, which was held in Los Angeles, California, and the meetings on April 1, 2008, and [____], which were telephonic meetings. No witnesses testified at these additional meetings, expect for the June 3, 2008 meeting. The agenda for the June 3, 2008 meeting consisted of hearing oral statements from witnesses and considering written submissions that those witnesses had filed with the Committee. The oral statements and written submissions focused on the issues mentioned in the Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum. Twentyone witnesses testified at this meeting.15 The Committee, through the Department, published [____] releases in the Federal Register formally seeking public comment on issues under consideration. On October 31, 2007, the Committee published a release seeking comment on the Working Discussion Outline,16 in response to which the Committee received seventeen comment letters. On May 15, 2008 and on June 12, 2008, the Committee published releases seeking comment on the Draft Report 17 13 Appendix J contains a list of witnesses who testified before the Committee. 14 Appendix J contains a list of witnesses who testified before the Committee. 15 Appendix J contains a list of witnesses who testified before the Committee. 16 Request for Comments, 72 FR 61709 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. Oct. 31, 2007). 17 Request for Comments, 73 FR 28190 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. May 15, 2008). PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44317 and Draft Report Addendum,18 respectively, in response to which the Committee received [____] comment letters. In addition, the Department announced each meeting of the Committee in the Federal Register, and in each announcement notice included an invitation to submit written statements to be considered in connection with the meeting.19 In response to these meeting notices, the Committee received [____] written submissions. In total, the Committee received [____] written submissions in response to Federal Register releases.20 All of the submissions made to the Committee will be archived and available to the public through the Department’s Library. In addition to work carried out by the full Committee, fact finding and deliberations also took place within three Subcommittees appointed by the Co-Chairs. The Subcommittees were organized according to their principal areas of focus: Human Capital, Firm Structure and Finances, and Concentration and Competition.21 Each of the Subcommittees prepared recommendations for consideration by the full Committee. III. Background [Contents of Background to be included in subsequent drafts of this Report.] IV. Human Capital The Committee devoted considerable time and effort surveying the human capital issues impacting the auditing profession, including education, licensing, recruitment, retention, and training of accounting and auditing professionals. The charter of the Committee charged its members with developing recommendations relating to the sustainability of the public company 18 Request for Comments, 73 FR 33487 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. June 12, 2008). 19 Notice of Meeting, 72 FR 55272 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. Sept. 28, 2007); Notice of Meeting, 72 FR 64283 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. Nov. 15, 2007); Notice of Meeting, 73 FR 2981 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. Jan. 16, 2008); Notice of Meeting, 73 FR 10511 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. Feb. 27, 2008); Notice of Meeting, 73 FR 13070 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. Mar. 11, 2008); Notice of Meeting, 73 FR 21016 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. Apr. 17, 2008); Notice of Meeting, FR 28208 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. May 15, 2008); Notice of Meeting, FR 39088 (U.S. Dep’t of Treas. July 8, 2008). 20 All of the written submissions made to the Committee are available in the Department’s Library, Room 1428 and on the Department’s Committee’s Web page at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/press.shtml. To avoid duplicative material in footnotes, citations to the written submissions made to the Committee in this Final Report do not reference the Department’s Library, Room 1428 or repeat the file number. 21 For a list of members and their Subcommittee assignments, see Appendix K. E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES 44318 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices auditing profession. Likewise, the Committee directs the following recommendations and related commentary to those practicing public company auditing. However, the Committee recognizes that several of its recommendations regarding human capital matters would have impact beyond the public company auditing profession, impacting the accounting profession as a whole. The Committee views the accelerating pace of change in the global corporate environment and capital markets and the increasing complexity of business transactions and financial reporting as among the most significant challenges facing the profession as well as financial statement issuers and investors. These are directly impacted by human capital issues. To ensure its viability and resilience and its ability to meet the needs of investors, the public company auditing profession needs to continue to attract and develop professionals at all levels who are prepared to perform high quality audits in this dynamic environment. It is essential that these professionals continue to be educated and trained to review, judge, and question all accounting and auditing matters with skepticism and a critical perspective. The recommendations presented below reflect these needs. After receiving testimony from witnesses and from comment letters, the Committee identified specific areas where the Committee believed it could develop recommendations to be implemented in the relatively short term to enhance the sustainability of the auditing profession. These specific areas include accounting curricula, accounting faculty, minority representation and retention, and development and maintenance of human capital data. The Committee has also developed a recommendation to study the possible future of higher accounting education’s institutional structure. The Committee recommends that regulators, the auditing profession, educators, educational institutions, accrediting agencies, and other bodies, as applicable, effectuate the following: Recommendation 1. Implement market-driven, dynamic curricula and content for accounting students that continuously evolve to meet the needs of the auditing profession and help prepare new entrants to the profession to perform high quality audits. The Committee considered the views of all witnesses who provided input regarding accounting curricula at VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 educational institutions.22 The Committee believes that the accounting curricula in higher education are critical to ensuring that individuals have the necessary knowledge, mindset, skills, and abilities to perform quality public company audits. In order to graduate from an educational institution with an accounting degree, students must have completed a certain number of hours in accounting and business courses. Accounting curricula typically include courses in auditing, financial accounting, cost accounting, and U.S. federal income taxation. Business curricula typically include courses in ethics, information systems and controls, finance, economics, management, marketing, oral and written communication, statistics, and U.S. business law.23 Since the 1950s, several private sector groups have studied and recommended changes to the accounting curricula,24 but 22 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Joseph V. Carcello, Director of Research, Corporate Governance, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 8), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Carcello120307.pdf (noting the market’s expectations that university accounting curricula will expose students to recent financial reporting developments, such as international financial reporting standards and eXtensible Business Reporting Language); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Fornelli020408.pdf (stating the need to ‘‘[d]edicate funds and people to work with accounting professors to ensure that the curriculum is keeping pace with developments in business transactions, international economics and financial reporting’’ and specifying the need to focus on ethical standards and international accounting and auditing standards); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Dennis Nally, Chairman and Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Nally120307.pdf (stating the need to ‘‘[m]odernize and enhance the university accounting curriculum, which should include consideration of other global curriculum models to increase knowledge of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), finance and economics, and process controls’’). 23 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State University, 13), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Reckers020408.pdf (commenting that business students typically take two sophomore-level introductory accounting classes and accounting majors take six additional accounting courses in their final two years of schooling). 24 See e.g., Franklin Pierson, et al., The Education of American Businessmen (1959) (noting that the main goal of a business education should be the development of an individual with broad training in both the humanities and principles of business); Robert A. Gordon and James E. Howell, Higher Education for Business (1959) (suggesting that accounting curriculum abandon its emphasis on financial accounting and auditing while emphasizing humanities); Robert H. Roy and James PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 notwithstanding these pleas for reform, curricula are characteristically slow to change.25 In this regard, the Committee makes the following recommendations: (a) Regularly update the accounting certification examinations to reflect changes in the accounting profession, its relevant professional and ethical standards, and the skills and knowledge required to serve increasingly global capital markets. Accounting and auditing professionals commonly complete the requirements of professional examinations in order to comply with legal or professional association requirements. To become licensed at the state level as a certified public H. MacNeill, Horizons for a Profession (1967) (emphasizing the importance of a humanities background for accountants and recommending accounting graduate study); American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Committee on Education and Experience Requirements for CPAs, Report of the Committee on Education and Experience Requirements for CPAs (Mar. 1969) (recommending, among other things, a five-year education requirement to be adopted by states by 1975); American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Education Requirements for Entry into the Accounting Profession: A Statement of AICPA Policies (May 1978) (preferring a 150 semester-hour education requirement rather than a five-year education requirement to acquire the common body of knowledge and sit for the CPA examination); American Accounting Association, Committee on the Future Structure, Content, and Scope of Accounting Education, Future Accounting Education: Preparing for the Expanding Profession, 1 Issues in Accounting Education, No. 1, 168–95 (Spring 1986) (examining accounting education and accounting practice since 1925 and concluding that, among other things, the current state of accounting education is inadequate to meet the dynamic needs of the profession and accounting education must be reassessed to meet these needs); American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Education Requirements for Entry into the Accounting Profession: A Statement of AICPA Policies, 2nd Ed., Revised (Feb. 1988) (reaffirming the 150 semesterhour requirement); Arthur Andersen & Co., Arthur Young, Coopers & Lybrand, Deloitte Haskins & Sells, Ernst & Whinney, Peat Marwick Main & Co., Price Waterhouse, and Touche Ross, Perspectives on Education: Capabilities for Success in the Accounting Profession (1989), available at https:// aaahq.org/aecc/big8/cover.htm (stating that the chief executive officers of the eight largest public accounting firms believe that graduates entering public accounting need to have greater interpersonal, communication, and thinking skills as well as greater business knowledge and that the accounting curriculum must be a dynamic experience); and Accounting Education Change Commission, Objectives of Education for Accountants: Position Statement Number One, 6 Issues in Accounting Education, No. 2, 307–12 (Fall 1990) (describing the education objectives for accountants in an environment where accounting education has not kept pace with the changing demands upon the accounting profession). 25 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Ira Solomon, R.C. Evans Distinguished Professor, and Head, Department of Accountancy, University of Illinois, 14–15), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Solomon120307.pdf (lamenting the slow pace of change in accounting curricula and education). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES accountant, an individual must, among other things, pass the Uniform CPA Examination. Professional examinations, such as the Uniform CPA Examination, influence the content of the technical, ethical, and professional materials comprising the accounting curricula.26 The Committee believes that evolution of professional examination content serves as an important catalyst for curricular changes to reflect the dynamism and complexity of auditing public companies in global capital markets. The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) already regularly analyzes and updates its examination content, through practice content analysis and in conjunction with the AICPA Board of Examiners, which comprises members from the profession and state boards of accountancy. The Committee recommends that such changes remain a focus to ensure that both the 150 semester hour curriculum 27 as well as examination content reflect in a timely 26 Gary Sundem, The Accounting Education Change Commission: Its History and Impact Chapter 6 (1999), available at https://aaahq.org/ AECC/history/index.htm (‘‘[T]he CPA examination has certainly had a major influence on the accounting curriculum and on other aspects of accounting programs.’’). 27 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Written Submission of Jean C. Bedard, Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accounting, Department of Accountancy, Bentley College, 1), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Bedard060308.pdf (observing that using the CPA Examination as a catalyst for curricula change will only be effective if the CPA Examination is written assuming completion of 150 hours); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Joseph V. Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP, Professor and Director of Research—Corporate Governance Center, University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard, Professor of Accountancy, Bentley College, and Dana R. Hermanson, Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting, Kennesaw State University, 2 (June 20, 2008)), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/QFRs-6–3–08.pdf (noting that recent developments suggest a trend away from requiring 150 hours to sit for the CPA examination since eighteen states allow candidates to sit for the exam after 120 hours); Edward P. Howard, Senior Counsel, and Julianne D’Angelo Fellmeth, Administrative Director, Center for Public Interest Law, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2–4 (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAP_Draft_Report_Comments.pdf (providing background on the issue of requiring 150-hours for licensure while allowing 120-hours to sit for the CPA Examination in California); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Anne M. Mulcahy, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Xerox Corporation, and Alan L. Beller, Partner, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, 70–71, 77), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/agendas/minutes-06–03–08.pdf (noting the tension between updating the curricula in order to keep current with the changing environment and fitting these changes into a fouryear program). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 manner important ongoing market developments and investor needs, such as the increasing use of international financial reporting standards (IFRS),28 expanded fair value measurement and reporting, increasingly complex transactions, new Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) auditing and professional standards,29 risk-based business judgment, and technological innovations in financial reporting. Moreover, the Committee believes that professional 30 and ethical standards,31 fraud examination and forensic auditing, financial risk management, and valuation, and subject matter relating to their application, are an essential component of the accounting and auditing curricula and accordingly should be reflected in the professional examinations and throughout business and accounting coursework.32 28 Samuel K. Cotterell, CPA, Chair, NASBA, and David A. Costello, CPA, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1 (June 29, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ June2908LetterheadTreasuryAdvisory CommitteeontheAuditingProfession.pdf (agreeing that IFRS should be reflected in the CPA examination); Arnold C. Hanish, Chair, Committee on Corporate Reporting, Financial Executives International, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2 (July 3, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ FEICCRTreasuryACAPCommentLetter Filed73080.pdf (suggesting a greater emphasis of IFRS in the accounting curriculum). 29 See e.g., An Audit of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting that is Integrated with an Audit of Financial Statements, Auditing Standard No. 5 (Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 2007). 30 See PCAOB Standards and Related Rules, available at https://www.pcaobus.org/Standards/ Standards_and_Related_Rules/index.aspx. 31 See PCAOB Interim Ethics Standards, available at https://www.pcaobus.org/Standards/Interim_ Standards/Ethics/index.aspx. 32 See. e.g., Samuel K. Cotterell, CPA, Chair, NASBA, and David A. Costello, CPA, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1 (June 29, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ June2908LetterheadTreasuryAdvisoryCommitteeon theAuditingProfession.pdf (agreeing that ethics should be included in the accounting curriculum); Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 9 (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ DeloitteLLPCommentLetter.pdf (recommending that the Committee state that the following courses should be included in the curricula: ethics, fraud examination and forensic auditing, problem solving, finance, negotiation and communication skills, financial risk management, global business, taxation, and valuation); Record of Proceedings (Written Submission of Anne M. Lang, Chief Human Resources Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Lang060308.pdf (asking the Committee to specifically cite the need for curricula that teach specialized knowledge, such as risk management, computational finance, valuation theory, and sophisticated modeling techniques). PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44319 Finally, the Committee recommends that the market developments outlined in this section be reflected in professional examination content as soon as practicable, but not later than 2011.33 In particular, the CPA examination should test a candidate’s knowledge consistent with practice needs and the highest contemporary level of education required based on those practice needs. In addition, the Committee recommends that new evolving examination content be widely and promptly communicated to college and university faculty and administrators so that corresponding curricular changes in educational institutions can continually occur on a timely basis. (b) Reflect real world changes in the business environment more rapidly in teaching materials. Students are expected to use a variety of sources, such as textbooks and online materials, to learn. Such materials are an important element of higher education. The Committee learned that these commercial materials are generally conservatively managed and follow rather than lead recent market developments.34 Because developing accounting materials involves a significant investment of time and resources, commercial content providers carefully consider the potential risks and rewards before publishing new materials, even where a more prompt response to new developments might be beneficial to students. The Committee believes that accounting educational materials can contribute to inducing curricular changes that reflect the dynamism and complexity of the global capital markets and that commercial content providers should recognize the importance of capturing recent developments in their published materials. Specifically, the Committee recommends that organizations, such as the AICPA and the American Accounting Association (AAA), meet with commercial content providers and encourage them to update their materials promptly to reflect recent developments such as the increasing use 33 See, e.g., Samuel K. Cotterell, CPA, Chair, NASBA, and David A. Costello, CPA, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1 (June 29, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/June2908 LetterheadTreasuryAdvisoryCommitteeon theAuditingProfession.pdf (agreeing with the Recommendation to keep the CPA examination current). 34 Subcommittee on Human Capital Record of Proceedings (Jan. 16, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Bruce K. Behn, President, Federation of Schools of Accountancy, and Ergen Professor of Business, Department of Accounting and Information Management, University of Tennessee, Knoxville). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44320 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES of IFRS, new PCAOB auditing and professional standards, risk-based business judgment, and expanded fair value reporting, as well as technological developments in financial reporting and auditing such as eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL).35 Further, in order to ensure access to such materials and recognizing the benefits of technological innovations,36 the Committee recommends that authoritative bodies and agencies should be encouraged to provide lowcost, affordable access to digitized searchable authoritative literature and materials, such as Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) codification and eIFRS, to students and faculty members. Moreover, since the content of professional examinations, such as the Uniform CPA Examination, is based upon research using digitized materials, students need to have access to, among other things, searchable accounting standards.37 The Committee believes that low-cost affordable access to such primary materials would thus enhance student learning and performance and technical research. (c) Require that schools build into accounting curricula current market developments. A common theme of our first set of recommendations is that accounting curricula should reflect recent developments, including globalization and evolving market factors. As a further catalyst to curricula development and evolution by educational institutions, the Committee 35 See, e.g., Aram Kostoglian, Eastern Region Attest Practice Leader, and Ernest Baugh, National Director of Professional Standards, Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C., Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1 (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/MayerHoffman McCannCommentLetter.pdf (noting that textbooks lack a thorough discussion of current market developments); PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 4 (June 30, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCCommentLtr TreasCmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf (noting support for updating teaching materials promptly to reflect recent developments such as the increasing use of IFRS). 36 See Stephanie Woodruff, Chief Revenue Officer, AverQ, Inc, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum (June 2, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ index.cfm?FuseAction=Home.ViewPopup&Topic_ id=9&FellowType_id=1&Reply_id=95&Suppress Layouts=True (suggesting the use or study of ‘‘technology’’ to address auditing profession challenges). 37 See Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State University, 14), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Reckers020408.pdf (affirming the need for student access to digitized searchable accounting and auditing materials). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 recommends ongoing attention to responsiveness to recent developments by the bodies that accredit educational institutions. Accrediting agencies review institutions of higher education and their programs and establish that overall resources and strategies are conformed to the mission of the institutions. For example, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) and the Association of Collegiate Business Schools and Programs (ACBSP) accredit business administration and accounting programs. Since 1919, the AACSB has accredited business administration programs and, since 1980, accounting programs offering undergraduate and graduate degrees. The AACSB has accredited over 450 U.S. business programs and over 150 U.S. accounting programs. Since 1988, the ACBSP has accredited business programs offering associate, baccalaureate, and graduate degrees. As of February 2008, over 400 educational institutions have achieved ACBSP accreditation. The accreditation standards at both accrediting agencies relate to, among other things, curricula, program and faculty resources, and faculty development. The Committee believes that the accreditation process and appropriate accreditation standards can contribute to curricular changes. In particular, accreditation standards that embody curricular requirements to reflect the dynamism and complexity of the global capital markets and that evolve to keep pace in the future can be helpful in maintaining and advancing the quality of accounting curricula. The AACSB has emphasized in its accreditation standards that accounting curricula should reflect recent market developments. For example, educational institutions must include in their curricula international accounting issues in order to receive AACSB accreditation. The Committee supports the accrediting agencies’ efforts to continually develop standards specifically emphasizing the need to update accounting programs. Recommendation 2. Improve the representation and retention of minorities in the auditing profession so as to enrich the pool of human capital in the profession. The auditing profession presents challenging and rewarding opportunities for those who pursue a career in auditing and the profession actively recruits talent from all backgrounds.38 Yet, the Committee was 38 The Committee discussed the issue of representation and retention of females in the profession and the Committee found that the PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 concerned by what it heard from individuals with various backgrounds about minority representation and retention in the auditing profession.39 In profession is undertaking significant efforts to hire and retain females and notes that these issues are being much better managed today. See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Amy Woods Brinkley, Global Risk Executive, Bank of America Corporation, 57), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/agendas/minutes-06-03-08.pdf (noting that the Committee spent considerable time discussing this issue of females in the profession); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kayla J. Gillan, Chief Administrative Officer, RiskMetrics Group, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Gillan060308.pdf (urging the Committee to examine the issue of females in the profession); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Anne M. Lang, Chief Human Resources Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 100–101), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/agendas/minutes-06-03-08.pdf (stating that ‘‘* * * certainly recruiting women into the profession is something that [Grant Thornton LLP has] done extremely well for the last several years * * * [the] advancement of * * * women is something that [Grant Thornton LLP] still need[s] to pay attention to’’). The Committee notes the following statistics: In 2007, at the partner level, females represented 23% of partners on average, while in 2004 they were 19% and in 1994 they were just 12% of all partners. See American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, A Decade of Changes in The Accounting Profession: Workforce Trends and Human Capital Practices 5 (Feb. 2006) and Dennis R. Reigle, Heather L. Bunning And Danielle Grant, 2008 Trends In The Supply of Accounting Graduates And The Demand For Public Accounting Recruits 60 (2008), available at https://ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/C1E2330217D3-4ED5-AE81-B274D9CD7812/0/AICPA_ Trends_Reports_2008.pdf. According to Public Accounting Report surveys, the percentage of female professionals at the largest firms was 47.3% in 2007 and 44.2% in 2004. See Women at Big Four Gain Ground in Partnership Percentage, Public Accounting Report 6 (Oct. 31, 2004) and Women Post Gains in Partnership Percentage, Public Accounting Report 11 (Jan. 31, 2008). From 2005 to 2007, women represented about half of the new hires at the six largest firms. See Center For Audit Quality, Report Of The Major Public Company Audit Firms To The Department Of The Treasury Advisory Committee On The Auditing Profession 58 (Jan. 23, 2008). The Committee also considered the effects of workload compression on retention in the profession. Some Committee members believe that audit firms and their clients could benefit from spreading tax preparation work throughout the year. See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Oct. 15, 2007) (Oral Remarks of William D. Travis, Director and Former Managing Partner, McGladrey & Pullen LLP, 71), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/agendas/minutes-10-15-07.pdf (noting that ‘‘[a] significant challenge for retention of personnel in mid-size and small audit firms is the extreme seasonality * * * during the winter season. This reality places enormous pressure on audit quality and balanced lives of * * * professionals’’); Record of Proceedings (Mar. 13, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Barry C. Melancon, President and Chief Executive Officer, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, 118), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/agendas/minutes-03-13-08.pdf (noting that the Human Capital Subcommittee discussed workload compression issues). 39 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Ira Solomon, R.C. Evans E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices 2004, minorities accounted for 22% of all bachelor’s and masters’ degrees awarded in accounting, while in 2007, minorities accounted for 21%.40 In 44321 2004, African Americans represented 1% of all CPAs, Hispanic/Latino, 3%, and Asian/Pacific Islander, 4%.41 See Figure 1. These percentages changed very little in 2007 when African Americans represented 1% of all CPAs, Hispanic/Latino, 2%, and Asian/Pacific Islander, 4%.42 See Figure 2. https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Wood120307.pdf. 40 Dennis R. Reigle, Heather L. Bunning And Danielle Grant, 2008 Trends In The Supply Of Accounting Graduates And The Demand For Public Accounting Recruits 30 (2008), available at https:// ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/C1E23302-17D3-4ED5AE81-B274D9CD7812/0/AICPA_Trends_Reports_ 2008.pdf. 41 Beatrice Sanders, And Leticia B. Romeo, The Supply Of Accounting Graduates And The Demand For Public Accounting Recruits–2005: For Academic Year 2003–2004 35 (2005), available at https://ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/11715FC6F0A7-4AD6-8D28-6285CBE77315/0/Supply_ DemandReport_2005.pdf. 42 Dennis R. Reigle, Heather L. Bunning And Danielle Grant, 2008 Trends In The Supply Of Accounting Graduates And The Demand For Public Accounting Recruits 61 (2008), available at https://ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/C1E2330217D3-4ED5-AE81-B274D9CD7812/0/AICPA_ Trends_Reports_2008.pdf. VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 EN30JY08.039</GPH> Distinguished Professor, and Head, Department of Accountancy, University of Illinois, 13), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Solomon120307.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of George S. Willie, Managing Partner, Bert Smith & Co., 2 (Jan. 30, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Willie120307.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Julie K. Wood, Chief People Officer, Crowe Chizek and Company LLC, 2), available at EN30JY08.038</GPH> mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES African Americans accounted for 5.4% of new hires in 2007 at the largest 44322 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices six accounting firms, Hispanics, 4.6%, and Asians, 21.3%.43 See Figure 3. Native, aggregating less than 7% of the total partners.44 See Figure 4. The Committee recognizes that important groups within the minority population are significantly underrepresented in the accounting and auditing profession, especially at senior levels, and this under-representation of minorities in the profession is unacceptable from both a societal and business perspective. As the demographics of the global economy continue to expand ethnic diversity, it is imperative that the profession also reflect these changes. The auditing profession’s historic role in performing audits in an increasingly diverse global setting and in establishing investor trust cannot be maintained unless the profession itself is viewed as open and 43 Center For Audit Quality, Report Of The Major Public Company Audit Firms To The Department Of The Treasury Advisory Committee On The Auditing Profession 59 (Jan. 23, 2008), available at https://www.thecaq.org/publicpolicy/data/TRData 2008-01-23-FullReport.pdf. 44 Center For Audit Quality, Report Of The Major Public Company Audit Firms To The Department Of The Treasury Advisory Committee On The Auditing Profession 60 (Jan. 23, 2008), available at https://www.thecaq.org/publicpolicy/data/TR Data2008-01-23-FullReport.pdf. VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 EN30JY08.040</GPH> Latino, 3.4% were Asian, and less than 1.0% were Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander or American Indian/Alaska EN30JY08.044</GPH> mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES In 2007, 1.0% of the partners in the six largest accounting firms were African American, 1.6% were Hispanic/ Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES representative. To ensure the continued health and vibrancy of the profession, it is imperative that all participants in the financial, investor, educator, and auditor community adopt and implement policies, programs, practices, and curricula designed to attract and retain minorities. In order for minority participation in the accounting and auditing profession to grow and sustain itself, minority recruitment and retention needs to be a multi-faceted, multi-year effort, implemented and championed by community leaders, families, and most importantly business and academic leaders who educate, recruit, employ, and rely on accountants and auditors. In this regard, the Committee recognizes the importance of setting goals and measuring progress against these goals and thus makes the following recommendations: (a) Recruit minorities into the auditing profession from other disciplines and careers. The Committee heard from witnesses that the auditing profession has ‘‘fallen short’’ on its minority recruitment goals.45 Accordingly, the Committee recommends that auditing firms actively market to and recruit from minority non-accounting graduate populations, both at the entry and experienced hire level, utilizing cooperative efforts by academics and firm-based training programs to assist in this process.46 Generally, auditing firms hire individuals for the audit practice who are qualified to sit for the Uniform CPA Examination.47 Further, the Committee recommends that auditing firms expand their recruitment initiatives at historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), and explore the use of proprietary schools as another way to recruit minorities into the profession.48 45 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Julie K. Wood, Chief People Officer, Crowe Chizek and Company LLC, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Wood120307.pdf. 46 See Ernst & Young LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 22 (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/EYACAPComment LetterFINAL2.pdf (supporting this Recommendation). 47 See Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of James S. Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ernst & Young LLP, 4 (Feb. 1, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/QFRs-12-3-07.pdf (noting that since 1997, Ernst & Young LLP has typically hired individuals qualified to sit for the Uniform CPA Examination). 48 Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Frank K. Ross, Director, Center for Accounting Education, Howard University School of Business, 3), available at VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 Currently over 100 educational institutions established before 1964 to serve the African American community are designated as HBCUs and over fifty of these HBCUs maintain accounting programs. Approximately 290,000 students are enrolled in HBCUs 49 and HBCUs enroll 14% of all African American students in higher education.50 Twenty-seven HBCUs have one or more of the six largest accounting firms recruiting professional staff on their campus.51 Both the number of these schools visited by the largest firms and the number of firms recruiting at these schools should increase. Proprietary schools are for-profit businesses that teach vocational or occupational skills and there are over 2,000 proprietary schools in the United States.52 In 2005, these schools enrolled over 1 million students: African Americans accounted for 23% of these students, Hispanics, 13%, and Asian/ Pacific Islander, 4%.53 (b) Institute initiatives to increase the retention of minorities in the profession. The Committee considered testimony on the retention of minorities in the profession.54 As discussed above, minorities are significantly underrepresented in leadership and https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Ross060308.pdf (agreeing that this Recommendation will help increase minority recruitment). 49 Stephen Provasnik and Linda L. Shafer, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, 1976 to 2001 2 (NCES 2004–062), available at https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004062.pdf. 50 White House Initiative On Historically Black Colleges And Universities, available at https://www.ed.gov/about/inits/list/whhbcu/edliteindex.html. 51 Center For Audit Quality, Supplement To Report Of The Major Public Company Audit Firms To The Department Of The Treasury Advisory Committee On The Auditing Profession 1 (Mar. 5, 2008), available at https://www.thecaq.org/publicpolicy/data/ TRData2008-03-05-Supplement1.pdf. 52 Thomas D. Snyder, Sally A. Dillow, And Charlene M. Hoffman, Digest Of Education Statistics 2007 Table 5 (NCES 2008–022), available at https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008022.pdf. 53 Thomas D. Snyder, Sally A. Dillow, And Charlene M. Hoffman, Digest Of Education Statistics 2007 Table 220 (NCES 2008–022), available at https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008022.pdf. 54 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of George S. Willie, Managing Partner, Bert Smith & Co., 3), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Willie120307.pdf (noting that ‘‘firms must do more to retain and promote minority professionals’’); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Frank K. Ross, Director, Center for Accounting Education, Howard University School of Business, 8), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Ross060308.pdf (noting that ‘‘auditing firms need to establish aggressive retention programs that focus on retention’’). PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44323 partnership positions within the profession. The Committee recognizes the lack of minority mentors and role models 55 in the profession and the profession’s awareness of this situation.56 In a 2006 National Association of Black Accountants (NABA) survey, almost 60% of African American respondents stated that their mentors come from outside of the profession and almost 55% of respondents stated that they had been with their current employer for three years or less.57 The Committee considered testimony that African Americans leave the profession for other careers or do not wish to become managers or partners because they see that there are few African Americans in leadership positions within the firms.58 The Committee also heard testimony that the retention rate for Hispanics ‘‘is low.’’ 59 In 2004, Hispanics represented 3% of the professional staff at all CPA 55 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Gilbert R. Vasquez, Managing Partner, Vasquez & Company LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Vasquez02042008.pdf (highlighting the lack of Hispanic role models and mentors in the accounting profession). 56 See Record of Proceedings (July 12, 2006) (Written Testimony of Manuel Fernandez, National Managing Partner—Campus Recruiting, KPMG LLP, to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the House Financial Services Committee, 5), available at https:// financialservices.house.gov/media/pdf/ 071206mf.pdf (identifying the lack of minority faculty mentors and role models and noting ‘‘[w]hen students of color do not see professors of their own ethnic background on the accounting faculty, they are less apt to consider the option of a career in accountancy’’); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of George S. Willie, Managing Partner, Bert Smith & Co., 1 (Jan. 30, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 12032007/Willie120307.pdf (recommending the establishment of a mentor program for minority accounting students). 57 The Center for Accounting Education, Howard University School of Business, NABA Membership Survey, Analysis of Work Experience of NABA Members Table 23 and 5 (Sept. 15, 2006), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/ NABAMembershipSurvey.pdf. 58 Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Frank K. Ross, Director, Center for Accounting Education, Howard University School of Business, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Ross060308.pdf. 59 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Gilbert R. Vasquez, Managing Partner, Vasquez & Company LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Vasquez02042008.pdf. E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44324 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES firms 60 and this percentage did not change in 2007.61 The Committee believes that firms must continue to find ways to retain minorities in the profession in order to ensure the profession’s long-term viability. The Committee believes the need to instill confidence is critical to an individual’s career as is the need for mentors, especially at the start of an individual’s career.62 The Committee also recognizes that auditing firms must continue to give challenging assignments so that individuals have the motivation to stay in the profession.63 Thus, the Committee recommends that public company auditing firms intensify their efforts to create and maintain retention programs, including mentoring programs, for their employees as a means to provide these individuals with guidance, career coaching, and networking. Further, the Committee recommends that the profession compile and issue best practices related to minority recruitment and retention.64 (c) Emphasize the role of community colleges in the recruitment of minorities into the auditing profession. Community colleges are a vital part of the postsecondary education system. 60 Beatrice Sanders, and Leticia B. Romeo, The Supply of Accounting Graduates and the Demand for Public Accounting Recruits—2005: For Academic Year 2003–2004 32 (2005), available at https://ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/11715FC6– F0A7–4AD6–8D28–6285CBE77315/0/ Supply_DemandReport_2005.pdf. 61 Dennis R. Reigle, Heather L. Bunning and Danielle Grant, 2008 Trends in the Supply of Accounting Graduates and the Demand for Public Accounting Recruits 59 (2008), available at https:// ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/C1E23302–17D3– 4ED5–AE81–B274D9CD7812/0/AICPA_Trends_ Reports_2008.pdf. 62 Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Frank K. Ross, Director, Center for Accounting Education, Howard University School of Business, 8), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Ross060308.pdf (noting that ‘‘auditing firms need to establish aggressive retention programs that focus on confidence * * * the single greatest source of confidence is a good mentor. Unless [an individual has] been blessed with a truly strong mentor, it may be hard to understand how beneficial it is’’). 63 Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Anne M. Lang, Chief Human Resources Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 83), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/minutes-06-03-08.pdf (stating that ‘‘ * * * what [Grant Thornton] find[s], at least in the research that we’ve done with people coming into the organization and staying in public accounting, is that meaningful and challenging work and the opportunity to advance, based on an individual’s career aspirations, is really what keeps our people longer’’). 64 See PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Comment Letter Regarding the Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 5 (June 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCComment LtrTreasCmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf. VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 They provide open access to postsecondary education, preparing students for transfer to four-year institutions, providing workforce development and skills training, and offering non-credit programs. Moreover, as the cost of higher education continues its upward climb, more and more high-achieving students are beginning their postsecondary study through the community college system. As of January 2008, approximately 11.5 million students were enrolled in the 1,200 community colleges in the United States: African Americans accounted for 13% of these students, Hispanics, 15%, and Asian/Pacific Islander, 6%.65 In August 1992, the Accounting Education Change Commission (AECC), created in the late 1980s by the academic community to examine potential changes to accounting education, recognized the importance of two-year colleges in accounting education. The AECC noted that over half of all students taking their first course in accounting do so at two-year colleges and that approximately onefourth of the students entering the accounting profession take their initial accounting coursework at two-year colleges. The AECC called for ‘‘greater recognition within the academic and professional communities of the efforts and importance of two-year accounting programs.’’ 66 The Committee also heard from witnesses emphasizing the need to expand minority recruitment initiatives at community colleges.67 The Committee believes that more attention to community colleges may provide, in addition to an increase in the overall supply of students, another avenue for minorities to become familiar with and attracted to the auditing profession. Currently none of the largest 65 American Association of Community Colleges, available at https://www2.aacc.nche.edu/research/ index.htm. 66 Accounting Education Change Commission, Issues Statement Number 3: The Importance of Two-Year Colleges for Accounting Education (Aug. 1992), available at https://aaahq.org/aecc/ PositionsandIssues/issues3.htm. 67 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Gilbert R. Vasquez, Managing Partner, Vasquez & Company LLP, 4), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/02042008/Vasquez02042008.pdf (noting that auditing firms overlook community colleges where minorities, and specifically Latinos, represent a large student population); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of George S. Willie, Managing Partner, Bert Smith & Co., 2 (Jan. 30, 2008)), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ QFRs-12-3-07.pdf (recommending that the auditing profession increase it visibility at community colleges). PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 auditing firms recruits at community colleges because ‘‘individuals who only have associate degrees typically will not have sufficient qualifications to satisfy state licensing requirements.’’ 68 The Committee recommends that accreditation of two-year college accounting programs at community colleges be explored and implemented when viable, so that these programs can be relied upon as one of the requisite steps toward fulfilling undergraduate educational requirements.69 Further, the Committee recommends that auditing firms and educational institutions at all levels support and cooperate in building strong fundamental academic accounting programs at community colleges, including providing internships or financial support for students who begin their studies in twoyear programs and may be seeking careers in the auditing profession. The Committee also recommends that auditing firms and four-year colleges and universities and their faculty focus on outreach to community college students in order to support students’ transition from community colleges to four-year educational institutions.70 (d) Emphasize the utility and effectiveness of cross-sabbaticals and internships with faculty and students at Historically Black Colleges and Universities. As discussed above, African Americans are significantly underrepresented in the auditing profession. The Committee recommends encouraging a concerted effort to increase the focus upon HBCUs in order to raise the number of African Americans in the auditing profession and urging the HBCUs, auditing firms, corporations, federal and state 68 Center for Audit Quality, Supplement to Report of the Major Public Company Audit Firms to the Department of the Treasury Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession 1 (Mar. 5, 2008), available at https://www.thecaq.org/publicpolicy/data/ TRData2008-03-05-Supplement1.pdf. 69 See Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Anne M. Lang, Chief Human Resources Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Lang060308.pdf (supporting the accreditation of community colleges). 70 See, e.g., Cynthia M. Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 8 (June 26, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/CAQCommentletter 62708FINAL.pdf (stating that outreach programs to community colleges could be effective); PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 5 (June 30, 2008), available at https://comments. treas.gov/_files/PwCCommentLtrTreasCmt DraftandAddendum63008.pdf (suggesting that the Committee recommend steps to transition students from community colleges to four-year colleges and universities). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES governments, and other entities to emphasize the use of crosssabbaticals.71 Cross-sabbaticals are interactive relationships where faculty and seasoned professionals are regularly represented in the practice and academic environments through exchanges. Evidence suggests that such exchanges can be beneficial, and continued development of such exchanges is expected to provide substantial benefits for all parties.72 Cross-sabbaticals present an opportunity for ‘‘reflective thinking’’ for seasoned professionals.73 In addition, the Committee recommends that the over fifty HBCUs with accounting programs require one member of their accounting faculty annually to participate in a crosssabbatical with a private or public sector entity. The Committee also recommends that the private and public sector entities provide these opportunities, as well as focus on other arrangements to build relationships at these educational institutions. The Committee received testimony regarding the lack of minority mentors and role models 74 and notes that the 71 See Cynthia M. Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 8 (June 26, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/CAQCommentletter 62708FINAL.pdf (agreeing with this Recommendation). 72 See Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Fornelli020408.pdf (recommending encouraging sabbaticals, internships, and fellowship opportunities, structured to give faculty opportunities to conduct research for promotion and tenure); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State University, 68), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/minutes-2-4-08.pdf (stating that sabbaticals deliver professors ‘‘a wealth of knowledge they could bring back in the classroom’’). 73 See Record of Proceedings (Mar. 13, 2008) (Oral Remarks of H. Rodgin Cohen, Chairman, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, 69), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/minutes-03-13-08.pdf (noting that spending time in the classroom should ‘‘give the [practicing accountant] the time to do the reflective thinking’’); Record of Proceedings (Mar. 13, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Zoe-Vonna Palmrose, Deputy Chief Accountant, SEC), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/minutes-03-13-08.pdf (commenting that sabbaticals provide the ‘‘opportunity for reflective thinking’’). 74 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Frank K. Ross, Director, Center for Accounting Education, Howard University School of Business, 9), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/06032008/Ross060308.pdf (highlighting that a 2006 NABA survey revealed that almost 60% of African American respondents VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 profession has recognized this situation.75 Thus, the Committee also recommends that public company auditing firms intensify their efforts to create internships and mentoring programs for students in accounting and other complementary disciplines, including those from HBCUs and community colleges, as a means to increase the awareness of the accounting profession and its attractiveness among minority students. (e) Increase the numbers of minority accounting doctorates through focused efforts. Some dedicated programs have succeeded in attracting minorities to enter and complete accounting doctoral studies.76 In particular, the PhD Project, an effort of the KPMG Foundation, has worked to increase the diversity of business school faculty.77 The PhD Project focuses on attracting minorities to business doctoral programs, and provides a network of peer support. Since the PhD Project’s establishment in 1994, the number of minority professors at U.S. business schools has increased from 294 to 889.78 Ninety percent who enter the PhD Project earn their doctorates, and 99% of those who complete their doctorates go on to stated that their mentors come from outside of the profession); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Gilbert R. Vasquez, Managing Partner, Vasquez & Company LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Vasquez02042008.pdf (highlighting the lack of Hispanic role models and mentors in the accounting profession). 75 See Record of Proceedings (July 12, 2006) (Written Testimony of Manuel Fernandez, National Managing Partner—Campus Recruiting, KPMG LLP, to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the House Financial Services Committee, 5), available at https://financialservices. house.gov/media/pdf/071206mf.pdf (identifying the lack of minority faculty mentors and role models and noting ‘‘[w]hen students of color do not see professors of their own ethnic background on the accounting faculty, they are less apt to consider the option of a career in accountancy’’); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of George S. Willie, Managing Partner, Bert Smith & Co., 1 (Jan. 30, 2008)), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Willie120307.pdf (recommending the establishment of a mentor program for minority accounting students). 76 For a list of educational support programs that auditing firms are sponsoring, see Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Barry Salzberg, Chief Executive Officer, Deloitte LLP, Appendix A), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/02042008/Salzberg020408.pdf. 77 For further information on the PhD Project, see https://www.phdproject.org/mission.html. 78 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Barry Salzberg, Chief Executive Officer, Deloitte LLP, Appendix A), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Salzberg020408.pdf. PO 00000 44325 teach.79 The PhD Project has received over $17.5 million 80 in funding since 1994 from corporations, foundations, universities, and other interested parties.81 The Committee believes that programs such as these can successfully recruit minorities to accounting doctoral studies. The Committee recommends that auditing firms, corporations, and other interested parties advertise existing and successful efforts to increase the number of minority doctorates by developing further dedicated programs.82 Additionally, the Committee recommends that auditing firms, corporations, and other interested parties maintain and increase the funding of these programs. Recommendation 3. Ensure a sufficiently robust supply of qualified accounting faculty to meet demand for the future and help prepare new entrants to the profession to perform high quality audits. The Committee heard testimony from individuals regarding the need to have an adequate supply of faculty with the knowledge and experience to develop qualified professionals for the increasingly complex and global auditing profession.83 79 See Jane Porter, Going to the Head of the Class: How the PhD Project is Helping to Boost the Number of Minority Professors in B-schools, Business Week Online (Dec. 27, 2006), available at https://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/ dec2006/bs20061227_926455.htm. 80 See Record of Proceedings (July 12, 2006) (Written Testimony of Manuel Fernandez, National Managing Partner—Campus Recruiting, KPMG LLP, to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the House Financial Services Committee, 5), available at https:// financialservices.house.gov/media/pdf/ 071206mf.pdf. 81 For further information on the PhD Project, see https://www.phdproject.org/corp_sponsors.html. 82 See, e.g., Cynthia M. Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 9 (June 26, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/CAQCommentletter 62708FINAL.pdf (stating that this Recommendation could lead to an increase in the number of minority accounting doctorates); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Frank K. Ross, Director, Center for Accounting Education, Howard University School of Business, 11), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Ross060308.pdf (noting the need to expand support for the PhD Project and similar initiatives). 83 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of David W. Leslie, Chancellor Professor of Education, College of William and Mary, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Leslie120307.pdf (noting a 13.3% decline in accounting faculty from 1988 to 2004); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ Continued Frm 00115 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44326 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices from 20,321 in 1993 to 17,610 in 2004, while student (undergraduate) enrollment increased by 12.3% over the same period.84 See Figure 5. and managerial accounting, respectively, will be met.87 In addition to the accounting faculty supply issues, the Committee heard testimony from witnesses on the need to ensure faculty are qualified and able to teach students the latest market developments, such as fair value accounting and IFRS. The Committee learned that often new accounting faculty may have little practical experience.88 Witnesses testified to the difficulty of academics acquiring ‘‘practice-oriented’’ knowledge as the bond between the profession and academia is underdeveloped. Witnesses did suggest improving these relationships with incentives for sabbaticals and sharing practice experience.89 In this regard, the Committee makes the following recommendations: (a) Increase the supply of accounting faculty through public and private funding and raise the number of professionally qualified faculty that teach on campuses. The Committee recognizes that ensuring an adequate supply of doctoral accounting faculty in higher education is crucial to both retaining the academic standing of the discipline on campus and developing well-prepared and educated entry-level professionals. The resource represented by these professionals is essential for high quality audits. The Committee believes that high quality audits are critical to well-functioning capital markets, and therefore the funding necessary to acap/submissions/02042008/Nusbaum020408.pdf (stating that ‘‘recent years have seen a reduction in accounting faculty, based on a wave of retirements and lack of accounting PhDs coming into the system’’); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Ira Solomon, R.C. Evans Distinguished Professor, and Head, Department of Accountancy, University of Illinois, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Solomon120307.pdf (stating that ‘‘the number of persons entering accountancy doctoral programs is too low to sustain the accountancy professoriate’’). 84 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of David W. Leslie, Chancellor Professor of Education, College of William and Mary, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Leslie120307.pdf. 85 James R. Hasselback, 2007 Analysis of Accounting Faculty Birthdates, available at https:// aaahq.org/temp/phd/JimHasselbackBirthdate Slide.pdf. 86 R. David Plumlee, Steven J. Kachelmeier, Silvia A. Madeo, Jamie H. Pratt, and George Krull, Assessing the Shortage of Accounting Faculty, 21 Issues in Accounting Education, No. 2, 119 (May 2006). 87 R. David Plumlee, Steven J. Kachelmeier, Silvia A. Madeo, Jamie H. Pratt, and George Krull, Assessing the Shortage of Accounting Faculty, 21 Issues in Accounting Education, No. 2, 119 (May 2006). 88 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Joseph V. Carcello, Director of Research, Corporate Governance, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 21), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Carcello120307.pdf. 89 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 2), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/02042008/Fornelli020408.pdf (noting that the auditing firms recognize the need to be more active in sharing practical experiences with academics); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State University, 19), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Reckers020408.pdf (‘‘[R]elationships between practitioners and academics have so diminished that they are little more than formal liaison assignments involving very few parties from any side * * * [w]here there have been opportunities for interaction (curriculum issues, policy deliberations, research matters), those opportunities have been embraced perceptibly less often.’’). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 EN30JY08.041</GPH> faculty retirements. According to National Study of Postsecondary Faculty data, the number of full- and part-time accounting faculty at all types of educational institutions fell by 13.3% Moreover, the current pipeline of doctoral faculty is not keeping pace with anticipated retirements. In November 2006, it was estimated that one-third of the approximately 4,000 accounting doctoral faculty in the United States were 60 years old or older, and one-half were 55 years old or older.85 The average retirement age of accounting faculty was 62.4 years. In terms of specialization within the accounting discipline, an AAA study concluded that only 22% and 27% of the projected demand for doctoral faculty in auditing and tax, respectively, will be met by expected graduations in the coming years.86 However, 91% and 79% of the projected demand for doctoral faculty in financial accounting mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES The Committee recognizes that there is a high level of concern about the adequacy of both the near- and the longterm supply of doctoral faculty, especially given the anticipated pace of Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES supply the healthy pipeline of doctoral accounting faculty to assist in providing these human capital resources must be made available.90 The Committee therefore recommends expanding government funding, at both the federal and state level, for accounting doctoral candidates. The Committee also recommends that private sources (including corporations, institutional investors, and foundations as well as auditing firms) continue to be encouraged to fund accounting doctoral candidates.91 The Committee recognizes and commends the auditing firms’ support of doctoral candidates.92 90 See Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Jean C. Bedard, Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accounting, Department of Accountancy, Bentley College, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Bedard060308.pdf (noting that ‘‘[f]unding for doctoral study is absolutely critical’’). 91 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kayla J. Gillan, Chief Administrative Officer, RiskMetrics Group, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Gillan060308.pdf (noting that Sarbanes-Oxley Act Section 109(c)(2) states that monetary penalties assessed by the PCAOB against registered firms and individuals are to be used exclusively to fund merit-based scholarships for accounting undergraduate and graduate students and that Section 109(c)(2) also includes certain procedural requirements for the funds’ release, such as Congressional approval, and recommending the Committee suggest eliminating the unnecessary procedural obstacles contained in the statute); PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 6 (June 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCCommentLtr TreasCmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf (noting that the profession provides funding for faculty, but other private sector participants as well as Congress and state and local officials could contribute funding). 92 See Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Fornelli020408.pdf. Other commenters have suggested another method to increase the number of faculty and professionals as well as potentially expand diversity within the profession is by increasing the current H–1B quota of 65,000. See, e.g., Cynthia M. Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 9 (June 26, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/CAQ Commentletter62708FINAL.pdf (noting the need to increase the quota for H–1B visas to help increase the number of faculty and the number of professionals knowledgeable of international issues); PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 7 (June 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCCommentLtr TreasCmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf (recommending immigration reform, such as expansion of H–1B visa program, to increase supply of accounting faculty, international experience, and diversity). But, c.f., Carl Olson, California National University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 31–32 (June 6, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/Olson CommentLetter0606082.pdf (opposing the use of H– 1B visas by accounting firms to recruit employees). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 Currently, minimum accreditation requirements for accountancy faculty typically require that approximately 50% of full-time faculty have a doctoral degree. Commonly, business school deans and academic vice presidents (those making the budgetary decisions regarding faculty allotments on campuses) interpret this accreditation requirement to require that a minimum of 50% of a department’s faculty hold an earned doctorate and are actively engaged in research and publication activity. Although a high percentage of faculty is expected to be professionally qualified (i.e., having recent direct business experience), at times gatekeepers for budget allocations may be less enthusiastic about maximizing the number of professionally qualified teaching slots in a given program. The Committee sees benefits to the increased participation of professionally qualified and experienced faculty, who would bring additional practical business experience to the classrooms, and notes that witnesses and commenters have underscored the benefits of professionally qualified and experienced faculty.93 Therefore, the Committee recommends that accrediting agencies continue to actively support faculty composed of academically and professionally qualified and experienced faculty. (b) Emphasize the utility and effectiveness of cross-sabbaticals. As discussed above, cross-sabbaticals are interactive relationships where faculty and seasoned professionals are regularly represented in the practice and academic environments through exchanges. For example, currently, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the FASB offer fellowship programs for professional accountants and accounting academics. Evidence suggests that such exchanges can be beneficial, and continued development of such exchanges is expected to provide substantial benefits for all 93 See Andrew D. Bailey, Jr., Professor of Accountancy-Emeritus, University of Illinois, and Senior Policy Advisor, Grant Thornton LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 19 (Jan. 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/BAILEYCOMMENTSON TREASURYADVISORYCOMMITTEEOUTLINE FINALSUBMISSION13008.doc (stating that ‘‘[t]here are clearly practice professionals that make excellent contributions to some of the most highly rated accounting programs in the country’’); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Fornelli020408.pdf (stating that accreditation bodies ‘‘revise accreditation standards to allow the employment of more audit professionals, either active or retired, as adjunct professors’’). PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44327 parties.94 Cross-sabbaticals present an opportunity for ‘‘reflective thinking’’ for seasoned professionals.95 Academics often face the disincentive of being forced to forgo their full salaries in order to engage in such sabbaticals,96 and colleges and universities may not encourage professional practice sabbaticals, preferring that the focus of faculty be directed exclusively toward academic research and the number and placement of scholarly articles. The Committee believes that changing both the academic and practice culture will require a plan and commitment of support at the highest institutional levels. Specifically, the Committee recommends that educational institutions, auditing firms, corporations, federal and state regulators, and others engage in a twofold strategy to both encourage crosssabbaticals and eliminate financial or career disincentives for participating in such experiences.97 Further, the 94 See Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Fornelli020408.pdf (recommending encouraging sabbaticals, internships, and fellowship opportunities, structured to give faculty opportunities to conduct research for promotion and tenure); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of William Kinney, Charles & Elizabeth Prothro Regents Chair in Business and Price Waterhouse Fellow in Auditing, University of Texas, Austin, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Kinney060308.pdf (noting the completion of an August 2007 to February 2008 assignment as an academic fellow in the Professional Practice Group of Office of Chief Accountant at the SEC, and stating that the experience provided a greater understanding of the regulatory process and that ‘‘my students have already benefited through more relevant classes’’); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State University, 68), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Reckers020408.pdf (stating that sabbaticals deliver professors ‘‘a wealth of knowledge they could bring back in the classroom’’). 95 See Record of Proceedings (Mar. 13, 2008) (Oral Remarks of H. Rodgin Cohen, Chairman, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, 69), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/minutes-03–13–08.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Mar. 13, 2008) (Oral Remarks of ZoeVonna Palmrose, Deputy Chief Accountant, SEC, 67), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/agendas/minutes-03–13– 08.pdf. 96 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State University, 67–69), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Reckers020408.pdf (noting the financial disincentives associated with sabbaticals). 97 See, e.g., Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 11 (June 27, 2008), available at https:// E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM Continued 30JYN1 44328 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Committee recommends that university administrators place as high a value on professional sabbaticals for purposes of promotion and tenure as they do for research and scholarly publication.98 The Committee also recommends that accrediting agencies establish an expectation that at least one full-time member per year of each accounting faculty group participate in a sabbatical with a private sector or a governmental entity. Auditing firms, corporations, government agencies, and universities should be expected to provide these opportunities with the elimination of any financial disincentives. Further, the Committee recommends expanding faculty fellowship programs in agencies, such as those at the SEC and the FASB, and making them available at the PCAOB. The successful long-term operation of these programs at the SEC and the FASB and the application of appropriate conflict-of-interest and recusal rules have demonstrated that these programs can be maintained and expanded while protecting against conflicts of interest. (c) Create a variety of tangible and sufficiently attractive incentives that will motivate private sector institutions to fund both accounting faculty and faculty research, to provide practice materials for academic research and for participation of professionals in behavioral and field study projects, and to encourage practicing accountants to pursue careers as academically and professionally qualified faculty. As discussed above, there are concerns about the adequate supply of accounting faculty and about the need to have faculty who can inject more comments.treas.gov/_files/ DeloitteLLPCommentLetter.pdf (noting the formation of a task force on cross-sabbaticals with accounting faculty, including those at HBCUs); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of William Kinney, Charles & Elizabeth Prothro Regents Chair in Business and Price Waterhouse Fellow in Auditing, University of Texas, Austin, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Kinney060308.pdf (supporting the idea of allowing professors to take sabbaticals and providing direct evidence by describing a recent assignment as an academic fellow in the Professional Practice Group of the SEC’s Office of Chief Accountant). 98 See Joseph V. Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP, Professor and Director of Research—Corporate Governance Center, University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard, Professor of Accountancy, Bentley College, and Dana R. Hermanson, Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting, Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 4 (May 15, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAPCommentLetterMay152008.pdf (noting the need to ‘‘[p]lace equal emphasis on completing a sabbatical with a private sector institution or government entity as with publishing one ‘tier A’ paper’’). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 practical experience into classroom learning. Currently, there are few specific financial incentives encouraging private sector funding of accounting doctoral faculty or sponsoring of professional accountants to teach at educational institutions. Nonetheless, the Committee notes that the profession recognizes the need to support initiatives to increase faculty and is currently directing its efforts to raise funds for such a new initiative.99 The Committee also heard from several witnesses regarding the unavailability of data relating to auditing practice and the impact this lack of data has on research and potentially on the profession’s sustainability. In particular, witnesses stated that the decline in auditing research materials, including archival or experimental data, will lead to a further decline in faculty and doctoral students specializing in auditing.100 Since educational institutions normally require publications in top tier journals for promotion or tenure, faculty and doctoral students will conduct research in accounting areas where data are prevalent. The Committee also heard that encouraging more professionally 99 See Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Fornelli020408.pdf (stating that ‘‘[b]ecause of the profession’s concern over the shortage of qualified faculty to teach accounting, the AICPA Foundation, along with the 80 largest CPA firms, are working to raise more than $17 million to fund additional PhD candidates at participating universities’’). 100 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Joseph V. Carcello, Director of Research, Corporate Governance, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 21), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Carcello120307.pdf (‘‘[D]octoral students in * * * [a 2007] Deloitte [Foundation] study indicated that lack of access to public accounting firm and client data represented a severe obstacle to the research they want to conduct, and that this difficulty might result in them focusing on a different accounting sub-area. This issue must be addressed, or auditing may cease to exist as a discipline on many university campuses.’’); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State University, 8), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Reckers020408.pdf (recommending the development of a means ‘‘for researchers to gain access to auditing related data’’ and noting, without this means, interest in doctoral auditing programs will continue to decline); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Ira Solomon, R.C. Evans Distinguished Professor, and Head, Department of Accountancy, University of Illinois, 7), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Solomon120307.pdf (noting the lack of auditing research data and the ‘‘drastic decline in auditing research among extant accountancy faculty and among accountancy doctoral students’’). PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 qualified and experienced faculty will foster a stronger relationship between academia and the profession.101 Currently, there exists a need for more interaction between academia and the profession.102 Encouraging practicing accountants to pursue careers as academically and professionally qualified faculty would bring practical business experience to classrooms so that students are better prepared to perform quality audits in the dynamic business environment. Finally, the Committee recommends that Congress pass legislation creating a variety of tangible incentives for private sector institutions to establish support for accounting and auditing faculty and faculty research, to facilitate access to research data and individuals,103 and to sponsor transition of professional accountants from practice to teaching positions. These incentives must be sufficiently attractive to companies and auditing firms to affect rapid behavioral change, and should avoid cumbersome levels of administration. The Committee believes that these incentives would 101 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 2), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/02042008/Fornelli020408.pdf. 102 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State University, 19), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Reckers020408.pdf. 103 See, e.g., Joseph V. Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP, Professor and Director of Research— Corporate Governance Center, University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard, Professor of Accountancy, Bentley College, and Dana R. Hermanson, Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting, Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2 (May 15, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAPCommentLetterMay152008.pdf (recommending that auditing firms and regulators assist academic researchers with access to data relating to the auditing practice); Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 11–12 (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ DeloitteLLPCommentLetter.pdf (noting the attempt to actively work with academia to find ways to overcome confidentiality issues concerning auditing practice data); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kayla J. Gillan, Chief Administrative Officer, RiskMetrics Group, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Gillan060308.pdf (recommending that everyone have access to PCAOB inspection data and suggesting the Committee seek legislative amendments to allow this access); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of William Kinney, Charles & Elizabeth Prothro Regents Chair in Business and Price Waterhouse Fellow in Auditing, University of Texas, Austin, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Kinney060308.pdf (suggesting legislation encouraging access to data). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES provide the necessary impetus to private sector institutions to help increase the number of accounting faculty as well as faculty with significant practical experience. Recommendation 4. Develop and maintain consistent demographic and higher education program profile data. The Committee heard testimony regarding the lack of consistent demographic and higher education program profile data concerning the profession.104 The need for comparable, consistent, periodic information regarding the demographic profile of professional accountants and auditors, related higher education program capacity, entry-level supply and demand of personnel, accounting firm retention and compensation practices, and similar particulars are fundamental to a meaningful understanding of the human capital circumstances impacting the public company auditing profession and its future and sustainability. Historically, there has been neither an ongoing collection of data nor a centralized location where the general public can access data. For instance, the AICPA publishes a supply and demand study every two years. Additionally, various other groups, such as the AAA, the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy, colleges and universities, and individuals collect some of these data but not in a manner available and useful for research. Materials such as those supplied by the Center for Audit Quality to the Committee,105 previous AICPA Supply and Demand studies,106 and AAA104 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of David A. Costello, President and Chief Executive Officer, NASBA, 2– 4 (Feb. 6, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/QFRs-12-3-07.pdf (stating that ‘‘[s]ince 1970, * * * NASBA and the AICPA have recognized the need for a national database for Certified Public Accountants and have taken steps leading to the development of the database * * * [c]urrently, NASBA is not aware of a mechanism or database which would provide an accurate count of CPAs, without the effect of ‘double counting’ ’’); Julia Grant, Demographic Challenges Facing the CPA Profession, 20 Research in Accounting Regulation (2008); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Ira Solomon, R.C. Evans Distinguished Professor, and Head, Department of Accountancy, University of Illinois, 13), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 12032007/Solomon120307.pdf (noting the lack of comprehensive accounting profession supply and demand data and recommending the ‘‘establishment of a continuous and comprehensive system that produces more timely and reliable supply and demand data’’). 105 Center for Audit Quality, Report of the Major Public Company Audit Firms to the Department of the Treasury Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (Jan. 23, 2008), available at https:// www.thecaq.org/publicpolicy/data/TRData2008-0123-FullReport.pdf. 106 Dennis R. Reigle, Heather L. Bunning and Danielle Grant, 2008 Trends in the Supply of VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 commissioned demographic research 107 provide examples of the necessary information. In addition, AICPA membership trends, augmented by data available from state boards of accountancy regarding numbers of licensees, may be useful data. Therefore, the Committee recommends the establishment of a national cooperative committee, comprised of organizations such as the AICPA and the AAA, to encourage periodic consistent demographic and higher education program profile data.108 The Committee believes that having such data available will increase the ability of auditing firms, corporations, investors, academics, policy makers, and others to understand more fully, monitor and evaluate, and take necessary or desirable actions with respect to the human capital in the auditing profession and its future and sustainability. Recommendation 5. Encourage the AICPA and the AAA to jointly form a commission to provide a timely study of the possible future of the higher education structure for the accounting profession. The Committee heard testimony regarding the feasibility of establishing a free-standing, post-graduate professional educational structure.109 Accounting Graduates and the Demand for Public Accounting Recruits (2008), available at https:// ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/C1E23302-17D3-4ED5AE81-B274D9CD7812/0/AICPA_Trends_Reports_ 2008.pdf. 107 David Leslie, Accounting Faculty in U.S. Colleges and Universities: Status and Trends, 1993– 2004, A Report of the American Accounting Association (Feb. 19, 2008). 108 See, e.g., Joseph V. Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP, Professor and Director of Research— Corporate Governance Center, University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard, Professor of Accountancy, Bentley College, and Dana R. Hermanson, Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting, Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2 (May 15, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ACAP CommentLetterMay152008.pdf (supporting this Recommendation); Ernst & Young LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 23 (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/EYACAPCommentLetter FINAL2.pdf (supporting this Recommendation); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Anne M. Lang, Chief Human Resources Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Lang060308.pdf (supporting this Recommendation). 109 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Oral Submission of Joseph V. Carcello, Director of Research, Corporate Governance, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 3), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/ CarcelloOralStatement120307.pdf (recommending that ‘‘the Advisory Committee consider a different model—an education model involving professional PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44329 Currently, there is no post-graduate institutional arrangement dedicated to accounting and auditing. Graduate programs in accounting are generally housed within business schools and linked with undergraduate accounting programs. The history of the development of U.S. educational programs and preparation for accounting careers reveals a pattern of evolution of increasing formal higher education, with accreditation standards following and reinforcing this evolution, and with market needs providing the impetus and context. Today, accrediting agencies have recognized over 150 accounting programs as the result of these programs’ improving accounting education as envisioned by prior studies and reports. In a November 2006 Vision Statement, the chief executive officers of the principal international auditing networks noted the challenges in educating future auditing professionals, including the sheer quantity and complexity of accounting and auditing standards, rapid technological advancements, and the need for specialized industry knowledge. 110 This development in the market leads to a clear need to anticipate and enhance the human capital elements of the auditing profession. As such, this vision statement provides the impetus to commission a group to study and propose a long-term institutional arrangement for accounting and auditing education. As in the past, in the face of challenges of the changing environment for the profession, the Committee believes that the educational system should thoughtfully consider the feasibility of a visionary educational model. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the AICPA and the AAA jointly form a body to provide a timely study of the possible future of the higher education structure for the schools of auditing * * *’’); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Anne M. Lang, Chief Human Resources Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 5), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/06032008/Lang060308.pdf (noting that the establishment of a commission to study a higher education structure for the accounting profession ‘‘is a very sound’’ recommendation). But, c.f., Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State University, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Reckers020408.pdf (discounting the feasibility of free-standing professional schools). 110 Global Capital Markets and the Global Economy: A Vision From the CEOs of the International Audit Networks 15 (Nov. 2006). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44330 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices accounting profession.111 This commission may include representation from higher education, practitioners from the wide spectrum of the accounting and auditing profession, regulators, preparers, users of the profession’s services, and others. The commission would consider the potential role of a postgraduate professional school model to enhance the quality and sustainability of a vibrant accounting and auditing profession. The commission should consider developments in accounting standards and their application, auditing needs, regulatory framework, globalization, the international pool of candidates, and technology. Finally, a blueprint for this sort of enhanced professional educational structure would also require the consideration of long-term market circumstances, academic governance, operations, programs, funding and resources, the role of accreditation, and experiential learning processes. V. Firm Structure and Finances mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES In addressing the sustainability of the auditing profession, the Committee sought input on and considered a number of matters relating directly to auditing firms, including audit quality, governance, transparency, global organization, financial strength, ability to access capital, the investing public’s 111 See, e.g., Joseph V. Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP, Professor and Director of Research— Corporate Governance Center, University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard, Professor of Accountancy, Bentley College, and Dana R. Hermanson, Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting, Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 5 (May 15, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAPCommentLetterMay152008.pdf (supporting this Recommendation and noting the need for these schools to be well-funded and be independent from business schools with control over tenure and promotion); Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 23 (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ DeloitteLLPCommentLetter.pdf (supporting this Recommendation and noting the commission should consider other human capital issues including financial and time concerns as well as recruiting individuals from other disciplines); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Anne M. Lang, Chief Human Resources Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Lang060308.pdf (agreeing with this Recommendation). But, c.f., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Frank K. Ross, Director, Center for Accounting Education, Howard University School of Business, 11), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Ross060308.pdf (noting the financial concerns that an extra year of schooling would have on the less affluent, which includes a ‘‘disproportionate number’’ of minorities). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 understanding of auditors’ responsibilities and communications, the limitations of audits, particularly relating to fraud detection and prevention, as well as the effect of litigation where audits are alleged to have been ineffective. The Committee also considered the regulatory system applicable to auditing firms. While much data was available to the Committee, such information was not exhaustive. Certain information regarding auditors of public companies, the auditor of record, and audit fees is readily available. Auditing firms also provide on a voluntarily basis certain other information they believe useful to clients, regulators, and/or investors. Also, in connection with the work of the Committee, the largest firms provided certain additional input, through the Center for Audit Quality (CAQ), sometimes by individual firm and sometimes in summarized format.112 After reviewing these data and receiving testimony from witnesses and comment letters, the Committee focused on a few specific areas: Fraud prevention and detection; federal and state regulatory system; governance; and disclosure of auditor changes. The Committee recommends that regulators, the auditing profession, and others, as applicable, effectuate the following: Recommendation 1. Urge the [ ] to create a national center to facilitate auditing firms’ and other market participants’ sharing of fraud prevention and detection experiences, practices, and data and innovation in fraud prevention and detection methodologies and technologies, and commission research and other fact-finding regarding fraud prevention and detection, and further, the development of best practices regarding fraud prevention and detection. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) standards currently require auditors to plan and perform audits to obtain reasonable assurance whether financial statements are free of material misstatement, including those caused by fraud.113 The Committee considered testimony and commentary regarding auditing firms’ responsibilities and practices relating to 112 Center for Audit Quality, Report of the Major Public Company Audit Firms to the Department of the Treasury Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (Jan. 23, 2008); Center for Audit Quality, Second Supplement to Report of the Major Public Company Audit Firms to the Department of the Treasury Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (Apr. 16, 2008). 113 Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement, Interim Auditing Standard AU 316 (Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 2002). PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 fraud prevention and detection.114 The auditing profession itself has recognized the significance of its duties with respect to fraud: ‘‘Perhaps no single issue is the subject of more confusion, yet is more important, than the nature of the obligation of auditors to detect fraud—or intentional material misstatement of financial information by public companies.’’ 115 No formal forum currently exists where auditors and other market participants regularly share their views and experiences relating to fraud prevention and detection in the context of fraudulent financial reporting. The Committee received testimony that it would improve audit quality and benefit the capital markets and investors and other financial statement users for auditing firms to share their fraud detection experiences 116 and to develop best practices relating to fraud prevention and detection.117 The Committee believes that a collective sharing of fraud prevention and detection experiences among auditors and other market participants will provide a broad view of auditor practices and ultimately improve fraud prevention and detection capabilities and enable the development of best practices. The Committee also believes that research into industry trends and statistics will help auditors focus and develop procedures to identify areas 114 See, e.g., Andrew D. Bailey, Jr., Professor of Accountancy-Emeritus, University of Illinois, and Senior Policy Advisor, Grant Thornton LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 4 (Jan. 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/BAILEYCOMMENTS ONTREASURYADVISORYCOMMITTEEOUTLINE FINALSUBMISSION13008.doc; Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Dennis Johnson, Senior Portfolio Manager, Corporate Governance, California Public Employees’ Retirement System, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Johnson020408.pdf. 115 Serving Global Capital Markets and the Global Economy: A View from the CEOS of the International Audit Networks 12 (Nov. 2006). 116 See, Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Cynthia M. Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 6 (Mar. 31, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/agendas/-QFRs-2-408.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of James S. Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ernst & Young LLP, 7), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/12032007/Turley 120307.pdf. 117 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 10), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Nusbaum020408.pdf (stating that ‘‘[s]uccess also requires that the profession work with standard setters and regulators to develop best practices and the infrastructure for effective audits designed to detect material financial fraud’’). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES and situations at greater risk for fraud. The Committee believes that best practices regarding fraud prevention and detection will enhance the processes and procedures of auditing firms. The Committee recommends that the [ ] create a national center both to facilitate auditing firms’ sharing of fraud prevention and detection experiences, practices, and data and innovation in fraud prevention and detection methodologies and technologies and to commission research and other factfinding regarding fraud prevention and detection.118 The Committee also recommends that the auditing firms, forensic accounting firms, certified fraud examiners, investors, other financial statement users, public companies, and academics develop, in consultation with the PCAOB, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), international regulators, and the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA), best practices regarding fraud prevention and detection.119 The Committee also 118 See, e.g., Joseph Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP Ernst & Young Professor and Director of Research—Corporate Governance Center University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accountancy Bentley College, Dana R. Hermanson Dinos Eminent Scholar Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 6, (May 15, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAPCommentLetterMay152008.pdf (supporting this Recommendation); Samuel K. Cotterell, Chair, NASBA, and David A. Costello, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/June 2908LetterheadTreasuryAdvisoryCommitteeonthe AuditingProfession.pdf (‘‘Conclusions from, or approaches discussed during, Center deliberations could have an immediate effect on the way accounting practitioners approach the performance of audits and would likely form the basis for consideration of changes in auditing standards.’’); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kenneth Nielsen Goldmann, Capital Markets and SEC Practice Director, J.H. Cohn LLP, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Goldmann060308.pdf (noting how useful such a center would be to smaller firm auditors in detecting and preventing fraud.); Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 10–11, (June 26, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/CAQ Commentletter62708FINAL.pdf (agreeing with this Recommendation and volunteering the Center for Audit Quality to house this center). But c.f., Jim Wanserski, Businessman, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum (June 3, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ACAPDraft ReportcommentsJune22008.doc (stating that public company management is key in fraud prevention and detection efforts more so than the external auditor and notes the small percentage of frauds uncovered by public company auditors). 119 See Dave Richards, Institute of Internal Auditors, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 recognizes that a national center and best practices will have greater impact if these concepts are ultimately extended and embraced internationally. Recommendation 2. Encourage greater regulatory cooperation and oversight of the public company auditing profession to improve the quality of the audit process and enhance confidence in the auditing profession and financial reporting. The SEC, the PCAOB, and individual state boards of accountancy regulate the auditing profession. The SEC and the PCAOB enforce the securities laws and regulations addressing public company audits. Individual state accountancy laws in fifty-five jurisdictions in the United States govern the licensing and regulation of both individuals and firms who practice as certified public accountants.120 State boards of accountancy enforce these laws and also administer the Uniform CPA Examination. NASBA serves as a forum for these boards to enhance their regulatory effectiveness and communication. The Committee believes that enhancing regulatory cooperation and reducing duplicative oversight of the auditing profession by federal and state authorities and enhancing licensee practice mobility among the states are in the best interest of the public and the effective operation of the capital markets. In this regard, the Committee recommends the following: (a) Institute the following mechanism to encourage the states to substantially adopt the mobility provisions of the Uniform Accountancy Act, Fifth Edition (UAA) 121: If states have failed to adopt the mobility provisions of the UAA by December 31, 2010, Congress should pass a federal provision requiring those states to adopt these provisions. The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and NASBA jointly author the UAA, a model bill which focuses on the education, examination, and experience requirements for certified public accountants. As the name of the bill suggests, the UAA advances the goal of uniformity, in addition to protecting the and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ IIARESPONSETREASURYADVISORY COMMITTEEONAUDITING061308.doc (suggesting the Institute of Internal Auditors be included in the listing of organizations providing best practices). 120 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of David A. Costello, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Association of State Board of Accountancy, 2), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Costelllo120307.pdf. 121 Uniform Accountancy Act (Fifth Ed. July 2007). PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44331 public interest and promoting high professional standards. In 2006 and 2007, recognizing the changing global economy and the impact of electronic commerce, the AICPA and NASBA proposed amendments to the UAA to allow for a streamlined framework for CPA ‘‘mobility’’ of practice among the states; that is, a CPA’s practice privileges would be valid and portable across all state jurisdictions beyond that of the CPA’s resident state.122 According to NASBA, to date thirtyone states have passed mobility legislation. Two other states currently have mobility legislation introduced and other bills are anticipated in the 2009 legislative session. Almost every state is now discussing or considering mobility, and a number of other state boards of accountancy have voted to support and move forward with mobility. The Committee considered testimony and commentary on the importance to auditing firms’ multi-state practices of the adoption of the UAA’s mobility provisions.123 A NASBA representative testified, ‘‘In order for our capital market system to continue to prosper and grow, NASBA recognized the need to ensure that an efficient, effective mobility system is in place that will allow CPAs and their firms, as professional service providers, to serve 122 See Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of David A. Costello, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Association of State Board of Accountancy, 1 (Feb. 6, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/QFRs-12-3-2007.pdf (‘‘As the global business community continues to expand, CPAs will be required to practice beyond the state in which they reside. Inefficiencies are created when those individuals are required to complete paperwork and submit a fee for every state in which they perform professional services.’’). Note that the UAA does require notification or ‘‘permitting’’ for out-of-state firms performing attest services for audit clients headquartered in another state, but not for individual CPAs. See UAA, §§ 7(a)(1), 7(c)(1), and 23(a)(4) (Fifth Ed. July 2007). 123 See, e.g., Amper, Politziner and Mattia, P.C., Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 2 (Nov. 14, 2007) available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/AmperPolitziner Mattia.pdf (noting that ‘‘[t]he ease of performing audits in any state by a valid CPA * * * without requiring to be licensed by each state would be beneficial.’’); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Dennis Nally, Chairman and Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 5) (Dec. 3, 2008), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 12032007/Nally120307.pdf (noting that a number of states are cooperating and working towards adopting uniform mobility requirements); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of James S. Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ernst & Young LLP, 5), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Turley120307.pdf (‘‘The Treasury Committee should suggest that the states eliminate barriers to interstate practice by universal adoption of the mobility provisions of the Uniform Accountancy Act.’’). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44332 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES the needs of American businesses, where ever they are located.’’ 124 The Committee believes that, given the multi-state operations of many public companies and the multi-state practices of many auditing firms, practice mobility will foster a more efficient operation of the capital markets. The Committee recommends the following mechanism to encourage the states to adopt the UAA’s mobility provisions: If states have failed to adopt the mobility provisions of the UAA by December 31, 2010, Congress should pass a federal provision requiring those states to adopt these provisions.125 The Committee recognizes that some state legislatures meet biannually, and for such legislatures this deadline poses a challenge.126 However, such a deadline 124 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of David A. Costello, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Association of State Board of Accountancy, 6), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Costello120307.pdf. 125 See, e.g., Ernst & Young LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 24–25, (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ EYACAPCommentLetterFINAL.pdf (agreeing with this Recommendation); Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C., Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2, (June 17, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/Mayer HoffmanMcCannCommentLetter.pdf (noting that the lack of mobility impairs firms from assigning the best people to engagements and uses important resources to establish and comply with multiple state licensure); PricewaterhouseCoopers, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 9, (June 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCCommentLtrTreas CmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf; Bruce Rosen, Eisner LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum (May 23, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/index.cfm? FuseAction=Home.View&Topic_id=9&FellowType _id=1&CurrentPage=1 (noting the importance of putting the right resources in the right place without the needless complexity of differing state requirements). But c.f., Joseph Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP Ernst & Young Professor and Director of Research, Corporate Governance Center University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accountancy Bentley College, Dana R. Hermanson Dinos Eminent Scholar Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 6, (May 15, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAPCommentLetterMay152008.pdf (recommending that while there does need to be increased mobility, it could be achieved by a national license for public company audits in addition to state licensing.); William Hermann, Managing Partner, and Gregory Coursen, Director of Professional Standards, Plante & Moran, PLLC Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2, (June 12, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/Comment letter61208.pdf (noting the AICPA’s success in driving the adoption of the UAA’s mobility provision). 126 See, e.g., Samuel K. Cotterell, Chair, NASBA, and David A. Costello, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 27, 2008), available at VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 should be attainable and will encourage such legislatures to place this issue high on their agenda. The Committee also recommends that the states participate in NASBA’s Accountancy Licensee Database (ALD) as a mechanism to assist in maintaining appropriate oversight of CPAs throughout the country regardless of where they practice and that appropriate authorities interpret federal and state privacy regulations to facilitate implementation of the ALD. (b) Require regular and formal roundtable meetings of regulators and other governmental enforcement bodies in a cooperative effort to improve regulatory effectiveness and reduce the incidence of duplicative and potentially inconsistent enforcement regimes. Under the federal securities laws, the SEC has enforcement authority over public company auditing firms and oversight authority over the PCAOB under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Sarbanes-Oxley). Sarbanes-Oxley provides the PCAOB with registration, reporting, inspection, standard-setting, and enforcement authority over public company auditing firms.127 In addition, the fifty-five boards of accountancy license, regulate, and enforce state accountancy laws pertaining to certified public accountants and their firms. In addition, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and state attorneys general can bring enforcement actions against auditing firms and their employees. The Committee considered testimony from auditing firms on the duplicative and sometimes inconsistent federal and state oversight of the profession.128 The https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ June2908LetterheadTreasury AdvisoryCommitteeontheAuditingProfession.pdf (recommending a later due date because some states may not be able to meet the 2010 deadline due to their legislative calendars); Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 14–15, (June 26, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ CAQCommentletter62708FINAL.pdf (suggesting delaying federal action as states may adopt the provisions on their own or, at the least, moving the deadline to December 31, 2011 to allow states adequate time to adopt the provisions). 127 Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 15 U.S.C. §§ 7211–7219. 128 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Dennis Nally, Chairman and Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Nally120307.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 7), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Nusbaum020408.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Barry Salzberg, Chief Executive Officer, Deloitte LLP, App. A 4 (Mar. 31, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Committee does recognize that both federal and state regulators have made attempts to coordinate better their enforcement activities.129 One witness suggested the possible formation of a commission to help improve regulatory effectiveness.130 Another witness urged state and federal regulatory cooperation to ensure harmonized regulation and licensure.131 The Committee recommends mandating regular and formal roundtables of the PCAOB, the SEC, the DOJ, the state boards of accountancy, and the state attorneys general, to periodically review the overall enforcement regimes applicable to the public company auditing profession.132 acap/agendas/QFRs-2–4-08.pdf (criticizing duplicative auditing firm investigations by states with no nexus to alleged conduct). 129 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Oral Remarks of David A. Costello, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Association of State Board of Accountancy, 98), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/minutes-12–3-07.pdf (noting that ‘‘[NASBA] has been working with the PCAOB very closely coordinating efforts, trying to diminish as much as possible the redundancy in enforcement’’) Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of David A. Costello, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Association of State Board of Accountancy, 6), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Costelllo120307.pdf (stating that NASBA is assisting state boards in enforcement cases involving multi-state activities). 130 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 7), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Nusbaum020408.pdf (noting that, ‘‘it would be useful to evaluate the possibility of an interstate commission for the whole of the audit profession. Such a commission would bring together state licensing authorities, the PCAOB, and appropriate professional organizations. It would be the means to rationalize existing disparities in licensing qualifications, continuing education requirements and peer review for non-public company audit practices. It would also enable enforcement of common regulations and license discipline across state and federal jurisdictions.’’). 131 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Dennis Nally, Chairman and Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Nally120307.pdf. 132 See e.g., Joseph Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP Ernst & Young Professor and Director of Research—Corporate Governance Center University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accountancy Bentley College, Dana R. Hermanson Dinos Eminent Scholar Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 6, (May 15, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAPCommentLetterMay152008.pdf (supporting this Recommendation); Samuel K. Cotterell, Chair, NASBA, and David A. Costello, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ June2908Letterhead E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES These roundtables also should focus on regulatory coordination, improvement, and consistent approaches to enforcement to minimize duplicative efforts. Because of the difficulty and cost of bringing together many different state agencies on a regular basis, the Committee recommends that NASBA assist states by taking a leadership role in coordinating their responsibilities and interests.133 (c) Urge the states to create greater financial and operational independence of their state boards of accountancy. The Committee is concerned about the financial and operational independence of state boards of accountancy from outside influences, such as other state agencies, and the possible effect on the regulation and oversight of the accounting profession. A number of state boards are underfunded 134 and lack the wherewithal to incur the cost of investigations leading to enforcement. In addition, some state boards fall under the centralized administrative ‘‘umbrella’’ of other state agencies and lack control of financial resources and/or operational independence necessary to carry out their mandate of public protection.135 In some cases, board members are nominated by private associations whose constituencies are not necessarily focused on the protection of the public. The Committee believes that greater independence of state boards of TreasuryAdvisoryCommitteeonthe AuditingProfession.pdf (supporting this Recommendation); Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C., Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ MayerHoffmanMcCannCommentLetter.pdf (suggesting that all meetings be made public); but, cf. Frank Frankowski, CFO, Airborne Systems, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1, (June 2, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ FrankowskiLetter.pdf (stating that the Recommendation ‘‘will only add to the confusion and lack of focus on the underlying issues’’). 133 Samuel K. Cotterell, Chair, NASBA, and David A. Costello, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/June2908Letterhead TreasuryAdvisoryCommitteeonthe AuditingProfession.pdf (supporting this Recommendation). 134 National Association of State Boards of Accountancy, Submission in Connection With the December 3, 2007 Meeting of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (Jan. 2008) (documenting the wide spectrum of funding for individual state boards of accountancy and noting the number of full-time staff per state boards of accountancy office). 135 Statement of Ronald J. Rotaru, Executive Director, Accountancy Board of Ohio, before Ohio H. Finance Committee of the Ohio House of Representatives 1 (Mar. 18, 2005) (‘‘The evidence shows that ‘consolidated’ states have difficulty in effectively enforcing the statutes governing the profession under their central agency umbrella.’’). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 accountancy would enhance their regulatory effectiveness. The Committee recommends that, working with NASBA, states evaluate and develop means to make their respective state boards of accountancy more operationally and financially independent of outside influences.136 The Committee notes that this Recommendation to ensure the independence of state boards of accountancy is not meant to limit in any way the efforts of regulators and other governmental enforcement bodies to coordinate their regulatory and enforcement activities as recommended in Recommendation 2(b). Recommendation 3. Urge the PCAOB and the SEC, in consultation with other federal and state regulators, auditing firms, investors, other financial statement users, and public companies, to analyze, explore, and enable, as appropriate, the possibility and feasibility of firms appointing independent members with full voting power to firm boards and/or advisory boards with meaningful governance responsibilities to improve governance and transparency of auditing firms. In response to the recent corporate accounting scandals, related legislative and regulatory requirements and best practices, public companies enhanced their corporate governance. One of the most prominent alterations to the corporate governance scheme was the increased representation and strengthening of independent members of boards of directors. The New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq enhanced their public company listing standards to call for a majority of independent board members.137 Best practices have gone even further, calling for a ‘‘substantial majority’’ of independent directors.138 136 See Samuel K. Cotterell, Chair, NASBA, and David A. Costello, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/June2908 LetterheadTreasuryAdvisoryCommitteeonthe AuditingProfession.pdf (‘‘There is a need to ensure all State Boards of Accountancy have adequate funding to maintain a healthy regulatory environment, which includes the ability to fund the costs of investigations and disciplinary enforcement.’’); Ernst & Young LLP Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 25, (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ EYACAPCommentLetterFINAL.pdf (agreeing that appropriate operational support is needed to allow regulators the resources to monitor the profession). 137 New York Stock Exchange, Listed Company Manual § 303A.01 (2003); Nasdaq, Manual, Rule 4350(c). 138 See, e.g., The Business Roundtable, Principles of Corporate Governance (May 2002) (recommending, among other things, a substantial majority of independent directors and fully PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44333 A combination of Sarbanes-Oxley provisions and exchange listing standards mandate fully independent audit committees, nominating/corporate governance, and compensation committees.139 In addition, independent directors’ responsibilities have increased. For example, the independent audit committee now appoints, oversees, and compensates the auditor.140 Although difficult to quantify the benefits of these enhancements, many have extolled these reforms as improving the quality of board oversight, reducing conflicts of interest, and enhancing investor confidence in public company operations and financial reporting.141 Public company auditing firms as private partnerships are not subject to these requirements. Instead, state laws and partnership agreements determine the governance of auditing firms.142 Often a firm’s governing body is independent audit, corporate governance/ nominating, and compensation committees); The Conference Board, Commission on Public Trust and Private Enterprise (Jan. 9, 2003) (recommending, among other things, a substantial majority of independent directors and regular executive sessions of the independent directors). 139 Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78–j (2002) (mandating audit committees comprised solely of independent directors); New York Stock Exchange, Listed Company Manual § 303A.04 (2004)(requiring nominating/corporate governance committees comprised solely of independent directors); New York Stock Exchange, Listed Company Manual § 303A.05 (2004) (requiring compensation committees comprised solely of independent directors); New York Stock Exchange, Listed Company Manual § 303A.06 (2003) (mandating compliance with SEC rules requiring audit committees comprised solely of independent directors); Nasdaq, Manual, Rule 4350(d) (mandating compliance with SEC rules requiring audit committees comprised solely of independent directors). Nasdaq, Manual, Rule 4350(c)(3) (requiring independent directors to determine, or recommend to the full Board for determination, the compensation of all executive officers). Nasdaq, Manual, Rule 4350(c)(4) (requiring independent directors to determine, or recommend to the full Board for determination, director nominees.). 140 Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78–j (2002). 141 For example, see the commentary accompanying New York Stock Exchange, Listed Company Manual § 303A.01 (‘‘Requiring a majority of independent directors will increase the quality of board oversight and lessen the possibility of damaging conflicts of interest.’’) and the interpretive material accompanying Nasdaq Rule 4350, IM–4350–4 (‘‘Independent directors * * * play an important role in assuring investor confidence. Through the exercise of independent judgment, they act on behalf of investors to maximize shareholder value in the companies they oversee and guard against conflicts of interest. Requiring that the board be comprised of a majority of independent directors empowers such directors to carry out more effectively these responsibilities.’’). 142 Center for Audit Quality, Report of the Major Public Company Audit Firms to the Department of the Treasury Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession 2 (Jan. 23, 2008). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44334 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES comprised of elected firm partners.143 Some firms are currently using advisory boards, although these may not be wellpublicized or transparent. Several witnesses testified to the benefits of improving auditing firm governance and suggested the addition of independent members to the boards of directors.144 One witness called for an entirely independent board with enhanced responsibilities, including chief executive officer selection, determining partner compensation, and monitoring potential conflicts of interest and audit quality.145 An auditing firm representative noted that his firm was considering adding independent members on its international governing board.146 The Committee believes that enhancing corporate governance of auditing firms through the appointment of independent board members, whose duties run to the auditing firm and its partners/owners, to advisory boards with meaningful governance responsibilities (possible under the 143 Center for Audit Quality, Report of the Major Public Company Audit Firms to the Department of the Treasury Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession 2–22 (Jan. 23, 2008) (detailing the various governance structures of the largest six auditing firms); Cynthia M. Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, and James S. Turley, Chair, Governing Board, Center for Audit Quality, and Chairman and CEO, Ernst & Young LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 13 (Nov. 30, 2007), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ Treasurycommentletterfinal11302007.pdf (noting the largest auditing firms have supervisory boards overseeing management). 144 See, e.g., Andrew D. Bailey, Jr., Professor of Accountancy-Emeritus, University of Illinois, and Senior Policy Advisory, Grant Thornton LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 12 (Jan. 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ BAILEYCOMMENTSONTREASURY ADVISORYCOMMITTEE OUTLINEFINALSUBMISSION13008 (‘‘[I]ndependent board members similar to those found on public company boards would be a good governance practice and would signal the markets about the firms’ positive commitment to the public good.’’); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Dennis Johnson, Senior Portfolio Manager, Corporate Governance, California Public Employees’ Retirement System, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Johnson020408.pdf (stating that independent board of directors could possibly decrease potential conflicts of interest). 145 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Paul G. Haaga Jr., Vice Chairman, Capital Research and Management Company, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Haaga020408.pdf. 146 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 7), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Nusbaum020408.pdf. VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 current business model), and/or to firm boards could be particularly beneficial to auditing firm management and governance.147 The Committee also believes that such advisory boards and independent board members could improve investor protection through enhanced audit quality and firm transparency. The Committee is particularly intrigued by the idea of independent board members with duties and responsibilities similar to those of public company non-executive board members. The Committee recognizes the multiple challenges that instituting a governance structure with independent board members might entail, including compliance with state partnership laws and independence requirements, insurance availability for such directors, and liability concerns.148 Accordingly, the Committee recommends that the PCAOB and the SEC, in consultation with federal and state regulators, auditing firms, investors, other financial statement users, and public companies, analyze, explore, and enable, as appropriate, the possibility and feasibility of firms’ appointing independent board members and advisory boards.149 The Committee 147 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 7), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/Nusbaum 020408.pdf (‘‘Such a change in the governance model may be one way to strengthen our ability to serve market participants and reinforce independence.’’). 148 Several witnesses commented on these difficulties. See, e.g., Ernst & Young LLP Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 25–26, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/&_files/ EYACAPCommentLetterFINAL.pdf; Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 17–19, (June 26, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ CAQCommentletter62708FINAL.pdf; William Hermann, Managing Partner, and Gregory Coursen, Director of Professional Standards, Plante & Moran, PLLC Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1–2, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/&_files/ Commentletter61208.pdf; Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Barry Mathews, Deputy Chairman, Aon Corporation, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Mathews060308.pdf.; David McDonnell, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton International Ltd, and Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Ltd Board of Governors, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 4 (June 27, 2008) available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/GTComment lettertoACAPJune2008_FINAL.pdf. 149 See Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Nell Minow, Editor and CoFounder, The Corporate Library, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 notes that the PCAOB and the SEC should consider the size of auditing firms in analyzing and developing any governance proposals.150 Recommendation 4. Urge the SEC to amend Form 8–K disclosure requirements to characterize appropriately and report every public company auditor change and to require auditing firms to notify the PCAOB of any premature engagement partner changes on public company audit clients. In 2006, over 1,300 public companies changed their auditor and from 2002 to 2006 over 6,500 public companies changed their auditor.151 Under current SEC regulations, a public company must disclose any auditor change on Form 8– K.152 SEC regulations require disclosure of any disagreements on financial disclosures during the preceding two years prior to a resignation or termination and whether some issue, such as the auditor’s inability to rely on management’s representations, may put into question financial disclosure reliability. SEC regulations also allow a public company to request that the auditor respond with a letter addressed to the SEC stating whether it agrees with the company’s disclosure and, if it does not agree, stating why. While the SEC does attempt to uncover through its rules whether the auditor change relates to disagreements over accounting and reporting matters, the SEC rules do not require a public company to provide a reason for the auditor’s departure in the vast majority of cases. The limitations of the existing disclosure requirements have resulted in companies failing to disclose any reason for their auditor changes in acap/submissions/06032008/Minow060308.pdf. But, cf. Wayne Kolins, Director of Assurance, BDO Seidman LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3–4, (June 27, 2008) available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ ResponsetoAdvisoryCommittee0627final.PDF (advising the Committee to keep in mind the fact that accounting firms operate differently than public companies and that the PCAOB currently reviews information that would concern independent board members); Paul Lee, Director, Hermes Equity Ownership Services Limited, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ACAPresponse 13Jun08.pdf. 150 See Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kenneth Nielsen Goldmann, Capital Markets and SEC Practice Director, J.H. Cohn LLP, 4–5), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Goldmann060308.pdf (noting that smaller firms do not have large public company audit practices so the concept of public board members may be difficult). 151 See Mark Grothe and Blaine Post, Speak No Evil, Glass Lewis & Co Research 12 (May 21, 2007). 152 Form 8–K, available at https://www.sec.gov/ about/forms/form8-k.pdf. E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES approximately 70% of the more than 1,300 auditor changes occurring in 2006.153 The Committee considered testimony and commentary regarding the lack of clear disclosure surrounding auditor changes. Testimony and commentary viewed the lack of transparency surrounding auditor changes as detrimental to investor confidence in financial reporting.154 Testimony and commentary suggested greater transparency regarding auditor changes would compel audit committees to more closely evaluate auditor selection decisions and lead to greater competition in the audit market.155 The Committee believes that explicitly stating the reason for an auditor change will assist investors in determining the quality of financial reporting and subsequent investment decisions. The Committee recommends that the SEC amend its Form 8–K disclosure on auditor changes by providing for the following mechanism:156 The public company 153 See Mark Grothe and Blaine Post, Speak No Evil, Glass Lewis & Co Research 12 (May 21, 2007). 154 See, e.g., Andrew D. Bailey, Jr., Professor of Accountancy-Emeritus, University of Illinois, and Senior Policy Advisor, Grant Thornton LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 4 (Jan. 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/Baileycomments ontreasuryadvisorycommitteeoutline finalsubmission13008.doc (recommending SEC and PCAOB disclosures of auditor changes to enhance the growth of smaller auditing firms); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 193–94), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/agendas/minutes-2–4–08.pdf (calling for expanded Form 8–K disclosure requirements as ‘‘in the best interest of investors’’). 155 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Nusbaum020408.pdf (noting that the Committee should examine ‘‘[c]omprehensive disclosures about reasons for auditor switches’’). 156 See Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kenneth Nielsen Goldmann, Capital Markets and SEC Practice Director, J.H. Cohn LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Goldmann060308.pdf (recommending additional disclosure regarding the relationship between the successor auditor and the company); Dennis Johnson, CFA, Senior Portfolio Manager, CalPERS, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ 200806;_13ACAP_addendum_commentltr.pdf (supporting the Recommendation); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Nell Minow, Editor and Co-Founder, The Corporate Library, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Minow060308.pdf (stating that the Recommendation seems consistent with SarbanesOxley Act). But, cf. Ernst & Young LLP Comment VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 would file within four days of an auditor change a Form 8–K disclosing that an auditor had resigned, was terminated, or did not seek reappointment; the company would appropriately characterize and state in all cases in plain English the reason or reasons for the change. The company would also disclose whether its audit committee agreed with the disclosure it has provided. The company would also provide the auditor with a copy of the disclosure and request a response as to the accuracy of the disclosure. The company would include any response as an exhibit to the company’s Form 8– K filing, or if received following the due date for the Form 8–K, in a subsequent Form 8–K. As discussed above under current SEC regulations, the public company can request that the auditor respond to the company’s statements in the Form 8–K regarding disagreements over accounting and financial matters. In addition, the Committee recommends that auditing firms notify the PCAOB of any engagement partner changes on public company audits if made before the normal rotation period and, other than for retirement, the reasons for those changes.157 Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 27, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/EYACAPComment LetterFINAL.pdf (worrying that the results will be ‘‘boilerplate disclosure that is of little benefit to investors while an expansion of the list of objective criteria could be more useful’’); Wayne Kolins, Director of Assurance, BDO Seidman LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 4, (June 27, 2008) available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/Responseto AdvisoryCommittee0627final.PDF (stating ‘‘a requirement for auditors to respond as to the accuracy of disclosures relating to subjective reasons is not feasible, since auditors have no basis for agreeing or disagreeing with management regarding why they dismissed the auditors’’). 157 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Paul G. Haaga Jr., Vice Chairman, Capital Research and Management Company, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Haaga020408.pdf (calling for public disclosure on audit partner changes other than for rotation requirements); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Oral Remarks of D. Paul Regan, President and Chairman, Hemming Morse Inc., 194–195 (Feb. 4, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/agendas/minutes-2–4– 08.pdf (commenting that ‘‘if an audit partner is * * * rotated [early] off of an issuer, there ought to be a disclosure, and there ought to be communication from the partner who was rotated off early as to [the reason for the early rotation] * * * because in many instances * * * there [i]s controversy * * *’’). But, cf. Ernst & Young LLP Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 27, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/EYACAPComment LetterFINAL.pdf (‘‘Unscheduled changes in an engagement partner are often due to circumstances that have no impact on the relationship between the client and the Auditor’’); Wayne Kolins, Director of Assurance, BDO Seidman LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44335 Recommendation 5: Urge the PCAOB to undertake a standard-setting initiative to consider improvements to the auditor’s standard reporting model. Further, urge that the PCAOB and the SEC clarify in the auditor’s report the auditor’s role in detecting fraud under current auditing standards and further that the PCAOB periodically review and update these standards. The auditor’s report is the primary means by which the auditor communicates to the users of financial statements regarding its audit of financial statements. The standard auditor’s report, not much altered since the 1930s,158 identifies the financial statements audited, the scope and nature of the audit, the general responsibilities of the auditor and management, and the auditor’s opinion.159 In addition, for companies subject to Sarbanes-Oxley’s internal control requirements, the auditor’s report includes an attestation as to internal control over financial reporting.160 The auditor’s opinion on the financial statements states whether these statements present fairly, in all material respects, a company’s financial position, results of operations, and cash flows in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.161 Many consider the auditor’s reporting model a pass/fail model because the auditor opines whether the statements are fairly presented (pass) or not (fail).162 Since the SEC does not accept filings with financial statements that 12, (June 27, 2008) available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ResponsetoAdvisory Committee0627final.PDF (stating that no benefit is gained in requiring notification to the PCAOB when there is premature changes in the engagement partner); PricewaterhouseCoopers, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 20, (June 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCCommentLtrTreas CmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf (noting that there are many reasons for the engagement partner to change including personal as well as professional and that the real issue is ‘‘whether the firm has the appropriate quality control processes in place’’). 158 For a historical analysis of the evolution of the auditor’s report, see George Cochrane, The Auditor’s Report: Its Evolution in the U.S.A., in Perspectives in Auditing 16 (D.R. Carmichael and John J. Willingham 2d. ed. 1975). 159 Reports on Audited Financial Statements, Interim Auditing Standard AU Section 508.08 (Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 2002). 160 An Audit of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting That Is Integrated With An Audit of Financial Statements, Auditing Standard No. 5, para. 85 (Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 2007). 161 Reports on Audited Financial Statements, Interim Auditing Standard AU Section 508.07–.08 (Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 2002). 162 Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Standing Advisory Group Meeting Briefing Paper: Auditor’s Reporting Model 3 (Feb. 16, 2005). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44336 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES ‘‘fail,’’ 163 the vast number of audit reports issued rarely departs from the exact standardized wording. Some believe this pass/fail model with its standardized wording does not adequately reflect the amount of auditor work and judgment. Over thirty years ago, the audit ‘‘expectations gap’’ was coined 164 and has been a topic of controversy ever since. The expectations gap has been defined as ‘‘the difference between what the public and users of financial statements perceive the role of an audit to be and what the audit profession claim is expected of them during the conduct of an audit.’’ 165 The Committee considered testimony and commentary regarding this ‘‘expectations gap’’ between the public’s expectations regarding auditor responsibility for fraud detection and the auditor’s required and capable performance of fraud detection.166 163 SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin, Topic 1E— Requirements for Audited or Certified Financial Statements [Interpretive response to question 2], (stating, in part, ‘‘[a]ccordingly, auditor reports filed with the SEC must include unqualified opinions’’). 164 C.D. Liggio, The Expectation Gap: The Accountant’s Waterloo Vol. 3 No. 3 Journal of Contemporary Business 27 (1974). 165 Marianne Ojo, Eliminating the Audit Expectations Gap: Myth or Reality?, (Feb. 2006), available at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/232/ 1/MPRA_paper_232.pdf. 166 See, e.g, Andrew D. Bailey, Jr., Professor of Accountancy—Emeritus, University of Illinois, and Senior Policy Advisor, Grant Thornton LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 4 (Jan. 30, 2008), available at https://comments. treas.gov/_files/BAILEYCOMMENTSONTREASURY ADVISORYCOMMITTEEOUTLINEFINAL SUBMISSION13008.doc (stating that ‘‘[i]f the discovery of material errors and fraud is not a major part of what the audit is about, it is not clear what value-added service the auditor offers the investor and capital markets’’); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Cynthia M. Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 5 (Mar. 31, 2008)), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/QFRs-2–4–08.pdf (‘‘While auditors provide reasonable assurance that fraud material to the financial statements will be detected, they cannot be expected to provide absolute assurance that all material fraud will be found. Cost-benefit constraints and the lack of governmental subpoena and investigative powers, among other factors, make absolute assurance impossible.’’); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Dennis Johnson, California Public Employees’ Retirement System, 5), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/02042008/Johnson020408.pdf (stating that ‘‘[o]f critical importance to investors is the responsibility of auditors to detect fraud and improve the timely communication of these frauds to investors and shareowners.’’); Serving Global Capital Markets and the Global Economy: A View From the CEOs of the International Audit Networks 12 (Nov. 2006) (‘‘Nonetheless, there is a significant ‘expectations gap’ between what various stakeholders believe auditors should do in detecting fraud, and what audit networks are actually capable of doing, at the prices that companies or investors are willing to pay for audits.’’). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 Public investors have appropriately raised questions when large frauds have gone undetected. Among the attributes that the public expects of auditors is a clear acknowledgment of their responsibility for the reliability of financial statements, particularly with respect to the detection of fraud, notwithstanding the recognition that a company’s management and board have the primary role in preventing fraud.167 Some say the public may believe that auditors will detect more fraud than those in the profession believe can be reasonably expected. Both beliefs may be unreasonable in some circumstances. And, there are difficulties of detecting fraud, especially before it has resulted in a material misstatement. However, even those involved directly in the audit process on a daily basis from time to time have differing views as to what the auditor should and should not have been expected to discover. According to existing auditing standards and SEC rules, management prepares and has the primary responsibility for the accuracy of financial statements and for prevention and identification of fraud and the auditor’s role is to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free of material misstatement.168 These concepts are embedded in the current auditing and audit reporting standards that require that the auditor ‘‘plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement whether caused by error or fraud.’’ 169 It is noteworthy that the current standard auditor’s report does not actually mention ‘‘fraud’’ and is silent about the auditor’s responsibility to find fraud. Clarification of the expectations gap and confusion about auditor 167 See, e.g., Sir David Tweedie, Challenges Facing the Auditor: Professional Fouls and the Expectation Gap, Deloitte, Haskins and Sells Lecture, University College, Cardiff 20 (‘‘The public appears to require (1) a burglar alarm system (protection against fraud) * * * (2) a radar station (early warning of future insolvency) * * * (3) a safety net (general re-assurance of financial wellbeing) * * * (4) an independent auditor (safeguards for auditor independence) * * * and (5) coherent communications (understanding of audit reports)’’). 168 See, e.g., Commission on Auditors’ Responsibilities, Report, Conclusions, and Recommendations xii (1978) (concluding that, after having been established to investigate the existence of such a gap, ‘‘[a]fter considerable study of available evidence and its own research......such a gap does exist’’). For a more recent article, see Dan L. Goldwasser, The Past and Future of Reasonable Assurance, The CPA Journal (Nov. 2005), available at https://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/2005/1105/ special_issue/essentials/p28.htm. 169 Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement, Interim Auditing Standard AU 316 (Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 2002). PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 responsibility to detect fraud are not the only criticisms of the standard auditor’s report. Over the years there have been numerous recommendations that the standard report be improved. In 1978, the Commission on Auditors’ Responsibilities (Cohen Commission) made a simple observation: ‘‘For the largest corporations in the country, an audit may involve scores of auditors and tens of thousands of hours of work for which the client may pay millions of dollars. Nevertheless, the auditor’s standard report compresses that considerable expenditure of skilled effort into a relatively few words and paragraphs.’’ 170 The Cohen Commission then called for an expansion of the auditor’s report to include a report not merely on the financial statements, but covering the entire audit function.171 The Cohen Commission reasoned that this new more comprehensive information would benefit users, but also clarify the role and, consequently, the legal standing of the auditor in relation to the audit.172 In 1987, the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting (Treadway Commission) recommended that the standard auditor’s report more clearly identify the auditor’s responsibilities, the degree to which users can rely on the audit, and the limitations on the audit process.173 The Treadway Commission aimed to reaffirm that management has ‘‘primary responsibility for financial statements’’ and to caution users of financial statements from placing more than ‘‘reasonable’’ assurance on the audit process. More recently, the American Assembly called for differing attestation standards for different parts of the financial statements, depending on the amount of uncertainty and judgment required in making certain determinations.174 In addition, a February 2008 CFA Institute survey indicated that 80% of its member respondents believe that the auditor’s report should provide specific information about how the auditor 170 Commission on Auditors’ Responsibilities, Report, Conclusions, and Recommendations 71 (1978). 171 Commission on Auditors’ Responsibilities, Report, Conclusions, and Recommendations 75 (1978). 172 Commission on Auditors’ Responsibilities, Report, Conclusions, and Recommendations 75–76 (1978). 173 National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Report, Report of the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting (Oct. 1987). 174 American Assembly, The Future of the Accounting Profession 12–13 (Nov. 13–15, 2003); American Assembly, The Future of the Accounting Profession: Auditor Concentration 21 (May 23, 2005). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES reached its opinion.175 A majority of survey respondents thought it was very important to have the auditors identify key risk areas, significant changes in risk exposures, and amounts either involving a high degree of uncertainty in measurement and significant assumptions or requiring a higher level of professional judgment.176 In 2005, the PCAOB’s Standing Advisory Group (SAG), which advises the PCAOB on the establishment of auditing and related professional practice standards, considered whether the auditor’s report should include more information relating to the auditor’s judgments regarding financial reporting quality.177 The SAG also considered whether required auditor communications to audit committees, such as the auditor’s judgments about accounting principles 178 and critical accounting policies and practices,179 should be incorporated into the auditor’s report.180 The PCAOB has not yet taken up a standard-setting initiative regarding the auditor’s report. Foreign jurisdictions are also currently considering changes to their auditor’s reports. For instance, the European Commission under the Eighth Directive is authorized to develop its own ‘‘European Audit Report’’ or adopt the International Federation of Accountants’ International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board’s recently revised auditor’s report standard.181 In December 2007, the Audit Practices Board, a part of the United Kingdom’s Financial Reporting Council, issued a Discussion Paper seeking comment on potentially altering the auditor’s report.182 Currently in Germany, public companies are generally required to 175 CFA Institute, February 2008 Monthly Question Results (Feb. 2008), available at https:// www.cfainstitute.org/memresources/ monthlyquestion/2008/february.html. 176 CFA Institute, February 2008 Monthly Question Results (Feb. 2008), available at https:// www.cfainstitute.org/memresources/ monthlyquestion/2008/february.html. 177 Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Standing Advisory Group Meeting: Auditor’s Reporting Model (Feb. 16, 2005). 178 For this requirement, see Communications With Audit Committees, Interim Auditing Standard AU Section 380.11 (Public Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 2002). 179 For this requirement, see Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78j–1 (2002). 180 Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Standing Advisory Group Meeting: Auditor’s Reporting Model 4–5 (Feb. 16, 2005). 181 Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council Art. 28 (May 17, 2006); Auditing Practices Board, Discussion Paper—The Auditor’s Report: A Time For Change? 6 (Dec. 2007). 182 Auditing Practices Board, Discussion Paper— The Auditor’s Report: A Time For Change? (Dec. 2007). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 issue a long-form auditor’s report, discussing matters such as the company’s economic position and trend of business operations and the nature and scope of the auditor’s procedures. The Committee is cognizant that this debate over such disclosures is unfolding in a litigation environment different from that in the United States. This Committee has also heard testimony regarding expanding the auditor’s report.183 One witness noted that some institutional investors believe an expanded auditor’s report would enhance investor confidence in financial reporting and recommended exploring a more ‘‘narrative’’ report in areas, such as ‘‘estimates, judgments, sufficiency of evidence and uncertainties.’’ 184 The Committee notes that the increasing complexity of global business operations are compelling a growing use of judgments and estimates, including those related to fair value measurements, and also contributing to greater complexity in financial reporting. The Committee believes this complexity supports improving the content of the auditor’s report beyond the current pass/fail model to include a more relevant discussion about the audit of the financial statements. While there is not yet agreement as to precisely what additional information is sought by and would be useful to investors and other users of financial statements, the Committee concludes that an improved auditor’s report would likely lead to more relevant information for users of financial statements and would clarify the role of the auditor in the financial statement audit. The Committee therefore recommends that the PCAOB address these issues, both long-debated and increasingly important given the use of judgments 183 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Dennis M. Nally, Chairman and Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 7), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Nally120307.pdf (supporting the Committee’s considering whether to change the auditor’s report’s content given single financial reporting standards, more cohesive global auditing standards, and trends, like fair value measurement); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Oral Remarks of Ashwinpaul C. Sondhi, President, A. C. Sondhi & Associates, LLC, 255–57), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/minutes-12–3-07.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Oral Remarks of James S. Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ernst & Young LLP, 253–54), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ agendas/minutes-12–3-07.pdf. 184 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Richard Fleck, Global Relationship Partner, Herbert Smith LLP, 17, 21), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/02042008/Fleck02042008.pdf. PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44337 and estimates, by undertaking a standard-setting initiative to consider improvements to the auditor’s reporting model.185 With regards to this initiative, the PCAOB should consult with investors, other financial statement users, auditing firms, public companies, academics, other market participants, and other state, federal, and foreign regulators. In view of the desirability of improving the quality of financial reporting and auditing on a global basis, the PCAOB should also consider the developments in foreign jurisdictions that improve the quality and content of the auditor’s report and should consult with international regulatory bodies as appropriate. The PCAOB should also take cognizance of the proposal’s potential legal ramifications, if any, to auditors.186 185 See, e.g., Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 20 (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/DeloitteLLP CommentLetter.pdf (recommending that the Committee suggest to the PCAOB to include the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) and the Auditing Standards Board (ASB), who are evaluating the auditor’s report, in undertaking this initiative); Roderick Hills, Chairman, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Hills Program on Governance, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 3 (June 5, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ commentsregardingdraftreportofadvisorycomm.pdf (agreeing that a new auditor’s report standard is needed to allow auditors to offer a range of attestations to reflect the range of values possible); Dennis Johnson, CFA, Senior Portfolio Manager, CalPERS, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1–2, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ 200806_13ACAP_addendum_commentltr.pdf (supporting the Recommendation). But, cf., Arnold Hanish, Financial Executives International, Chair, Committee on Corporate Reporting, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 4–5 (July 3, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/FEICCRTreasury ACAPCommentLetterFiled73080.pdf (suggesting that the Recommendation ‘‘can add even more stress to an already stressed system’’ and that changes can cause confusion); Lee Seidler, CPA, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction= Home.View&Topic_id=9 &FellowType_id=1&CurrentPage=1 (stating that expansion always includes exculpatory language that is not useful). 186 See, e.g., Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 20 (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/DeloitteLLP CommentLetter.pdf (‘‘[T]he different liability systems where these reports exist must be taken into account when assessing the standard language included in the auditor’s report in the U.S. and the U.S. litigation system’’); Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 22, (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/CAQComment letter62708FINAL.pdf (suggesting the Committee ‘‘acknowledge that the risk of catastrophic liability must inform any potential changes to the auditor’s report’’); PricewaterhouseCoopers, Comment Letter E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM Continued 30JYN1 44338 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Commentary has also suggested that auditors must more effectively communicate their responsibility regarding fraud detection with investors and the capital markets. The Committee agrees with this suggestion. Accordingly, the Committee believes that the auditor’s report should articulate clearly to investors the auditor’s role and limitations in detecting fraud.187 The Committee believes that expressly communicating to investors, other financial statement users, and the public the role of auditors in finding and reporting fraud would help narrow the ‘‘expectations gap.’’ In addition, the Committee recommends that the PCAOB and the SEC clarify in the auditor’s report the auditor’s role and limitations in detecting fraud under current auditing standards. In addition, the Committee recommends, in light of this continuing ‘‘expectations gap,’’ that the PCAOB review the auditing standards governing fraud detection and fraud reporting. Specifically, the Committee recommends that the PCAOB periodically review and update these standards.188 Recommendation 6: Urge the PCAOB to undertake a standard-setting initiative to consider mandating the engagement Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 11, (June 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCCommentLtr TreasCmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf (acknowledging that litigation issues must be taken into account). 187 See, e.g., Joseph Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP Ernst & Young Professor and Director of Research—Corporate Governance Center University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accountancy Bentley College, Dana R. Hermanson Dinos Eminent Scholar Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 6, (May 15, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ &_files/ACAPCommentLetterMay152008.pdf (urging the PCAOB to evaluate the efficacy of SAS No. 99); Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 26, (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/CAQComment letter62708FINAL.pdf (supporting the Recommendation); Frank Frankowski, CFO, Airborne Systems, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2, (June 2, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ FrankowskiLetter.pdf; Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Dan Guy, Former Vice President, Professional Standards and Services, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Guy060308.pdf (recommending the addition of illegal acts to the Recommendation). 188 Donald Chapin, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1, (June 9, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ _files/TreasuryAdvisoryCommittee.doc (supporting the Recommendation). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 partner’s signature on the auditor’s report. SEC regulations require that the auditor’s report be signed.189 Under current requirements, the auditor’s report signature block shows the auditing firm’s name, not the engagement partner’s. In 2005, the PCAOB’s SAG considered whether the audit partner and a concurring partner should sign the auditor’s report in their own names.190 The Committee has received testimony and commentary regarding the benefits and complexities of engagement partner signatures.191 The Committee has also discussed and debated the merits of the senior engagement partner signing the auditor’s report.192 Advocates believe that such signatures will foster greater accountability of the individuals signing the auditor’s report, will enhance transparency, and may improve audit quality, and they also note the signature will create no additional liability concerns for the engagement partner.193 These supporters analogize the signatures to the chief executive officer and chief financial officer certifications under Section 302 of Sarbanes-Oxley and directors’ signatures on public company annual reports. The signature will also enhance the status of the engagement partner, putting the partner Regulation S–X, Rule 2–02a. Company Accounting Oversight Board, Standing Advisory Group Meeting: Auditor’s Reporting Model 7–8 (Feb. 16, 2005). 191 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Paul G. Haaga, Jr., Vice Chairman, Capital Research and Management Company, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Haaga020408.pdf (stating that signatures could improve audit quality and enhance accountability). 192 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Mar. 13, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Donald T. Nicolaisen, Board Member, Morgan Stanley, 228–230) (stating his belief that engagement partner should sign the auditor’s report); Record of Proceedings (Mar. 13, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Mary Bush, Board Member, Discover Financial Services, 231) (endorsing the engagement partner signature on the auditor’s report). 193 See, e.g., Donald Chapin, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2, (June 9, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/TreasuryAdvisory Committee.doc (suggesting that if the engagement partner and concurring partner sign the auditor’s report separately, some type of liability limitations should be received if the firm is not complicit in the audit failure); Dennis Johnson, CFA, Senior Portfolio Manager, CalPERS, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2, (June 13, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ 200806_13ACAP_addendum_commentltr.pdf (supporting the Recommendation); Paul Lee, Director, Hermes Equity Ownership Services Limited, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 4, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ACAP response13Jun08.pdf (noting that the signatures would increase accountability and professionalism). PO 00000 189 SEC 190 Public Frm 00128 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 on the same level as the chief executive officer and chief financial officer. Opponents of such signatures argue that the auditing firm operates as a team and takes responsibility for the audit, but not individual partners. They also argue that no improvement in audit quality will result from such a signature.194 The Committee notes that engagement partner signatures are required in other jurisdictions. The European Union’s (EU) Eighth Directive requires that the engagement partner sign the auditor’s report.195 Even prior to the Eighth Directive, several European countries, including France, Germany, and Luxembourg, required engagement partner signatures for a number of years.196 The Committee notes that in Chapter VII of this Report, the Committee is recommending disclosure of the name(s) of the senior audit partner(s) staffed on the engagement in the proxy statement to increase transparency and affirm the accountability of the auditor. The Committee believes that the engagement partner’s signature on the 194 See, e.g., Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 21 (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/DeloitteLLPComment Letter.pdf (arguing that regulators and others can already identify those involved in audits); Arnold Hanish, Financial Executives International, Chair, Committee on Corporate Reporting, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 5 (July 3, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/FEICCRTreasuryACAP CommentLetterFiled73080.pdf (stating that partners could become excessively conservative and seek multiple opinions from the national office before signing their name); Wayne Kolins, Director of Assurance, BDO Seidman LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 14–15, (June 27, 2008) available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ResponsetoAdvisory Committee0627final.PDF (noting that an audit is a team effort and focusing on one partner may reduce other engagement staff’s sense of responsibility); Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C., Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 17, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/MayerHoffmanMcCann CommentLetter.pdf (stating that the Recommendation ‘‘may be counterproductive since large audits require many partners in various parts of the country or world’’); PricewaterhouseCoopers, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 11–12, (June 30, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCComment LtrTreasCmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf (discerning no clear benefit from the Recommendation). 195 Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council Art. 28 (May 17, 2006). 196 The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, Shareholder Involvement— Identifying the Audit Partner (2005) (noting that Germany, France, and Luxembourg currently require audit partner signatures and European Member states must adopt such a requirement under Article 28 of the Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES auditor’s report would increase transparency and accountability. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the PCAOB undertake a standardsetting initiative to consider mandating the engagement partner’s signature on the auditor’s report. The Committee notes the signature requirement should not impose on any signing partner any duties, obligations or liability that are greater than the duties, obligations and liability imposed on such person as a member of an auditing firm.197 Recommendation 7. Urge the PCAOB to require that, beginning in 2010, larger auditing firms produce a public annual report incorporating (a) information required by the EU’s Eighth Directive, Article 40 Transparency Report deemed appropriate by the PCAOB, and (b) such key indicators of audit quality and effectiveness as determined by the PCAOB in accordance with Recommendation 3 in Chapter VI of this Report. Further, encourage the PCAOB to require that, beginning in 2011, the larger auditing firms file with the PCAOB on a confidential basis audited financial statements. The Committee considered testimony and commentary regarding the transparency of auditing firms.198 The Committee has reviewed and considered a range of transparency reporting options, including the PCAOB’s May 2006 proposal, now finalized, requiring annual and periodic reporting pursuant to the mandate under Sarbanes-Oxley’s Section 102(d).199 This rule requires annual reporting by auditing firms on such items as a public company audit client list and the percentage of the firm’s total fees attributable to public company audit clients for each of the following categories of services: audit services, other accounting services, tax services, and non-audit services. The PCAOB rule also requires firms to file a ‘‘special’’ report, triggered by such 197 This language is similar to safe harbor language the SEC promulgated in its rulemaking pursuant to Sarbanes-Oxley’s Section 407 for audit committee financial experts. See, SEC, Final Rule: Disclosure Required by Sections 406 and 407 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Release No. 33–8177 (Jan. 23, 2003). 198 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of James S. Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ernst & Young LLP, 10), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Turley120307.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Dennis Johnson, Senior Portfolio Manager, Corporate Governance, California Public Employees’ Retirement System, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/Johnson 020408.pdf. 199 See PCAOB, Proposed Rules on Periodic Reporting by Registered Public Accounting Firms, available at https://www.pcaobus.org/rules/ docket_019/2006–05–23_release_no._2006–004.pdf. VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 events as the initiation of certain criminal or civil governmental proceedings against the firm or its personnel; a new relationship with a previously disciplined person or entity; or the firm becoming subject to bankruptcy or similar proceedings. The Committee has also considered the EU’s Eighth Directive, Article 40 Transparency Report,200 which requires that public company auditors post on their websites annual reports including the following information: legal and network structure and ownership description; governance description; most recent quality assurance review; public company audit client list; independence practices and confirmation of independence compliance review; continuing education policy; financial information, including audit fees, tax advisory fees, consulting fees; and partner remuneration policies. The Article 40 Transparency Report also requires a description of the auditing firm’s quality control system and a statement by firm management on its effectiveness. Auditing firms and investors have expressed support for requiring U.S. auditing firms to publish reports similar to the Article 40 Transparency Report.201 The Committee notes that Recommendation 3 in Chapter VI of this Report recommends that, if feasible, the PCAOB develop audit quality indicators and auditing firms publish these indicators. The Committee believes this information could improve audit quality by enhancing the transparency of auditing firms and notes that some foreign affiliates of U.S. auditing firms 200 Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council Art. 40 (May 17, 2006), available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006: 157:0087:0107:EN:PDF. 201 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Paul G. Haaga, Jr., Vice Chairman, Capital Research and Management Company, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Haaga020408.pdf (recommending auditing firm disclosure of quality control policies and procedures); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 6), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/Nusbaum 020408.pdf (supporting an annual transparency report for U.S. auditing firms); Record of Proceedings (Written Submission of James S. Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ernst & Young LLP, 10), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Turley120307.pdf (suggesting the PCAOB require auditing firms to publish transparency reports like the European Union’s Article 40 Transparency Report). PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44339 provide such indicators in public reports issued in other jurisdictions.202 Furthermore, for several years auditing firms in the United Kingdom have published annual reports containing audited financial statements pursuant to limited liability partnership disclosure requirements as well as a discussion of those statements, a statement on corporate governance, performance metrics, and other useful information. In the United States, auditing firms typically do not prepare audited financial statements. Some witnesses have called for the public disclosure of audited financial statements,203 whereas one auditing firm representative questioned the usefulness of disclosing financial statements of the smaller auditing firms.204 The Committee received 202 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Dennis Johnson, Senior Portfolio Manager, Corporate Governance, California Public Employees’ Retirement System, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/Johnson 020408.pdf (recommending auditing firm disclosure of key performance indicators, such as ‘‘percent of training dollars spent on staff compared to the fees received for the audit, average experience of staff, partner time allocated to each audit’’). 203 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of John Biggs, Audit Committee Chair, Boeing, Inc., former Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, TIAA–CREF), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/Biggs 060308.pdf (stating that audited financial statements would be useful for audit committees); James D. Cox, Duke University, and Lawrence A. Cunningham, George Washington University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1–2, (July 4, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/JointComment LetteronFACAPJuly2008.doc (supporting financial statement disclosure for assessing audit quality and independence); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Paul G. Haaga, Jr., Vice Chairman, Capital Research and Management Company, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Haaga020408.pdf (calling for auditing firm disclosure of audited financial statements); Dennis Johnson, CFA, Senior Portfolio Manager, CalPERS, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ 200806_13ACAP_addendum_commentltr.pdf (recommending that all audited financial statements be publicly available on the PCAOB’s website). 204 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Neal Spencer, Managing Partner, BKD LLP, 38–39), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/agendas/QFRs-2–4–08.pdf (analogizing the auditing firm to a vendor and noting that the profitability or financial strength of vendors ‘‘has little, if any, relevance other than perhaps related to concerns about their ability to financially support their continued existence’’ and noting that the profitability or financial condition of an auditing firm is not directly related to audit quality; and noting that the ‘‘most relevant financial information for users’’ of smaller auditing firms is insurancerelated information and noting that larger auditing firms with limited commercial insurance coverage may need to disclose different financial information). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44340 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices testimony and commentary opposed to the public release of financial statements.205 The Committee recommends that the PCAOB require that, beginning in 2010, larger auditing firms (those with 100 or more public company audit clients that the PCAOB inspects annually) produce a public annual report incorporating (a) information required by the Article 40 Transparency Report deemed appropriate by the PCAOB in consultation with investors, other financial statement users, auditing firms, public companies, academics, and other market participants, and (b) such key indicators of audit quality and effectiveness as determined by the PCAOB in accordance with Recommendation 3 in Chapter VII of this Report. These disclosure requirements should supplement any rules approved by the SEC as a result of the PCAOB’s May 2006 reporting proposal. Further, the Committee also recommends that the PCAOB require that, beginning in 2011, the larger auditing firms file with the PCAOB on a confidential basis audited financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES 203 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of John Biggs, Audit Committee Chair, Boeing, Inc., former Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, TIAA–CREF), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/Biggs 060308.pdf (stating that audited financial statements would be useful for audit committees); James D. Cox, Duke University, and Lawrence A. Cunningham, George Washington University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1–2, (July 4, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/JointComment LetteronFACAPJuly2008.doc (supporting financial statement disclosure for assessing audit quality and independence); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Paul G. Haaga, Jr., Vice Chairman, Capital Research and Management Company, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Haaga020408.pdf (calling for auditing firm disclosure of audited financial statements); Dennis Johnson, CFA, Senior Portfolio Manager, CalPERS, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ 200806_13ACAP_addendum_commentltr.pdf (recommending that all audited financial statements be publicly available on the PCAOB’s website). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 principles or international financial reporting standards. The Committee also recommends that the PCAOB determine which of the requirements included above should be imposed on smaller auditing firms (those with fewer than 100 public company audit clients), taking into account these firms’ size and resources. VI. Concentration and Competition The Committee analyzed public company audit market concentration and competition. In its work the Committee focused on concentration and competition in the context of their impact on audit quality and effectiveness. In turn, consideration of the sustainability of the auditing profession was also subject to examination in the context of audit quality and effectiveness. The recommendations set out below reflect this focus. During the course of its deliberations, the Committee received testimony and commentary from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), academics, auditing firms, investors, and others regarding audit market concentration and competition. In January 2008, the GAO issued Audits of Public Companies: Continued Concentration in Audit Market for Large Public Companies Does Not Call for Immediate Action,206 updating its 2003 report on audit market concentration.207 204 Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Neal Spencer, Managing Partner, BKD LLP, 38–39), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/agendas/QFRs-2–4–08.pdf (analogizing the auditing firm to a vendor and noting that the profitability or financial strength of vendors ‘‘has little, if any, relevance other than perhaps related to concerns about their ability to financially support their continued existence’’ and noting that the profitability or financial condition of an auditing firm is not directly related to audit quality; and noting that the ‘‘most relevant financial information for users’’ of smaller auditing firms is insurancerelated information and noting that larger auditing firms with limited commercial insurance coverage may need to disclose different financial information). 205 Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 20 (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ DeloitteLLPCommentLetter.pdf (opposing disclosure of financial statements due to increased PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 The GAO concluded that the four largest auditing firms continue to dominate the large public company audit market. In 2006, the four largest auditing firms audited 98% of the 1500 largest public companies with annual revenues over $1 billion and 92% of public companies with annual revenues between $500 million and $1 billion. However, concentration in the small and mid-size public company audit market has eased during the past five years. The largest firms’ share in auditing small public companies with annual revenues under $100 million has declined from 44% in 2002 to 22% in 2006 and in auditing mid-size public companies with annual revenue between $100 million and $500 million from 90% in 2002 to 71% in 2006.208 See Figure 1. litigation risk and the impact on concentration); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Charles W. Gerdts, III, General Counsel, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP, 12), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/Bedard 060308.pdf (suggesting that audited financial statements would not help audit quality, may harm competition, and could increase settlement awards); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kenneth Nielsen Goldmann, Capital Markets and SEC Practice Director, J.H. Cohn LLP, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Goldmann060308.pdf (stating that smaller firms would leave the public company audit market due to the fact that ‘‘they would view such disclosure as placing them in a negative competitive position with respect to larger audit firms, current and potential clients, and potential plaintiffs’’); David McDonnell, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton International Ltd, and Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Ltd Board of Governors, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 5 (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ _files/GTCommentlettertoACAPJune 2008_FINAL.pdf (noting the lack of evidence that audit quality would improve but states that the Recommendation would have an adverse affect on concentration and smaller firms); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Michael R. Young, Partner, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Young060308.pdf (noting that the Recommendation may result in larger settlement demands). 206 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Audits of Public Companies: Continued Concentration in Audit Market for Large Public Companies Does Not Call for Immediate Action, GAO–08–163 (Jan. 2008) [hereinafter 2008 GAO Report]. E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices 207 GAO, Public Accounting Firms: Mandated Study on Consolidation and Competition, GAO–03– 864 (July 2003) (finding that ‘‘although audits for large public companies were highly concentrated among the largest accounting firms, the market for audit services appeared competitive according to various indicators’’). 208 2008 GAO Report 19. The GAO also found that the largest firms collected 94% of all audit fees paid by public companies in 2006, slightly less than the 96% they collected in 2002. 2008 GAO Report 16. VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 services.211 Notwithstanding the increasing number of public company financial restatements,212 the Committee heard from several witnesses that audit quality had improved.213 For example, the GAO observed that market participants and public company officials had noted improvement in recent years in audit quality, including auditing firm staff’s technical expertise, responsiveness to client needs, and ability to identify material financial reporting matters.214 Much of the improvement was credited to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SarbanesOxley), which enhanced auditor independence, replaced the selfregulation of the auditing profession with the PCAOB, mandated evaluation and disclosure of the effectiveness of internal controls over financial GAO Report 31–32. e.g., Susan Scholz, The Changing Nature and Consequences of Public Company Financial Restatements 1997–2006 (Apr. 2008). 213 2008 GAO Report 5; Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd., Report on the PCAOB’s 2004, 2005, and 2006 Inspections of Domestic Triennially Inspected Firms, PCAOB Rel. No. 2007– 010 (Oct. 22, 2007). 214 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of Jeanette M. Franzel, Director, Financial Management and Assurance Team, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2 (Jan. 30, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/QFRs-12–3-2007.pdf (observing that the market believes the ‘‘bar had been raised’’ on audit quality). See also Center for Audit Quality, Report on the Survey of Audit Committee Members (Mar. 2008) (concluding that: 17% of surveyed audit committee members view audit quality as good, 53% as very good, 25% as excellent, while 82% say overall quality has improved somewhat/significantly over the past several years). PO 00000 211 2008 212 See, Frm 00131 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 reporting,215 and strengthened audit committee membership, independence, and responsibilities. Although industry concentration can lead to increased prices, the Committee notes that the GAO concluded that higher audit market concentration has not been associated with higher fees. Public companies, auditing firms, and other market participants believe the considerable increase in audit fees in recent years is due not to market power of a concentrated industry, but to the increased requirements under SarbanesOxley, the complexity of accounting and financial reporting standards, the need to hire and retain qualified audit staff, and the independence requirements (which have led to the possible repricing of audits to their unbundled market price).216 The Committee also considered the impact of the possible loss of one of the four largest accounting firms in light of the high degree of concentration of public company auditing, and especially large public company auditing, in those firms. The GAO noted the possibility of this loss due to issues arising out of firm conduct, such as civil litigation, federal or state regulatory action or criminal prosecution, or economic events, such as a merger.217 The GAO posited 215 2008 GAO Report 32. GAO Report 27–29. On the re-pricing of audits, see also James D. Cox, The Oligopolistic Gatekeeper: The U.S. Accounting Profession, in After Enron: Improving Corporate Law and Modernizing Securities Regulation in Europe and the U.S., Chapter 9, Oxford, forthcoming, available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=926360. 217 2008 GAO Report 34–35. 216 2008 E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 EN30JY08.042</GPH> mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES The Committee considered the testimony of several witnesses regarding the reasons for the continued concentration in the large public company audit market. Auditing firms, public companies, market participants, academics, investors and others reasoned that large public companies with operations in multiple countries need auditing firms with global resources and technical and industry expertise to deal with an increasingly complex business and financial reporting environment.209 These needs limit auditor choice to only the largest auditing firms for many large public companies. The Committee heard from witnesses who also described barriers to the growth of smaller auditing firms, including the behavior of underwriters and other capital market participants.210 In analyzing these data on concentration and limited auditor choice in the large public company audit market, the Committee focused on the potential negative impact of concentration on audit quality. Some have suggested the lack of competition may not provide sufficient incentive for the dominant auditing firms to deliver high quality and innovative audit 44341 44342 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices potential negative effects of such a loss, including the following: Further limitations on large public company auditor choice, costs associated with changing auditors, and companies’ inability to obtain timely financial statement audits.218 However, the GAO did not recommend insulating auditing firms directly from either the legal or market consequences of their actions. With the above considerations in mind, the Committee recommends that regulators, the auditing profession, and other bodies, as applicable, effectuate the following: Recommendation 1. Reduce barriers to the growth of smaller auditing firms consistent with an overall policy goal of promoting audit quality. Because smaller auditing firms are likely to become significant competitors in the market for larger company audits only in the long term, the Committee recognizes that Recommendation 2 will be a higher priority in the near term. The GAO concluded that concentration in the large public company audit market will not be reduced in the near term by smaller auditing firms. The Committee considered testimony regarding the reasons that smaller auditing firms are unable or unwilling to enter the large public company audit market. Challenges facing these firms’ entry into this market typically include the following: Lack of staffing and geographic limitations on both the physical span of their practices and experience and expertise with global auditing complexities; inability to create global networks necessary to serve global clients, due to lack of auditing firms abroad to act as potential partners; the need for greater technical capability and industry specialization; lack of name recognition and reputation; and limited access to capital.219 In addition, expanding into the large public company audit market may be unattractive for some smaller auditing firms for a variety of reasons,220 218 2008 GAO Report 35–36. e.g., 2008 GAO Report 37; Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Wayne Kolins, National Director of Assurance and Chairman, BDO Seidman LLP, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Kolins120307.pdf (describing as barriers for smaller auditing firms liability risks, overly complex independence rules, and an array of factors that audit committees may review in choosing an auditor that best matches the company); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Neal D. Spencer, Managing Partner, BKD, LLP, 1), available at https://www.treas. gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Spencer020408.pdf (noting that barriers include resources, institutional bias, insurability, and liability). 220 2008 GAO Report 38. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES 219 See, VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 including increased exposure to litigation, the possibility that their business model is not scaleable, and the fact that for some smaller firms other aspects of their business (such as private company auditing and other work) has greater potential for expansion. To address these issues, the Committee recommends that policy makers press for the reduction of barriers, to the extent consistent with audit quality and other public interest factors, to the growth of smaller auditing firms. For smaller firms, this includes encouraging and promoting development of technical resources in such areas as international financial reporting standards (IFRS) and fair value accounting, and development of specialized or ‘‘niche’’ practices or industry ‘‘verticals’’ where they are in the best interests of investors and can lead to more effective competition. Pressure also should be applied against non-justifiable resistance to using smaller firms on the part of a variety of market actors. Some commentary has also noted the costs associated with public companies’ changing auditors and how these costs can pose another barrier for smaller firms trying to enter the larger public company audit market. For example, commentary and testimony noted the often high fees charged for the predecessor auditor’s opinion on previously filed financial statements and the challenges associated with having the predecessor auditor transfer its work papers to the successor auditor.221 Other obstacles to auditor changes discussed by the Committee have included poor communication between predecessor and successor auditors. The Committee believes that public companies should not be limited in their auditor selection by unnecessary barriers created during the auditor change and selection processes. Consistent with AU 315: Communications Between Predecessor and Successor Auditors,222 which addresses communications between predecessor and successor auditors, the 221 Anonymous, Private Investor, Former Auditor, and Former CFO, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1 (May 11, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ index.cfm?FuseAction=Home.View&Topic_id=9 &FellowType_id=1&CurrentPage=2; Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Kurt N. Schacht, Managing Director, Centre for Financial Markets Integrity, CFA Institute (June 30, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/agendas/QFRs-6-3-08.pdf. 222 Communications Between Predecessor and Successor Auditors, Interim Auditing Standard AU 315 (Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 2002). PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Committee urges the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the PCAOB to encourage predecessor auditors to fully communicate and cooperate with the successor auditors. This communication and cooperation should apply to all auditors regardless of their size. The issue of auditor changes and the importance of transparency in this area are addressed within Chapter V of this Report. The Committee believes that the following specific and incremental actions would assist in the growth of the smaller firms and their entry into the large public company audit market: (a) Require disclosure by public companies in their registration statements, annual reports, and proxy statements of any provisions in agreements with third parties that limit auditor choice. The Committee considered testimony and commentary that certain market participants, such as underwriters, banks, and lenders, may influence and effectively limit public company auditor selection decisions.223 For instance, certain contractual arrangements limit public companies’ auditor choice.224 Consistent with the large public company audit market, this practice is particularly prevalent in the initial public offering (IPO) arena, where an underwriter may include in the underwriting agreement a provision limiting the company’s auditor choice to a specified group of auditing firms.225 223 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Nusbaum020408.pdf (noting that transparency regarding ‘‘restrictive contracts with underwriters’’ could improve auditor choice). See also 2008 GAO Report 47. 224 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Lewis H. Ferguson, III, Partner, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Ferguson120307.pdf (‘‘Sometimes lenders, investors, investment bankers or credit rating agencies will insist that a company seeking to access the capital markets have its financial statements audited by one of the largest accounting firms, adding a bias that has the practical effect of being a barrier to entry.’’). 225 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (May 5, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Committee Member Ken Goldman, Chief Financial Officer, Fortinet, Inc., 143), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/agendas/minutes-05-05-08.pdf. See also, Edwin J. Kliegman, CPA, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 2 (Nov. 26, 2007), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ index.cfm?FuseAction=Home.View&Topic _id=3&FellowType_id=1; Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Brad Koenig, Former Managing Director and Head of Global Technology Investment Banking, Goldman Sachs, 219–220), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/Koenig020408.pdf (noting underwriter practices in auditor selection). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices 44343 combined share of the IPO market (by number of IPOs) has increased progressively (rising from 18% in 2003 to 40% in 2007),226 the largest firms continue to audit the majority of the largest IPOs.227 See Figure 2. The Committee believes these provisions impair competition by limiting public company auditor choice and the ability of smaller auditors to serve a greater share of the public company audit market. Accordingly, the Committee recommends that the SEC require public companies to disclose in their registration statements, annual reports, and proxy statements any provisions in agreements limiting auditor choice.228 The disclosure should identify the agreement and include the names of the parties to the agreement and the actual provisions limiting auditor choice.229 (b) Include representatives of smaller auditing firms in committees, public forums, fellowships, and other engagements. The Committee considered testimony that the lack of smaller firms’ name recognition and reputation have hindered smaller auditing firms’ ability to compete in the large public company audit market. The GAO noted that name recognition, reputation, and credibility Accountancy, Bentley College, 8), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Bedard060308.pdf (supporting this Recommendation and noting that enhanced name recognition ‘‘would provide further incentives for these [smaller] firms to build the personnel quality of their organizations’’); Wayne Kolins, National Director of Assurance and Chairman, BDO Seidman LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 5, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments. treas.gov/_files/ResponsetoAdvisoryCommittee 0627FINAL.pdf (recommending that ‘‘the SEC adopt a rule prohibiting agreements with third parties that limit auditor selection to specific firms, other than to specify that the firm selected must be suitably qualified to perform the audit’’); David McDonnell, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton International Ltd, and Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Ltd Board of Governors, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 6 (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ GTCommentlettertoACAPJune2008_FINAL.pdf (‘‘Such public disclosure will create incentives for audit committees to optimize their auditor choice and help clarify that size alone is not the best criterion when selecting an auditor.’’). But c.f., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Brian O’Malley, Senior Vice President and General Auditor, Nasdaq Stock Market, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/OMalley060308.pdf (noting that disclosure may add transparency but the ‘‘root causes’’ of decisions to limit auditor choice remain). 229 The Committee notes that a group of market participants put together by the United Kingdom’s Financial Reporting Council to study audit market competition has suggested similar disclosure of contractual obligations limiting auditor choice. See Financial Reporting Council, FRC Update: Choice in the UK Audit Market 4 (Apr. 2007) [hereinafter FRC Update] (recommending that ‘‘when explaining auditor selection decisions, Boards should disclose any contractual obligations to appoint certain types of audit firms’’). 226 2008 GAO Report 44. of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Brad Koenig, Former Managing Director and Head of Global Technology Investment Banking, Goldman Sachs, 2), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ Koenig020408.pdf (noting that from 2002–2007 the largest four auditing firms had an 87% market share of the 817 initial public offerings that exceeded $20 million). See also 2008 GAO Report 44 (‘‘Staff from some investment firms that underwrite stock issuances for public companies told [GAO] that in the past they generally had expected the companies for which they raised capital to use one of the largest firms for IPOs but that now these organizations were more willing to accept smaller audit firms. * * * However, * * * most of the companies that went public with a mid-size or smaller auditor were smaller. In addition, these firms’ share of IPOs of larger companies (those with revenues greater than $150 million) rose from none in 2003 to about 13 percent in 2007.’’). 228 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Jean C. Bedard, Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accounting, Department of mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES 227 Record VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 EN30JY08.043</GPH> Evidence suggests that auditor choice may be more limited among the largest IPOs: While midsize and smaller firms’ 44344 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES were significant barriers to smaller auditing firm expansion.230 The PCAOB has registered and oversees 982 U.S. auditing firms and 857 foreign auditing firms.231 While it is not possible to include all smaller firms, the Committee received testimony and comment letters suggesting that there should be greater inclusion and participation of smaller firms in public and private sector committees, roundtables, and fellowships.232 One auditing firm representative suggested the creation of a PCAOB professional practice fellowship program, reaching out to professionals from auditing firms of various sizes.233 The Committee believes increasing name recognition and reputation could promote audit market competition and auditor choice.234 Accordingly, the 230 2008 GAO REPORT 44 (‘‘Fifty percent of accounting firms responding to [GAO’s] survey that want to audit large companies said that name recognition or reputation with potential clients was a great or very great impediment to expansion. Similarly, 54 percent of these firms cited name recognition or credibility with financial markets and investment bankers as a great or very great impediment to expansion.’’). See also Edward J. Kliegman, CPA, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline (Nov. 16, 2007), available at https://comments.treas.gov/index.cfm?Fuse Action=Home.View&Topic_id=3&FellowType_id=1. 231 Data are as of Feb. 21, 2008. 232 See, e.g., Andrew D. Bailey, Jr., Professor of Accountancy—Emeritus, University of Illinois, and Senior Policy Advisor, Grant Thornton LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 16 (Jan. 30, 2008), available at https://comments. treas.gov/_files/BAILEYCOMMENTSONTREASURY ADVISORYCOMMITTEEOUTLINEFINAL SUBMISSION13008.doc; Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of James S. Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ernst & Young LLP, 4 (Feb. 1, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/QFRs-12-3-2007.pdf. 233 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Wayne Kolins, National Director of Assurance and Chairman, BDO Seidman LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Kolins120307.pdf. See Chapter IV (recommending the creation of a PCAOB fellowship program). While maintenance and extension of professional fellowship programs are also considered in the Committee’s recommendations relating to human capital matters, extending these opportunities increasingly to firms of various sizes could assist smaller firms in their ability to compete in the public company audit market. 234 See, e.g. Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Jean C. Bedard, Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accounting, Department of Accountancy, Bentley College, 8), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Bedard060308.pdf (agreeing with the Recommendation); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kenneth Nielsen Goldmann, Capital Markets and SEC Practice Director, J.H. Cohn LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Goldmann060308.pdf (‘‘More opportunities such as this testimony for leaders of smaller firms to participate in important public policy discussions about the public company audit profession would over time enhance public VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 Committee recommends that regulators and policy makers, such as the SEC, the PCAOB, and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), include representatives of smaller auditing firms in committees, public forums, fellowships, and other engagements.235 The Committee recognizes the existence of different programs within regulatory agencies available to serve as a resource and contact point for smaller auditing firms and smaller public companies, such as, the SEC’s Office of Small Business Policy, the PCAOB’s Forum on Auditing in the Small Business Environment, and the FASB’s Small Business Advisory Committee. Recommendation 2. Monitor potential sources of catastrophic risk faced by public company auditing firms and create a mechanism for the preservation and rehabilitation of troubled larger public company auditing firms. The Committee considered testimony regarding the variety of potentially catastrophic risks that public company auditing firms face. These risks include general financial risks and risks relating to failure in the provision of audit services and non-audit services, including civil litigation, regulatory actions, and loss of customers, employees, or auditing network partners due to a loss of reputation.236 The Committee believes these risks are real and notes that over the past two decades two large auditing firms have gone out of existence. In 1990, Laventhol & Horwath, at the time the seventh largest auditing firm in the understanding and acceptance that high quality in auditing is achievable in different forms and packages.’’); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kurt N. Schacht, Managing Director, Centre for Financial Market Integrity, CFA Institute, 2–3), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Schacht060308.pdf. 235 For a similar recommendation, see SEC Advisory Committee on Smaller Public Companies, Final Report 114 (Apr. 23, 2006). 236 See, e.g., 2008 GAO Report 32–36; Zoe-Vonna Palmrose, Maintaining the Value and Viability of Independent Auditors as Gatekeepers under SOX: An Auditing Master Proposal, in Brookings-Nomura Seminar: After the Horses Have Left the Barn: the Future Role of Financial Gatekeepers 12–13 (Sept. 28, 2005). Civil litigation was the risk most often cited by witnesses before the Committee. See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of James D. Cox, Brainerd Currie Professor of Law, Duke University School of Law), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Cox120307.pdf. See also Eric R. Talley, Cataclysmic Liability Risk among Big Four Auditors, 106 Colum. L. Rev. 1641 (Nov. 2006) (‘‘On one hand, the pattern of liability exposure during the last decade does not appear to be the type that would, at least on first blush, imperil the entire profession. On the other hand, if one predicts historical liability exposure patterns into the future, the risk of another firm exiting due to liability concerns appears to be more than trivial.’’). PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 United States, filed for bankruptcy protection due in part to a failure in the provision of non-audit services, and subsequent class action litigation, loss of reputation, and inability to attract and retain clients.237 In 2002, Arthur Andersen, at the time one of the five largest auditing firms in the United States, dissolved. The Department of Justice (DOJ) had criminally indicted the auditing firm on obstruction of justice charges relating to the audit of Enron. The resulting inability to retain clients and partners and keep together its global affiliate network led to the collapse of Arthur Andersen.238 In addition, KPMG recently faced the possibility of criminal indictment relating to its provision of tax-related services. In the end, KPMG entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with the DOJ.239 Many have suggested that a criminal indictment would have led to the dissolution of the firm. Currently, BDO Seidman is appealing a $521 million state judgment involving a private company audit client. The auditing firm’s chief executive has publicly stated that such a judgment amount would threaten the firm’s viability.240 As discussed above, the Committee believes that the loss of one of the larger auditing firms would likely have a significant negative impact on the capital markets. Of greatest concern is the potential disruption to capital markets that the failure of a large auditing firm would cause, due to the lack of sufficient capacity to audit the largest public companies and the possible inability of public companies to obtain timely audits.241 The 237 See, e.g, 2008 GAO Report 33. e.g., U.S. Government Accountability Office, Public Accounting Firms: Mandated Study on Consolidation and Competition 12 (July 2003) (‘‘The criminal indictment of fourth-ranked Andersen for obstruction of justice stemming from its role as auditor of Enron Corporation led to a mass exodus of Andersen partners and staff as well as clients.’’). 239 2008 GAO Report 56–57, n. 60. Note that the Department of Justice did indict several individuals. 240 Jury Awards Rise Against BDO Seidman, Assoc. Press, Aug. 15, 2007. 241 See 2008 GAO Report 35, 36 (observing that further audit market concentration would ‘‘leave large companies with potentially only one or two choices for a new auditor’’ and that ‘‘the market disruption caused by a firm failure or exit from the market could affect companies’ abilities to obtain timely audits of their financial statements, reducing the audited financial information available to investors’’). See also London Economics, Final Report to EC–DG Internal Market and Services, Study on the Economic Impact of Auditors’ Liability Regimes 24 (Sept. 2006) (‘‘The adjustment to a situation in which one of the Big-4 networks fails is unlikely to be smooth. But the long run consequences are likely to be limited provided the overall statutory audit capacity does not fall 238 See, E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Committee believes these concerns must be balanced against the importance of auditing firms and their partners, as private, for-profit businesses, being exposed to the consequences of failure, including both the legal consequences and economic consequences. In consideration of these competing concerns, the Committee makes the following recommendations: (a) As part of its current oversight over registered auditing firms, the PCAOB should monitor potential sources of catastrophic risk which would threaten audit quality. The PCAOB’s mission is to oversee auditing firms conducting audits of public companies. Its audit qualityfocused mission is intertwined with issues of catastrophic risk, as most often risks to firms’ survival historically have been largely the result of significant audit quality failures or serious compliance issues in the non-audit services aspect of their business. Sarbanes-Oxley provides the PCAOB with registration, reporting, inspection, standard-setting, and enforcement authority over public company auditing firms.242 Under its inspection authority, the PCAOB inspects audit engagements, evaluates quality control systems, and tests as necessary audit, supervisory, and quality control procedures. For example, in its inspection of an auditing firm’s quality control systems, the PCAOB reviews the firm’s policies and procedures related to partner evaluation, partner compensation, new partner nominations and admissions, assignment of responsibilities, disciplinary actions, and partner terminations; compliance with independence requirements; client acceptance and retention policies and procedures; compliance with professional requirements regarding consultations on accounting, auditing, and SEC matters; internal inspection program; processes for establishing and communicating audit policies, procedures, and methodologies; processes related to review of a firm’s foreign affiliate’s audit performance; and tone at the top.243 significantly. Among the various economic sectors, financial institutions may find such a situation particularly difficult as their statutory audits are viewed as more risky and * * * two Big-4 firms dominate the market for statutory audits of financial institutions. The situation is likely to be much direr if a second Big-4 network fails shortly after the first one. Investors’ confidence will be in all likelihood seriously affected and the adjustment to the new situation is likely to be difficult.’’). 242 Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 15 U.S.C. §§ 7211–7219. 243 See, e.g., PCAOB, Observations on the Initial Implementation of the Process for Addressing Quality Control Criticisms within 12 Months after VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 The PCAOB also has authority to require registered auditing firms to provide annual and periodic reports. In May 2006, the PCAOB issued Proposed Rules on Periodic Reporting by Registered Public Accounting Firms requiring annual and periodic reporting.244 The PCAOB has not yet finalized this proposal. The Committee therefore recommends that the PCAOB, in furtherance of its objective to enhance audit quality and effectiveness, exercise its authority to monitor meaningful sources of catastrophic risk that potentially impact audit quality through its programs, including inspections, registration and reporting, or other programs, as appropriate.245 The objective of PCAOB monitoring would be to alert the PCAOB to situations in which auditing firm conduct is resulting in increased catastrophic risk which is impairing or threatens to impair audit quality.246 (b) Establish a mechanism to assist in the preservation and rehabilitation of a troubled larger auditing firm. A first step would encourage larger auditing firms to adopt voluntarily a contingent streamlined internal governance mechanism that could be triggered in the event of threatening circumstances. an Inspection Report, PCAOB Release No. 104– 2006–078 (Mar. 21, 2006). See also the PCAOB’s completed inspection reports at https:// www.pcaobus.org/Inspections/Public_Reports/ index.aspx#k. 244 PCAOB Release No. 2006–004 (May 23, 2006). 245 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Oral Remarks of James Kaplan, Chairman and Founder, Audit Integrity, 280–283), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/agendas/minutes-06–03–08.pdf (noting that ‘‘it really only requires one or two catastrophic events in order to upset or disturb the market place. And clearly, more information needs to be gathered and collected to ensure, or at least assure, that the number of tragic incidents like that are minimized and mitigated’’); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Brian O’Malley, Senior Vice President and General Auditor, Nasdaq Stock Market, 2–3), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/06032008/OMalley060308.pdf (supporting this Recommendation); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kurt N. Schacht, Managing Director, Centre for Financial Market Integrity, CFA Institute, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Schacht060308.pdf (supporting this Recommendation). 246 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Jean C. Bedard, Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accounting, Department of Accountancy, Bentley College, 9), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Bedard060308.pdf (supporting this Recommendation); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Charles W. Gerdts, III, General Counsel, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP, 8), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Bedard060308.pdf (stating that the ‘‘concept’’ behind this Recommendation deserves serious consideration). PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44345 If the governance mechanism failed to stabilize the firm, a second step would permit the SEC to appoint a courtapproved trustee to seek to preserve and rehabilitate the firm by addressing the threatening situation, including through a reorganization, or if such a step were unsuccessful, to pursue an orderly transition. The Committee considered testimony regarding the importance of the viability of the larger auditing firms and the negative consequences of the loss of one of these firms on the capital markets. The Committee also considered commentary regarding issues auditing firms faced in addressing circumstances that threatened their viability, including, in particular, problems arising from the need to work with regulators and law enforcement agencies.247 Several witnesses suggested the development of a mechanism to allow auditing firms facing threatening circumstances to emerge from those situations.248 Committee member and former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker opined that, ‘‘[I]f we had [such an] arrangement at the time Andersen went down, we would have saved it.’’249 The Committee notes that it is critical to have a process in place to quickly respond to crisis events and 247 See, e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission, Temporary Final Rule and Final Rule: Requirements for Arthur Andersen LLP Auditing Clients, SEC Release No. 33–8070 (Mar. 18, 2002); Securities and Exchange Commission, Press Rel. No. 2002–39 and Order Rel. No. 33–8070 (Mar. 18, 2002) (indictment of Arthur Andersen); SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 90 (Feb. 7, 1991) (bankruptcy of Laventhol & Horwath). 248 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of James R. Doty, Partner, Baker Botts L.L.P., 11–13), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 12032007/Doty120307.pdf (suggesting that the Bankruptcy Code be amended to prevent creditors whose claims relate to violations of professional standards from opposing reorganization under a court-approved plan; an automatic stay against partners facilitating partner retention; expanding the SEC’s emergency powers to enable the SEC to act by summary order to address the registered firm’s ability to continue to provide audit services; and encouraging the SEC or PCAOB to discourage ‘‘client poaching’’ by requiring public companies to show that switching auditors was not related to mega-judgments against audit affiliates in other jurisdictions). See also Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Peter S. Christie, Principal, Friemann Christie, LLC, 6), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Christie120307.pdf (‘‘If it remains possible that a firm can fail for reasons other than liability claims it may be attention needs to be given to devices that will permit a firm to re-emerge.’’). 249 Record of Proceedings (Mar. 13, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Paul A. Volcker, Former Chairman, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System, 317), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/agendas/minutes-03–13–08.pdf. E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 44346 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices recommends the following two-step mechanism described below. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES First Step—Internal Governance Mechanism The Committee notes that auditing firms operate as partnerships, generally led by a centralized management team, with a supervisory board of partners overseeing management’s strategy and performance.250 In the event of threatening circumstances at a larger auditing firm, the Committee believes that a lack of effective centralized governance mechanisms may delay crucial decision making, impede difficult decisions that could sustain the firm and its human assets, and lessen the firm’s ability to communicate with maximum responsiveness and effectiveness with private, regulatory and judicial bodies. The Committee therefore recommends that larger auditing firms (those with 100 or more public company audit clients that the PCAOB inspects annually) establish in their partnership agreements a contingent internal governance mechanism, involving the creation of an Executive Committee (made up of partners or outsiders) with centralized firm management powers to address threatening circumstances. The centralized governance mechanism would have full authority to negotiate with regulators, creditors, and others, and it would seek to hold the firm’s organization intact, including preserving the firm’s reputation, until the mitigation of the threat, or, failing that, the implementation of the second step outlined below. The auditing firm voluntarily would trigger the operation of this mechanism upon the occurrence of potentially catastrophic events specified in the partnership agreement, such as civil litigation or actual or significantly threatened government or regulatory action. If necessary, the SEC and the PCAOB could encourage the firm to trigger the mechanism through private communications, public statements, or other means. Regulators could also assist in maintaining the firm’s organization intact by, for example, increasing the time period for registrants that are audit clients to have audits or reviews completed and providing accelerated consultative guidance to registrants that are audit clients.251 The Committee recognizes 250 Center for Audit Quality, Report of the Major Public Company Audit Firms to the Department of the Treasury Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession 13 (Jan. 23, 2008). 251 See, e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission, Temporary Final Rule and Final Rule: Requirements for Arthur Andersen LLP Auditing Clients, SEC Release No. 33–8070 (Mar. 18, 2002); VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 the precise details of such a mechanism would vary from auditing firm to auditing firm, depending on firm structures, history, and culture.252 Second Step—External Preservation Mechanism The Committee also recommends that the larger auditing firms establish in their partnership agreements a rehabilitation mechanism under SEC oversight. The failure of the internal governance mechanism to preserve the auditing firm outlined in the first step above would trigger this second step, which would require legislation. Upon triggering of the second step, either voluntarily by the firm or by the SEC, the SEC would appoint a trustee, subject to court approval, whose mandate would be to seek to address the circumstances that threaten survival, and failing that, to pursue a reorganization that preserves and rehabilitates the firm to the extent practicable, and finally, if reorganization fails, to pursue an orderly transition.253 If this second mechanism is to include an element that addresses claims of creditors (which could include investors with claims, Securities and Exchange Commission, Press Rel. No. 2002–39 and Order Rel. No. 33–8070 (Mar. 18, 2002) (indictment of Arthur Andersen); SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 90 (Feb. 7, 1991) (bankruptcy of Laventhol & Horwath). 252 Note that some commenters sought more prescription surrounding the implementation of this mechanism. See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Jean C. Bedard, Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accounting, Department of Accountancy, Bentley College, 9), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Bedard060308.pdf (recommending that the SEC and/or the PCAOB be granted the power to ‘‘require a firm to invoke its internal governance mechanism or to directly invoke the external preservation mechanism when particularly severe threats arise’’); Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 27–29 (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ DeloitteLLPCommentLetter.pdf (stating that ‘‘the only effective way to stave off disaster is to ensure that the threat itself is mitigated at its source’’); Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 34–35 (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ CAQCommentletter62708FINAL.pdf; Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Barry Mathews, Deputy Chairman, Aon Corporation, 1), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Mathews060308.pdf. 253 Some witnesses questioned whether the SEC would be willing to assume such a role. See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Charles W. Gerdts, III, General Counsel, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP, 9), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Gerdts060308.pdf (noting that the SEC may not have the resources, expertise, or will to assume such a role). PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 audit and other clients, partners, other employees, and others), legislation to integrate this mechanism with the judicial bankruptcy process may be necessary. It is important that this mechanism not be used as insurance for partner capital; that is, this mechanism should not be developed to ‘‘bail out’’ a larger auditing firm, but rather to preserve and rehabilitate the firm in order to ensure the stable functioning of the capital markets and the timely delivery of audited financial statements to investors and other financial statement users. Accordingly, there must be powers that can be exercised in furtherance of the objective of holding the firm together.254 In addition, the Committee recommends that, in order for the SEC to make effective and timely use of its powers under this Recommendation and for the DOJ to have the opportunity to be informed as to the consequences that would result from a potential charging decision against a public auditing firm (as distinct from individuals within a firm), the DOJ should inform the SEC prior to bringing criminal charges against such a firm. The Committee also notes that the larger auditing firms are members or affiliates of global networks of firms and rely on these networks to serve their global clients. Since the networks are maintained through voluntary contractual agreements, the fact that a U.S.-based firm may be facing threatening circumstances could lead to the disintegration of the network. In this regard, in developing this mechanism, auditing firms, regulators, policy makers, and other market participants must consider the practical implications resulting from the relationship between the U.S.-based firms and the global networks. Recommendation 3. Recommend the PCAOB, in consultation with auditors, investors, public companies, audit committees, boards of directors, academics, and others, determine the feasibility of developing key indicators of audit quality and effectiveness and requiring auditing firms to publicly disclose these indicators. Assuming development and disclosure of indicators of audit quality are feasible, 254 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of James R. Doty, Partner, Baker Botts L.L.P., 11), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 12032007/Doty120307.pdf (Dec. 3, 2007) (‘‘It is an anecdotal but firmly held perception of the profession that no accounting firm has entered bankruptcy and emerged to continue its practice. The hard assets of the firm are not significant: the professionals and the clients are the lifeblood of the registered firm. With any anticipation of bankruptcy, these mobile assets are gone.’’). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES require the PCAOB to monitor these indicators. A key issue in the public company audit market is what drives competition for audit clients and whether audit quality is the most significant driver. Currently, there is minimal publicly available information regarding indicators of audit quality at individual auditing firms. Consequently, it is difficult to determine whether audit committees, who ultimately select the auditor, and management are focused and have the tools that are useful in assessing audit quality that would contribute to making the initial auditor selection and subsequent auditor retention evaluation processes more informed and meaningful.255 In addition, with the majority of public companies currently putting shareholder ratification of auditor selection to an annual vote, shareholders may also lack audit quality information important in making such a ratification decision.256 The Committee believes that requiring firms to disclose indicators of audit quality may enhance not only the quality of audits provided by such firms, but also the ability of smaller auditing firms to compete with larger auditing firms, auditor choice, shareholder decision-making related to ratification of auditor selection, and PCAOB oversight of registered auditing firms. The Committee recognizes the challenges of developing and monitoring indicators of audit quality, especially in light of the complex factors driving the potential impact on the incentives of market actors, and the resulting effect on competitive dynamics among auditors.257 The Committee has considered testimony and comment letters as well as other studies and reports in developing this recommendation. A possible framework for PCAOB consideration is reviewing annual 255 See, e.g., New York Stock Exchange, Listed Company Manual § 303A, which the SEC approved on November 4, 2003, for the responsibilities of exchange-listed companies’ audit committees. 256 Institutional Shareholder Services, U.S. Corporate Governance Policy—2007 Updates 3 (2006). 257 If the idea proves to be workable, implementation could be a major undertaking for the PCAOB. Developing meaningful quality indicators, defining how they should be measured, and rolling out the measurement process could take significant PCAOB time and effort. Auditing firms, public companies, investors, and academics would all likely have valuable ideas as to approaches the PCAOB could take. However the indicators were devised, firms would have to build their internal processes for measuring the audit quality indicators and the PCAOB would have to develop procedures and training to monitor those processes. VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 auditing firm reports in other jurisdictions. For example, one auditing firm’s United Kingdom affiliate lists in its annual report nine ‘‘key performance indicators, including average headcount, staff turnover, diversity, client satisfaction, audit and non-audit work, proposal win rate, revenue, profit, and profit per partner.’’ 258 The Financial Reporting Council recently published a paper setting out drivers of audit quality.259 In addition, the PCAOB also could consider some of the factors that auditing firms present to audit committees, such as engagement team composition, the nature and extent of firm training programs, and the nature and reason for client restatements.260 The Committee therefore recommends that the PCAOB, in consultation with auditors, investors, public companies, audit committees, boards of directors, academics, and others, determine the feasibility of developing key indicators of audit quality and requiring auditing firms to publicly disclose these indicators.261 Testimonies and comment letters have suggested specific outputbased audit quality indicators— indicators determined by what the auditing firm has produced in terms of its audit work, such as number of frauds discovered and nature and reason for financial restatements related to time periods when the underlying reason for restatement occurred during the auditing firm’s tenure as auditor for the client- and input-based audit quality indicators—indicators of what the auditing firm puts into its audit work to achieve a certain result, such as the auditing firm’s processes and KPMG LLP, UK Annual Report 2007 46. Update 4. 260 Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Wayne Kolins, National Director of Assurance and Chairman, BDO Seidman LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Kolins120307.pdf. 261 See, e.g., Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 29, (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/DeloitteLLP CommentLetter.pdf; Ernst & Young LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 33–34, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/EYACAP CommentLetterFINAL.pdf; Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 36–38, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/CAQComment letter62708FINAL.pdf (noting that the feasibility study should state the overarching objectives of quality indicators, consider the differences in firm size, partnership model, audit practice scope and audit specialty, and recognize the costs, difficulty and complexity involved); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kenneth Nielsen Goldmann, Capital Markets and SEC Practice Director, J.H. Cohn LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Goldmann060308.pdf. PO 00000 258 See 259 FRC Frm 00137 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44347 procedures used for detecting fraud, the average experience level of auditing firm staff on individual engagements, the average ratio of auditing firm professional staff to auditing firm partners on individual engagements, and annual staff retention.262 The Committee believes that the PCAOB should consider both output-based and input-based indicators.263 The 262 See, e.g., Anonymous Retired Big 4 partner, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline (Nov. 2007) (recommending public disclosure of the following audit quality drivers: (1) Average years of experience of audit professionals, (2) ratio of professional staff to audit partners, (3) chargeable hours per audit professional, (4) professional chargeable hours managed per audit partner, (5) annual professional staff retention, and (6) average annual training hours per audit professional); Matthew J. Barrett, Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ index.cfm?FuseAction=Home.View&Topic&_id=9& FellowType&_id=1&CurrentPage=1; Dennis Johnson, CFA, Senior Portfolio Manager, CalPERS, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/200806_ 13ACAP_addendum_commentltr.pdf (suggesting to include, among other things, ‘‘average headcount, staff turnover, diversity, client satisfaction, audit and non-audit work, proposal win rate, revenue, profit, profit per partner, engagement team composition, the nature and extent of training programs and the nature and reason for client restatements’’); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Wayne Kolins, National Director of Assurance and Chairman, BDO Seidman LLP, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Kolins120307.pdf (recommending the issuance of regulatory guidance on qualitative factors to be used by audit committees and other market participants to evaluate auditing firms); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Dennis M. Nally, Chairman and Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 6), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Nally120307.pdf (suggesting that disclosure of ‘‘key elements that drive audit quality would be a useful benefit to the capital markets’’ and could include ‘‘firm disclosure and discussion of the levels of partner and staff turnover, average hours of professional training, risk management and compliance measurements, and metrics related to the quality of management and firm governance processes’’); Anonymous Private Investor, Former Auditor, and Former CFO, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum (May 11, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction= Home.View&Topic&_id=9&FellowType&_ id=1&CurrentPage=2 (recommending that the auditor’s report disclose, in addition to the location of the office conducting the audit, the percentage of office revenue attributed to the client, the length of the audit firm’s tenure with the client, and the length of time until the lead and concurring partner must rotate). 263 See, e.g., Matthew J. Barrett, Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum (June 13, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ index.cfm?FuseAction=Home.View&Topic_id=9& FellowType_id=1&CurrentPage=1 (suggesting that the SEC require registrants to publicly disclose any financial fraud uncovered by the auditor, including numbers and amount of all audit adjustments, and the number of restatements of financial statements E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM Continued 30JYN1 44348 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Committee also recommends that, if the proposal is feasible, the PCAOB, through its inspection process, should monitor these indicators. Recommendation 4. Promote the understanding of and compliance with auditor independence requirements among auditors, investors, public companies, audit committees, and boards of directors, in order to enhance investor confidence in the quality of audit processes and audits. The Committee considered testimony and comment letters regarding the significance of the independence of the public company auditor—both in fact and appearance—to the credibility of financial reporting, investor protection, with unqualified opinions); Joseph V. Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP Ernst & Young Professor and Director of Research—Corporate Governance Center University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accountancy Bentley College, Dana R. Hermanson Dinos Eminent Scholar Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 10 (May 15, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAPCommentLetterMay152008.pdf (suggesting that the Committee consider ‘‘output-based measures of audit quality’’ such as fewer client frauds, fewer client restatements, less earnings management, and more accurate auditor reporting before a bankruptcy filing); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Wayne Kolins, National Director of Assurance and Chairman, BDO Seidman LLP, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/12032007/Kolins120307.pdf; Gilbert F. Viets, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2–3, (May 19, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ TREASURYLETTER3.doc (suggesting disclosure of instances where the auditor found and corrected, prior to their disclosure, material financial statement errors and the firms’ ‘‘acceptable audit risk’’ in discovering material errors). The Committee recognizes the concerns noted by certain testimony and commentary regarding the use of audit quality indicators. See, e.g., Cynthia M. Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 37 (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ CAQCommentletter62708FINAL.pdf (‘‘Any feasibility study should also consider—as the [UK’s Financial Reporting Council] has recognized—how the key indicators being considered may vary due to factors unrelated to audit quality.’’); Wayne Kolins, National Director of Assurance and Chairman, BDO Seidman, LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 11 (June 27, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ResponsetoAdvisory Committee0627final.PDF (‘‘Disclosure of indicators would only be meaningful if they have a clear and demonstrable relationship to audit quality and, even if they do, only if they can be understood in the context of a particular audit.’’); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Brian O’Malley, Senior Vice President and General Auditor, Nasdaq Stock Market, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/OMalley060308.pdf (cautioning against an auditing industry managing itself towards some set of preconceived metrics that might sway them from investor protection). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 and the capital formation process.264 The auditor is expected to offer critical and objective judgment on the financial matters under consideration, and actual and perceived absence of conflicts is critical to that expectation. The Committee believes that auditors, investors, public companies, and other market participants must understand the independence requirements and their objectives, and that auditors must adopt a mindset of skepticism when facing situations that may compromise their independence. In that regard, the Committee makes the following recommendations: (a) Compile the SEC and PCAOB independence requirements into a single document and make this document website accessible. The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and state boards of accountancy should clarify and prominently note that differences exist between the SEC and PCAOB standards (applicable to public companies) and the AICPA and state standards (applicable in all circumstances, but subject to SEC and PCAOB standards, in the case of public companies) and indicate, at each place in their standards where differences exist, that stricter SEC and PCAOB independence requirements applicable to public company auditors may supersede or supplement the stated requirements. This compilation should not require rulemaking by either the SEC or the PCAOB because it only calls for assembly and compilation of existing rules. In the United States, various oversight bodies have authority to promulgate independence requirements, including the SEC and PCAOB for public company auditors, and the AICPA and state boards of accountancy for public and private company auditors.265 The 264 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Dennis M. Nally, Chairman and Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Nally120307.pdf (‘‘Independence forms the bedrock of credibility in the auditing profession, and is essential to the firms’ primary function in the capital markets.’’); Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Board of Governors, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 02042008/Nusbaum020408.pdf. 265 See, e.g., SEC Regulation S–X, Article 2, Rule 2–01—Qualifications of Accountants, 17 CFR § 210.2–01; SEC Financial Reporting Policies, Sec. 602.01—Interpretations Relating to Independence; SEC Final Rule, Amendments to SEC Auditor Independence Requirements ‘‘Strengthening the Commission’s Requirements Regarding Auditor Independence’’, SEC Rel. No 33–8183 (2003); SEC Final Rule, Revision of the Commission’s Auditor Independence Requirements, SEC Rel. No. 33–7919 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Committee recommends that the SEC and PCAOB compile and publish their independence requirements in a single document and make this document easily accessible on their websites.266 The Committee recommends that the AICPA and state boards of accountancy clarify and prominently state that differences exist between their standards and those of the SEC and the PCAOB and indicate, at each place in their standards where differences exist, that additional SEC and PCAOB independence requirements applicable to public company auditors may supersede or supplement the stated requirements.267 (2001); PCAOB, Interim Independence Standards, ET Sections 101 and 191; Independence Standards Board, Independence Standards Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and ISB Interpretations 99–01, 00–1, and 00–2; PCAOB Bylaws and Rules, Section 3, Professional Standards; AICPA Code of Professional Conduct, ET Sections 100–102. 266 See, e.g., Cynthia Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 38–39, (June 26, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ CAQCommentletter62708FINAL.pdf (agreeing that ‘‘such a document would make it easier for auditors to understand the independence requirements that apply to them’’); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Brian O’Malley, Senior Vice President and General Auditor, Nasdaq Stock Market, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/OMalley060308.pdf (stating that the Recommendation would be a ‘‘great asset’’); PricewaterhouseCoopers, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 19, (June 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCCommentLtrTreas CmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf (supporting this Recommendation). Note that the Committee received testimony and comment letters suggesting that the Department of Labor independence rules be included in this compilation. See, e.g. Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 30, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ DeloitteLLPCommentLetter.pdf; Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kenneth Nielsen Goldmann, Capital Markets and SEC Practice Director, J.H. Cohn LLP, 7), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/ acap/submissions/06032008/Goldmann060308.pdf. (recommending the inclusion of the Department of Labor and others in the Recommendation); Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C., Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 5, (June 17, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ _files/MayerHoffmanMcCannCommentLetter.pdf (suggesting the Recommendation include the SEC, PCAOB, AICPA, DOL, and GAO). 267 The Committee took note of concerns expressed regarding independence issues from a variety of perspectives. See, e.g., Andrew D. Bailey, Jr., Professor of Accountancy—Emeritus, University of Illinois, and Senior Policy Advisor, Grant Thornton LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 9 (Jan. 30, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ BAILEYCOMMENTSONTREASURY ADVISORYCOMMITTEEOUTLINE FINALSUBMISSION13008.doc (suggesting simplifying the current SEC independence standards); Dana R. Hermanson, Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Discussion Outline 1 (Oct. 4, 2007), available at https:// E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES (b) Develop training materials to help foster and maintain the application of healthy professional skepticism with respect to issues of independence and other conflicts among public company auditors, and inspect auditing firms, through the PCAOB inspection process, for independence training of partners and mid-career professionals. The Committee considered testimony and commentary that, to comply with the detailed and complex 268 requirements, some auditors may be taking a ‘‘check the box’’ approach to compliance with independence requirements, and losing focus on the critical need to exercise independent judgment or professional skepticism about whether the substance of a potential conflict of interest may compromise integrity or objectivity, or create an appearance of doing so.269 The Committee recommends that auditing firms develop appropriate independence training materials for auditing firms, especially partners and mid-career professionals, that help to foster a healthy professional skepticism with respect to issues of independence that is objectively focused and extends beyond a ‘‘check the box’’ mentality.270 comments.treas.gov/_files/ HermansonStatement10407.pdf (stating that consulting and auditing were incompatible and posed a significant threat to the long-term sustainability of the profession); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Dennis M. Nally, Chairman and Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 5), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Nally120307.pdf (‘‘The independence rules should be re-evaluated periodically to examine whether the rules continue to strike the right balance between cost burden and benefit.’’); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of James S. Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ernst & Young LLP, 5), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/12032007/ Turley120307.pdf (recommending consideration of potential changes to aspects of independence rules). Note that one witness called for adoption of a single set of independence rules for public and private companies. See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kurt N. Schacht, Managing Director, Centre for Financial Market Integrity, CFA Institute, 6), available at https:// www.treas.govoffices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/06032008/Schacht060308.pdf. 268 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Michael P. Cangemi, President and Chief Executive Officer, Financial Executives International), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/12032007/Cangemi120307.pdf; Financial Executives International, Recommendations to ADDRESS Complexity in Financial Reporting (Mar. 2007). 269 See, e.g., Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement, Interim Auditing Standard AU 316, Paragraph.13 (Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 2002) (‘‘Professional skepticism is an attitude that includes a questioning mind and a critical assessment of audit evidence.’’). 270 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Dan Guy, Former Vice VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 The training materials should focus on lessons learned and best practices observed by the PCAOB in its inspection process and the experience of other relevant regulators as appropriate. To ensure the implementation of this training on an overall basis, the PCAOB should review this training as part of its inspection program. Recommendation 5. Adopt annual shareholder ratification of public company auditors by all public companies. Although not statutorily required, the majority of public companies in the United States—nearly 95% of S&P 500 and 70%–80% of smaller companies— put auditor ratification to an annual shareholder vote.271 Even though ratification of a company’s auditor is non-binding, the Committee learned that corporate governance experts consider this a best practice serving as a ‘‘check’’ on the audit committee.272 Pursuant to Sarbanes-Oxley, audit committees of exchange-listed companies must appoint, compensate, and oversee the auditor.273 SEC rules implementing Sarbanes-Oxley specifically permit shareholder ratification of auditor selection.274 Ratification allows shareholders to voice a view on the audit committee’s work, including the reasonableness of audit fees and apparent conflicts of interest. The Committee believes shareholder ratification of auditor selection through the annual meeting and proxy process can enhance the audit committee’s President, Professional Standards and Services, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Guy060308.pdf (stating that auditors fail to detect material financial statement fraud due to, among other things, the lack of professional skepticism); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Brian O’Malley, Senior Vice President and General Auditor, Nasdaq Stock Market, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/OMalley060308.pdf (noting that ‘‘auditor skepticism throughout an auditor’s career is the keystone, all incentives and disincentives should be focused on its achievement’’); PricewaterhouseCoopers, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 19, (June 30, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/PwCCommentLtr TreasCmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf (stating that ‘‘independence forms the bedrock of credibility in the auditing profession, and is essential to the firm’s primary function in the capital markets’’). 271 Institutional Shareholder Services, ISS U.S. Corporate Governance Policy—2007 Update 3 (Nov. 15, 2006). 272 Institutional Shareholder Services, Request for Comment—Ratification of Auditors ON THE Ballot 1. 273 Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78j–1 (2002). 274 SEC, Final Rule: Standards Related to Listed Audit Committees. Release No. 33–8220 (Apr. 9, 2003). PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44349 oversight to ensure that the auditor is suitable for the company’s size and financial reporting needs.275 This may enhance competition in the audit industry. Accordingly, the Committee encourages such an approach as a best practice for all public companies. The Committee also urges exchange selfregulatory organizations to adopt such a requirement as a listing standard. In addition, to further enhance audit committee oversight and auditor accountability, the Committee recommends that disclosure in the company proxy statement regarding shareholder ratification include the name(s) of the senior auditing partner(s) staffed on the engagement.276 The 275 See also FRC Update 5, 7 (recommending that ‘‘the FRC should amend the section of the Smith Guidance dealing with communications with shareholders to include a requirement for the provision of information relevant to the auditor reselection decision,’’ and that ‘‘investor groups, corporate representatives, firms and the FRC should promote good practices for shareholder engagement on auditor appointment and re-appointments’’). 276 See, e.g., Andrew D. Bailey, Jr., Professor of Accountancy—Emeritus, University of Illinois, and Senior Policy Advisor, Grant Thornton LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 4, (June 16, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ TREASURYLETTER3BAILEY61608.doc (‘‘Knowing that any failure will be clearly and unambiguously associated with the named individuals and that the veil of the firm will not be there to obscure their responsibility may be of value.’’); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Jean C. Bedard, Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accounting, Department of Accountancy, Bentley College, 11), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Bedard060308.pdf (supporting the Recommendation and suggesting further that the Committee recommend an advisory shareholder vote on each member of the audit committee for companies that have not adopted a majority vote provision for all board members, and that the engagement partner sign both his or her name as well as the firm’s name to the audit report, making it a more direct public statement of responsibility than proxy disclosure); Paul Lee, Director, Hermes Equity Ownership Services Limited, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 4, (June 13, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAPresponse13Jun08.pdf (stating that an auditor should not continue in office unless it receives a majority of the votes of shareholders in favor of ratification, and noting that accountability and professional judgment would be increased if auditors’ reports were signed by individuals as well as in the names of the relevant audit firm); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kurt N. Schacht, Managing Director, Centre for Financial Market Integrity, CFA Institute, 6), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/06032008/ Schacht060308.pdf (supporting the Recommendation and further recommending disclosure of other key engagement individuals in addition to the lead audit partner, and transparent disclosure of audit quality, firm financial strength, and professional skill level at least to the audit committee, if not publicly). But c.f., Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 21–22, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM Continued 30JYN1 44350 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 30, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Committee notes that there might be other audit-engagement specific data, such as the auditor’s tenure with a specific public company client, useful to shareholders and audit committees. Recommendation 6. Enhance regulatory collaboration and coordination between the PCAOB and its foreign counterparts, consistent with the PCAOB mission of promoting quality audits of public companies in the United States. The globalization of the capital markets has compelled regulatory coordination and collaboration across jurisdictions. Regulators of public company auditors are no exception, as companies increasingly seek investor capital outside their home jurisdictions and the larger auditing firms create, expand, and, in some audits, increasingly rely on global networks of affiliates in order to provide auditing and other services to companies operating in multiple jurisdictions.277 The Committee considered commentary DeloitteLLPCommentLetter.pdf (noting that the Recommendation goes against the team nature of audits, raises personal security and privacy concerns, and is unrelated to audit quality); Ernst & Young LLP Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 28, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/ &lowbar;files/EYACAPCommentLetterFINAL.pdf; Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C., Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 3, (June 17, 2008), available at https:// comments.treas.gov/_files/MayerHoffmanMcCann CommentLetter.pdf (suggesting that ‘‘[o]ther individuals involved in the audit might actually feel less responsibility if only the engagement and concurring partners sign the report or only top partners are named, precisely the opposite of what should be encouraged’’); David McDonnell, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton International Ltd, and Edward E. Nusbaum, Chief Executive Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, and Chairman, Grant Thornton International Ltd Board of Governors, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 4, (June 27, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/GTCommentletter toACAPJune2008_FINAL.pdf (noting the team effort aspect of audits and stating that partners may be unwilling to accept the added risk, personal security issues, and privacy issues). As discussed above, the Committee also believes that this ratification process would be made more meaningful if accompanied by the development and disclosure of key indicators of audit quality. 277 See Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia M. Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 16), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/02042008/ Fornelli020408.pdf (noting the ‘‘growing consensus that regulators on every continent would be well served by working more closely together in the interest of improving worldwide audit quality’’); PCAOB Press Release, PCAOB Meets with Asian Counterparts to Discuss Cooperation on Auditor Oversight (Mar. 23, 2007), available at https:// www.pcaobus.org/News_and_Events/News/2007/ 03–23.aspx (‘‘The PCAOB strongly believes that dialogue and cooperation among auditor regulators are critical to every regulator’s ability to meet the challenges that come with the increasingly complicated and global capital markets.’’). VerDate Aug<31>2005 23:06 Jul 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 regarding the PCAOB’s regulatory role on a global basis.278 The PCAOB has the statutory responsibility for ensuring quality audits of public companies. In a world of global business operations and globalized capital markets, the PCAOB benefits from cooperation with foreign auditing firm regulators (many created and modeled after the PCAOB) to accomplish its inspections of registered foreign auditing firms, including firms that are members of global auditing firm networks. In May 2007, the PCAOB hosted its first International Auditor Regulatory Institute where representatives from more than 40 jurisdictions gathered to learn more about PCAOB operations. In 2006, the PCAOB formally joined the International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators, created to encourage regulatory collaboration and sharing of regulatory knowledge and experience. The Committee believes that these types of global regulatory coordination and cooperation are important elements in making sure public company auditing firms of all sizes are contributing effectively to audit quality. The Committee strongly supports the efforts of the PCAOB to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of its programs by communicating with foreign regulators and participating in global regulatory bodies. The Committee urges the PCAOB and its foreign counterparts to continue to improve regulatory cooperation and coordination on a global basis.279 278 See, e.g., PCAOB Briefing Paper, Oversight of Non-U.S. Public Accounting Firms (Oct. 28, 2003); PCAOB Final Rules Relating to the Oversight of Non-U.S. Public Accounting Firms, PCAOB Rel. No. 2004–005 (June 9, 2004); Request for Public Comment on Proposed Policy Statement: Guidance Regarding Implementation of PCAOB Rule 4012, PCAOB Rel. No. 2007–001 (Dec. 5, 2007); PCAOB Chairman Mark Olson and EU Commissioner Charlie McCreevy Meet to Discuss Furthering Cooperation in the Oversight of Audit Firms, PCAOB Press Rel. (March 6, 2007); PCAOB Meets with Asian Counterparts to Discuss Cooperation on Auditor Oversight, PCAOB Press Rel. (Mar. 23, 2007); Establishment of the International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators, Haut Conseil du Commissariat aux Comptes Press Rel. (Sep. 15, 2006); PCAOB Enters into Cooperative Arrangement with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, PCAOB Press Rel. (July 16, 2007); Board Establishes Standing Advisory Group, PCAOB Press Rel. (Apr. 15, 2004). 279 See, e.g., Joseph Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the Treasury ACAP Ernst & Young Professor and Director of Research—Corporate Governance Center University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accountancy Bentley College, Dana R. Hermanson Dinos Eminent Scholar Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting Kennesaw State University, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 11, (May 15, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ ACAPCommentLetterMay152008.pdf (agreeing with PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 In addition, the Committee recognizes the challenges that the globalized regulatory environment creates for smaller firms, particularly with respect to the increasing acceptance of IFRS.280 The Committee believes that regulators and policy makers must recognize the importance of including smaller firms in international roundtables, discussions, and policy making decisions.281 [FR Doc. E8–17441 Filed 7–29–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810–25–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Fiscal Service Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds: Axis Insurance Company Financial Management Service, Fiscal Service, Department of the Treasury. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This is Supplement No. 1 to the Treasury Department Circular 570, 2008 Revision, published July 1, 2008, at 73 FR 37644. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874–6850. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Certificate of Authority as an acceptable surety on Federal bonds is hereby issued under 31 U.S.C. 9305 to the following company: the Recommendation); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Brian O’Malley, Senior Vice President and General Auditor, Nasdaq Stock Market, 4), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/OMalley060308.pdf (agreeing with the Recommendation); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kurt N. Schacht, Managing Director, Centre for Financial Market Integrity, CFA Institute, 6), available at https:// www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/ submissions/06032008/Schacht060308.pdf (agreeing with this ‘‘most important’’ Recommendation). 280 Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Mr. Kenneth Nielsen Goldmann, Capital Markets and SEC Practice Director, J.H. Cohn LLP, 21–22 (June 30, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/agendas/QFRs-6–3–08.pdf (noting the difficulty and costs associated with implementing IFRS for smaller firms); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Mr. Kurt N. Schacht, Managing Director, Centre for Financial Market Integrity, CFA Institute, 73–74 (June 30, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/ domestic-finance/acap/agendas/QFRs-6–3–08.pdf (stating the difficulty in maintaining competence in IFRS, GAAP, and local/national standards). 281 See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Kurt N. Schacht, Managing Director, Centre for Financial Market Integrity, CFA Institute, 3), available at https://www.treas.gov/ offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/ 06032008/Schacht060308.pdf (stating that demonstrating technical competence in international matters is of increased importance especially for smaller firms). E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM 30JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 147 (Wednesday, July 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44315-44350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17441]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Second Draft Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing 
Profession

AGENCY: Office of the Undersecretary for Domestic Finance, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession is 
publishing a Second Draft Report and soliciting public comment.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before August 26, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to the Advisory Committee by any 
of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Department's Internet submission form (https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/comments); or

[[Page 44316]]

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Advisory Committee on 
the Auditing Profession, Office of Financial Institutions Policy, Room 
1418, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20220.
    In general, the Department will post all comments on its Web site 
(https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/comments) without 
change, including any business or personal information provided such as 
names, addresses, e-mail addresses, or telephone numbers. The 
Department will also make such comments available for public inspection 
and copying in the Department's Library, Room 1428, Main Department 
Building, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220, on 
official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern 
Time. You can make an appointment to inspect comments by telephoning 
(202) 622-0990. All comments, including attachments and other 
supporting materials, received are part of the public record and 
subject to public disclosure. You should submit only information that 
you wish to make available publicly.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen E. Jaconi, Senior Policy 
Advisor to the Under Secretary for Domestic Finance, Department of the 
Treasury, Main Department Building, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20220, at (202) 927-6618.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At the request of the two Co-Chairs of the 
Department of the Treasury's Advisory Committee on the Auditing 
Profession, the Department is publishing this notice soliciting public 
comment on the Advisory Committee's Second Draft Report. The text of 
the Second Draft Report is found in the appendix to this notice and may 
be found on the Web page of the Advisory Committee at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/index.shtml. The appendices 
to the Second Draft Report are not included in this notice, but may be 
found on the Web page of the Advisory Committee at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/index.shtml. The Second 
Draft Report contains the Advisory Committee's developed proposals on 
improving the sustainability of a strong and vibrant public company 
auditing profession. All interested parties are invited to submit their 
comments in the manner described above.

    Dated: July 25, 2008.
Taiya Smith,
Executive Secretary.

Appendix: Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession

Second Draft Report--July 22, 2008

The Department of the Treasury

Second Draft Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing 
Profession to the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Table of Contents

I. Transmittal Letter [Placeholder]
II. Committee History
III. Background [Placeholder]
IV. Human Capital
V. Firm Structure and Finances
VI. Concentration and Competition
VII. Separate Statements [Placeholder]
VIII. Appendices
    A. Official Notice of Establishment of Committee
    B. Committee Charter
    C. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Remarks at the 
Economic Club of New York, New York, NY on Capital Market 
Competitiveness (Nov. 20, 2006)
    D. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Opening Remarks at 
the Treasury Department's Capital Markets Competitiveness Conference 
at Georgetown University (Mar. 13, 2007)
    E. Paulson Announces First Stage of Capital Markets Action Plan, 
Treasury Press Release No. HP-408 (May 17, 2007)
    F. Paulson: Financial Reporting Vital to U.S. Market Integrity, 
Strong Economy, Treasury Press Release No. HP-407 (May 17, 2008)
    G. Paulson Announces Auditing Committee Members to Make 
Recommendations for a More Sustainable, Transparent Industry, 
Treasury Press Release No. HP-585 (Oct. 2, 2007)
    H. Under Secretary for Domestic Finance Robert K. Steel, Welcome 
and Introductory Remarks Before the Initial Meeting of the 
Department of the Treasury's Advisory Committee on the Auditing 
Profession, Treasury Press Release No. HP-610 (Oct. 15, 2007)
    I. Committee By-Laws
    J. List of Witnesses
    K. List of Committee Members, Observers, and Staff
    L. Working Discussion Outline
    M. Working Bibliography

Transmittal Letter

I. Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession

    [September 2008]
The Honorable Hank M. Paulson, Jr., Secretary,
U.S. Department of the Treasury,
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20220.
Dear Secretary Paulson:
    On behalf of the Department's Advisory Committee on the Auditing 
Profession, we are pleased to submit our Final Report.
    [Contents of letter to be included in Final Report]
    Respectfully Submitted on behalf of the Committee,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Arthur Levitt, Jr.
Committee Co-Chair
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Donald T. Nicolaisen
Committee Co-Chair
Enclosure

CHAPTER I: COMMITTEE HISTORY

    On November 20, 2006, the Secretary of the Treasury, Henry M. 
Paulson, Jr., delivered a speech on the competitiveness of the U.S. 
capital markets, highlighting the need for a sustainable auditing 
profession.\1\ In March 2007, Secretary Paulson hosted a conference at 
Georgetown University with investors, current and former policymakers, 
and market participants to discuss issues impacting the competitiveness 
of the U.S. capital markets, including the sustainability of the 
auditing profession.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Remarks on the 
Competitiveness of U.S. Capital Markets at the Economic Club of New 
York (Nov. 20, 2006), in Press Release No. HP-174, U.S. Dep't of 
Treas. (Nov. 20, 2006) (included as Appendix C).
    \2\ Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr., Opening Remarks at 
Treasury's Capital Markets Competitiveness Conference at Georgetown 
University (Mar. 13, 2007), in Press Release No. HP-306, U.S. Dep't 
of Treas. (Mar. 13, 2007) (included as Appendix D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 17, 2007, Secretary Paulson announced the Department of the 
Treasury's (the ``Department's'') intent to establish the Advisory 
Committee on the Auditing Profession (the ``Committee'') to consider 
and develop recommendations relating to the sustainability of the 
auditing profession.\3\ At the same time, Secretary Paulson announced 
that he had asked Arthur Levitt, Jr. and Donald T. Nicolaisen to serve 
as Co-Chairs of the Committee. The Department published the official 
notice of establishment and requested nominations for membership on the 
Committee in the Federal Register on June 18, 2007.\4\ Secretary 
Paulson announced the Committee's membership on October 2, 2007, with 
members drawn from a wide range of professions, backgrounds, and 
experiences.\5\ The Department filed the

[[Page 44317]]

Committee's Charter with the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and 
Urban Affairs, the Senate Committee on Finance, the House Committee on 
Financial Services, and the House Committee on Ways and Means on July 
3, 2007.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Treas., Paulson Announces First 
Stage of Capital Markets Action Plan (May 17, 2007) (included as 
Appendix E); Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Treas., Paulson: Financial 
Reporting Vital to U.S. Market Integrity, Strong Economy (May 17, 
2008) (included as Appendix F).
    \4\ Notice of Intent to Establish; Request for Nominations, 72 
FR 33560 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. June 18, 2007) (included as Appendix 
A).
    \5\ Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Treas., Paulson Announces 
Auditing Committee Members to Make Recommendations for a More 
Sustainable, Transparent Industry (Oct. 2, 2007) (included as 
Appendix G). This press release describes the diverse backgrounds of 
the Committee members. For a list of Members, Observers, and Staff, 
see Appendix K.
    \6\ See Committee Charter (included as Appendix B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Committee Activities

    The Committee held its initial meeting on October 15, 2007 in 
Washington, D.C.\7\ Then Under Secretary for Domestic Finance Robert K. 
Steel welcomed the Committee members and provided introductory 
remarks.\8\ Also on October 15, 2007, the Committee adopted its by-laws 
\9\ and considered a Working Discussion Outline to be published for 
public comment.\10\ The Working Discussion Outline identified in 
general terms issues for the Committee's consideration. A Working 
Bibliography, updated intermittently throughout the course of the 
Committee's deliberations, provided the members with articles, reports, 
studies, and other written materials relating to the auditing 
profession.\11\ All full Committee meetings were open to the public and 
conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act.\12\ The meetings of the full Committee were also Web or 
audio cast over the Internet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Record of Proceedings of this and subsequent meetings of 
the Committee are available on the Department's Web site at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance//acap/press.shtml. See Record 
of Proceedings, Meeting of the Committee (Oct. 15, 2007, Dec. 3, 
2007, Feb. 4, 2008, Mar. 13, 2008, Apr. 1, 2008, May 5, 2008, June 
3, 2008, and [--------]) [hereinafter Record of Proceedings (with 
appropriate date)] (on file in the Department's Library, Room 1428), 
available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/
press.shtml.
    \8\ Under Secretary for Domestic Finance Robert K. Steel, 
Welcome and Introductory Remarks Before the Initial Meeting of the 
Treasury Department's Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession 
(Oct. 15, 2007), in Press Release No. HP-610, U.S. Dep't of Treas. 
(Oct. 15, 2007) (included as Appendix H).
    \9\ The Committee By-Laws are included as Appendix I.
    \10\ The Working Discussion Outline is included as Appendix L.
    \11\ The Working Bibliography is included as Appendix M. The 
Working Bibliography was subsequently updated in December 2007, 
February 2008, and July 2008.
    \12\ 5 U.S.C.--------App. 2 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee held its second meeting on December 3, 2007 in 
Washington, DC. The agenda for this meeting consisted of hearing oral 
statements from witnesses and considering written submissions that 
those witnesses had filed with the Committee. The oral statements and 
written submissions focused on the issues impacting the sustainability 
of the auditing profession, including issues mentioned in the Working 
Discussion Outline. Nineteen witnesses testified at this meeting.\13\ 
The Committee held a subsequent meeting on February 4, 2008 in Los 
Angeles, California at the University of Southern California. The 
agenda for this meeting consisted of hearing oral statements from 
witnesses and considering written submissions that those witnesses had 
filed with the Committee. The oral statements and written submissions 
focused on the issues impacting the sustainability of the auditing 
profession, including issues mentioned in the Working Discussion 
Outline. Seventeen witnesses testified at this meeting.\14\ The 
Committee held additional meetings on March 13, 2008, April 1, 2008, 
May 5, 2008, June 3, 2008, and [--------]. All were face-to-face 
meetings held at the Department in Washington, DC, except for February 
4, 2008, which was held in Los Angeles, California, and the meetings on 
April 1, 2008, and [--------], which were telephonic meetings. No 
witnesses testified at these additional meetings, expect for the June 
3, 2008 meeting. The agenda for the June 3, 2008 meeting consisted of 
hearing oral statements from witnesses and considering written 
submissions that those witnesses had filed with the Committee. The oral 
statements and written submissions focused on the issues mentioned in 
the Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum. Twenty-one witnesses 
testified at this meeting.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Appendix J contains a list of witnesses who testified 
before the Committee.
    \14\ Appendix J contains a list of witnesses who testified 
before the Committee.
    \15\ Appendix J contains a list of witnesses who testified 
before the Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee, through the Department, published [--------] 
releases in the Federal Register formally seeking public comment on 
issues under consideration. On October 31, 2007, the Committee 
published a release seeking comment on the Working Discussion 
Outline,\16\ in response to which the Committee received seventeen 
comment letters. On May 15, 2008 and on June 12, 2008, the Committee 
published releases seeking comment on the Draft Report \17\ and Draft 
Report Addendum,\18\ respectively, in response to which the Committee 
received [--------] comment letters. In addition, the Department 
announced each meeting of the Committee in the Federal Register, and in 
each announcement notice included an invitation to submit written 
statements to be considered in connection with the meeting.\19\ In 
response to these meeting notices, the Committee received [--------] 
written submissions. In total, the Committee received [--------] 
written submissions in response to Federal Register releases.\20\ All 
of the submissions made to the Committee will be archived and available 
to the public through the Department's Library.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Request for Comments, 72 FR 61709 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. 
Oct. 31, 2007).
    \17\ Request for Comments, 73 FR 28190 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. May 
15, 2008).
    \18\ Request for Comments, 73 FR 33487 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. 
June 12, 2008).
    \19\ Notice of Meeting, 72 FR 55272 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. Sept. 
28, 2007); Notice of Meeting, 72 FR 64283 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. Nov. 
15, 2007); Notice of Meeting, 73 FR 2981 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. Jan. 
16, 2008); Notice of Meeting, 73 FR 10511 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. Feb. 
27, 2008); Notice of Meeting, 73 FR 13070 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. Mar. 
11, 2008); Notice of Meeting, 73 FR 21016 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. Apr. 
17, 2008); Notice of Meeting, FR 28208 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. May 15, 
2008); Notice of Meeting, FR 39088 (U.S. Dep't of Treas. July 8, 
2008).
    \20\ All of the written submissions made to the Committee are 
available in the Department's Library, Room 1428 and on the 
Department's Committee's Web page at https://www.treas.gov/offices/
domestic-finance/acap/press.shtml. To avoid duplicative material in 
footnotes, citations to the written submissions made to the 
Committee in this Final Report do not reference the Department's 
Library, Room 1428 or repeat the file number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to work carried out by the full Committee, fact finding 
and deliberations also took place within three Subcommittees appointed 
by the Co-Chairs. The Subcommittees were organized according to their 
principal areas of focus: Human Capital, Firm Structure and Finances, 
and Concentration and Competition.\21\ Each of the Subcommittees 
prepared recommendations for consideration by the full Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ For a list of members and their Subcommittee assignments, 
see Appendix K.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Background

    [Contents of Background to be included in subsequent drafts of this 
Report.]

IV. Human Capital

    The Committee devoted considerable time and effort surveying the 
human capital issues impacting the auditing profession, including 
education, licensing, recruitment, retention, and training of 
accounting and auditing professionals. The charter of the Committee 
charged its members with developing recommendations relating to the 
sustainability of the public company

[[Page 44318]]

auditing profession. Likewise, the Committee directs the following 
recommendations and related commentary to those practicing public 
company auditing. However, the Committee recognizes that several of its 
recommendations regarding human capital matters would have impact 
beyond the public company auditing profession, impacting the accounting 
profession as a whole. The Committee views the accelerating pace of 
change in the global corporate environment and capital markets and the 
increasing complexity of business transactions and financial reporting 
as among the most significant challenges facing the profession as well 
as financial statement issuers and investors. These are directly 
impacted by human capital issues. To ensure its viability and 
resilience and its ability to meet the needs of investors, the public 
company auditing profession needs to continue to attract and develop 
professionals at all levels who are prepared to perform high quality 
audits in this dynamic environment. It is essential that these 
professionals continue to be educated and trained to review, judge, and 
question all accounting and auditing matters with skepticism and a 
critical perspective. The recommendations presented below reflect these 
needs.
    After receiving testimony from witnesses and from comment letters, 
the Committee identified specific areas where the Committee believed it 
could develop recommendations to be implemented in the relatively short 
term to enhance the sustainability of the auditing profession. These 
specific areas include accounting curricula, accounting faculty, 
minority representation and retention, and development and maintenance 
of human capital data. The Committee has also developed a 
recommendation to study the possible future of higher accounting 
education's institutional structure.
    The Committee recommends that regulators, the auditing profession, 
educators, educational institutions, accrediting agencies, and other 
bodies, as applicable, effectuate the following:
    Recommendation 1. Implement market-driven, dynamic curricula and 
content for accounting students that continuously evolve to meet the 
needs of the auditing profession and help prepare new entrants to the 
profession to perform high quality audits.
    The Committee considered the views of all witnesses who provided 
input regarding accounting curricula at educational institutions.\22\ 
The Committee believes that the accounting curricula in higher 
education are critical to ensuring that individuals have the necessary 
knowledge, mindset, skills, and abilities to perform quality public 
company audits. In order to graduate from an educational institution 
with an accounting degree, students must have completed a certain 
number of hours in accounting and business courses. Accounting 
curricula typically include courses in auditing, financial accounting, 
cost accounting, and U.S. federal income taxation. Business curricula 
typically include courses in ethics, information systems and controls, 
finance, economics, management, marketing, oral and written 
communication, statistics, and U.S. business law.\23\ Since the 1950s, 
several private sector groups have studied and recommended changes to 
the accounting curricula,\24\ but notwithstanding these pleas for 
reform, curricula are characteristically slow to change.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written 
Submission of Joseph V. Carcello, Director of Research, Corporate 
Governance, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 8), available at 
https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/
12032007/Carcello120307.pdf (noting the market's expectations that 
university accounting curricula will expose students to recent 
financial reporting developments, such as international financial 
reporting standards and eXtensible Business Reporting Language); 
Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of Cynthia 
Fornelli, Executive Director, Center for Audit Quality, 3), 
available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/
submissions/02042008/Fornelli020408.pdf (stating the need to 
``[d]edicate funds and people to work with accounting professors to 
ensure that the curriculum is keeping pace with developments in 
business transactions, international economics and financial 
reporting'' and specifying the need to focus on ethical standards 
and international accounting and auditing standards); Record of 
Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of Dennis Nally, 
Chairman and Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 4), 
available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/
submissions/12032007/Nally120307.pdf (stating the need to 
``[m]odernize and enhance the university accounting curriculum, 
which should include consideration of other global curriculum models 
to increase knowledge of International Financial Reporting Standards 
(IFRS), finance and economics, and process controls'').
    \23\ Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of 
Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, Arizona State 
University, 13), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-
finance/acap/submissions/02042008/Reckers020408.pdf (commenting that 
business students typically take two sophomore-level introductory 
accounting classes and accounting majors take six additional 
accounting courses in their final two years of schooling).
    \24\ See e.g., Franklin Pierson, et al., The Education of 
American Businessmen (1959) (noting that the main goal of a business 
education should be the development of an individual with broad 
training in both the humanities and principles of business); Robert 
A. Gordon and James E. Howell, Higher Education for Business (1959) 
(suggesting that accounting curriculum abandon its emphasis on 
financial accounting and auditing while emphasizing humanities); 
Robert H. Roy and James H. MacNeill, Horizons for a Profession 
(1967) (emphasizing the importance of a humanities background for 
accountants and recommending accounting graduate study); American 
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Committee on Education 
and Experience Requirements for CPAs, Report of the Committee on 
Education and Experience Requirements for CPAs (Mar. 1969) 
(recommending, among other things, a five-year education requirement 
to be adopted by states by 1975); American Institute of Certified 
Public Accountants, Education Requirements for Entry into the 
Accounting Profession: A Statement of AICPA Policies (May 1978) 
(preferring a 150 semester-hour education requirement rather than a 
five-year education requirement to acquire the common body of 
knowledge and sit for the CPA examination); American Accounting 
Association, Committee on the Future Structure, Content, and Scope 
of Accounting Education, Future Accounting Education: Preparing for 
the Expanding Profession, 1 Issues in Accounting Education, No. 1, 
168-95 (Spring 1986) (examining accounting education and accounting 
practice since 1925 and concluding that, among other things, the 
current state of accounting education is inadequate to meet the 
dynamic needs of the profession and accounting education must be 
reassessed to meet these needs); American Institute of Certified 
Public Accountants, Education Requirements for Entry into the 
Accounting Profession: A Statement of AICPA Policies, 2nd Ed., 
Revised (Feb. 1988) (reaffirming the 150 semester-hour requirement); 
Arthur Andersen & Co., Arthur Young, Coopers & Lybrand, Deloitte 
Haskins & Sells, Ernst & Whinney, Peat Marwick Main & Co., Price 
Waterhouse, and Touche Ross, Perspectives on Education: Capabilities 
for Success in the Accounting Profession (1989), available at http:/
/aaahq.org/aecc/big8/cover.htm (stating that the chief executive 
officers of the eight largest public accounting firms believe that 
graduates entering public accounting need to have greater 
interpersonal, communication, and thinking skills as well as greater 
business knowledge and that the accounting curriculum must be a 
dynamic experience); and Accounting Education Change Commission, 
Objectives of Education for Accountants: Position Statement Number 
One, 6 Issues in Accounting Education, No. 2, 307-12 (Fall 1990) 
(describing the education objectives for accountants in an 
environment where accounting education has not kept pace with the 
changing demands upon the accounting profession).
    \25\ Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of 
Ira Solomon, R.C. Evans Distinguished Professor, and Head, 
Department of Accountancy, University of Illinois, 14-15), available 
at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/
12032007/Solomon120307.pdf (lamenting the slow pace of change in 
accounting curricula and education).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this regard, the Committee makes the following recommendations:
    (a) Regularly update the accounting certification examinations to 
reflect changes in the accounting profession, its relevant professional 
and ethical standards, and the skills and knowledge required to serve 
increasingly global capital markets.
    Accounting and auditing professionals commonly complete the 
requirements of professional examinations in order to comply with legal 
or professional association requirements. To become licensed at the 
state level as a certified public

[[Page 44319]]

accountant, an individual must, among other things, pass the Uniform 
CPA Examination. Professional examinations, such as the Uniform CPA 
Examination, influence the content of the technical, ethical, and 
professional materials comprising the accounting curricula.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Gary Sundem, The Accounting Education Change Commission: 
Its History and Impact Chapter 6 (1999), available at https://
aaahq.org/AECC/history/index.htm (``[T]he CPA examination has 
certainly had a major influence on the accounting curriculum and on 
other aspects of accounting programs.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee believes that evolution of professional examination 
content serves as an important catalyst for curricular changes to 
reflect the dynamism and complexity of auditing public companies in 
global capital markets. The American Institute of Certified Public 
Accountants (AICPA) already regularly analyzes and updates its 
examination content, through practice content analysis and in 
conjunction with the AICPA Board of Examiners, which comprises members 
from the profession and state boards of accountancy. The Committee 
recommends that such changes remain a focus to ensure that both the 150 
semester hour curriculum \27\ as well as examination content reflect in 
a timely manner important ongoing market developments and investor 
needs, such as the increasing use of international financial reporting 
standards (IFRS),\28\ expanded fair value measurement and reporting, 
increasingly complex transactions, new Public Company Accounting 
Oversight Board (PCAOB) auditing and professional standards,\29\ risk-
based business judgment, and technological innovations in financial 
reporting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Written Submission of 
Jean C. Bedard, Timothy B. Harbert Professor of Accounting, 
Department of Accountancy, Bentley College, 1), available at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/06032008/
Bedard060308.pdf (observing that using the CPA Examination as a 
catalyst for curricula change will only be effective if the CPA 
Examination is written assuming completion of 150 hours); Record of 
Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Questions for the Record of Joseph V. 
Carcello, Chair, AAA Task Force to Monitor the Activities of the 
Treasury ACAP, Professor and Director of Research--Corporate 
Governance Center, University of Tennessee, Jean C. Bedard, 
Professor of Accountancy, Bentley College, and Dana R. Hermanson, 
Chair of Private Enterprise and Professor of Accounting, Kennesaw 
State University, 2 (June 20, 2008)), available at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/agendas/QFRs-6-3-08.pdf 
(noting that recent developments suggest a trend away from requiring 
150 hours to sit for the CPA examination since eighteen states allow 
candidates to sit for the exam after 120 hours); Edward P. Howard, 
Senior Counsel, and Julianne D'Angelo Fellmeth, Administrative 
Director, Center for Public Interest Law, Comment Letter Regarding 
Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 2-4 (June 13, 2008), 
available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/ACAP_Draft_Report_
Comments.pdf (providing background on the issue of requiring 150-
hours for licensure while allowing 120-hours to sit for the CPA 
Examination in California); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) 
(Oral Remarks of Anne M. Mulcahy, Chairman and Chief Executive 
Officer, Xerox Corporation, and Alan L. Beller, Partner, Cleary 
Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, 70-71, 77), available at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/agendas/minutes-06-03-
08.pdf (noting the tension between updating the curricula in order 
to keep current with the changing environment and fitting these 
changes into a four-year program).
    \28\ Samuel K. Cotterell, CPA, Chair, NASBA, and David A. 
Costello, CPA, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter Regarding 
Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1 (June 29, 2008), available 
at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/
June2908LetterheadTreasuryAdvisoryCommitteeontheAuditingProfession.pd
f (agreeing that IFRS should be reflected in the CPA examination); 
Arnold C. Hanish, Chair, Committee on Corporate Reporting, Financial 
Executives International, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and 
Draft Report Addendum 2 (July 3, 2008), available at https://
comments.treas.gov/_files/
FEICCRTreasuryACAPCommentLetterFiled73080.pdf (suggesting a greater 
emphasis of IFRS in the accounting curriculum).
    \29\ See e.g., An Audit of Internal Control Over Financial 
Reporting that is Integrated with an Audit of Financial Statements, 
Auditing Standard No. 5 (Pub. Company Accounting Oversight Bd. 
2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the Committee believes that professional \30\ and ethical 
standards,\31\ fraud examination and forensic auditing, financial risk 
management, and valuation, and subject matter relating to their 
application, are an essential component of the accounting and auditing 
curricula and accordingly should be reflected in the professional 
examinations and throughout business and accounting coursework.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See PCAOB Standards and Related Rules, available at https://
www.pcaobus.org/Standards/Standards_and_Related_Rules/index.aspx.
    \31\ See PCAOB Interim Ethics Standards, available at https://
www.pcaobus.org/Standards/Interim_Standards/Ethics/index.aspx.
    \32\ See. e.g., Samuel K. Cotterell, CPA, Chair, NASBA, and 
David A. Costello, CPA, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter 
Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1 (June 29, 2008), 
available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/
June2908LetterheadTreasuryAdvisoryCommitteeontheAuditingProfession.pd
f (agreeing that ethics should be included in the accounting 
curriculum); Deloitte LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and 
Draft Report Addendum 9 (June 27, 2008), available at https://
comments.treas.gov/_files/DeloitteLLPCommentLetter.pdf 
(recommending that the Committee state that the following courses 
should be included in the curricula: ethics, fraud examination and 
forensic auditing, problem solving, finance, negotiation and 
communication skills, financial risk management, global business, 
taxation, and valuation); Record of Proceedings (Written Submission 
of Anne M. Lang, Chief Human Resources Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 
3), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/
submissions/06032008/Lang060308.pdf (asking the Committee to 
specifically cite the need for curricula that teach specialized 
knowledge, such as risk management, computational finance, valuation 
theory, and sophisticated modeling techniques).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Committee recommends that the market developments 
outlined in this section be reflected in professional examination 
content as soon as practicable, but not later than 2011.\33\ In 
particular, the CPA examination should test a candidate's knowledge 
consistent with practice needs and the highest contemporary level of 
education required based on those practice needs. In addition, the 
Committee recommends that new evolving examination content be widely 
and promptly communicated to college and university faculty and 
administrators so that corresponding curricular changes in educational 
institutions can continually occur on a timely basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See, e.g., Samuel K. Cotterell, CPA, Chair, NASBA, and 
David A. Costello, CPA, President and CEO, NASBA, Comment Letter 
Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 1 (June 29, 2008), 
available at https://comments.treas.gov/_files/
June2908LetterheadTreasuryAdvisoryCommitteeontheAuditingProfession.pd
f (agreeing with the Recommendation to keep the CPA examination 
current).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Reflect real world changes in the business environment more 
rapidly in teaching materials.
    Students are expected to use a variety of sources, such as 
textbooks and online materials, to learn. Such materials are an 
important element of higher education. The Committee learned that these 
commercial materials are generally conservatively managed and follow 
rather than lead recent market developments.\34\ Because developing 
accounting materials involves a significant investment of time and 
resources, commercial content providers carefully consider the 
potential risks and rewards before publishing new materials, even where 
a more prompt response to new developments might be beneficial to 
students.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Subcommittee on Human Capital Record of Proceedings (Jan. 
16, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Bruce K. Behn, President, Federation of 
Schools of Accountancy, and Ergen Professor of Business, Department 
of Accounting and Information Management, University of Tennessee, 
Knoxville).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee believes that accounting educational materials can 
contribute to inducing curricular changes that reflect the dynamism and 
complexity of the global capital markets and that commercial content 
providers should recognize the importance of capturing recent 
developments in their published materials. Specifically, the Committee 
recommends that organizations, such as the AICPA and the American 
Accounting Association (AAA), meet with commercial content providers 
and encourage them to update their materials promptly to reflect recent 
developments such as the increasing use

[[Page 44320]]

of IFRS, new PCAOB auditing and professional standards, risk-based 
business judgment, and expanded fair value reporting, as well as 
technological developments in financial reporting and auditing such as 
eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL).\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See, e.g., Aram Kostoglian, Eastern Region Attest Practice 
Leader, and Ernest Baugh, National Director of Professional 
Standards, Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C., Comment Letter Regarding Draft 
Report and Draft Report Addendum 1 (June 13, 2008), available at 
https://comments.treas.gov/_files/
MayerHoffmanMcCannCommentLetter.pdf (noting that textbooks lack a 
thorough discussion of current market developments); 
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report 
and Draft Report Addendum 4 (June 30, 2008), available at https://
comments.treas.gov/_files/
PwCCommentLtrTreasCmtDraftandAddendum63008.pdf (noting support for 
updating teaching materials promptly to reflect recent developments 
such as the increasing use of IFRS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, in order to ensure access to such materials and 
recognizing the benefits of technological innovations,\36\ the 
Committee recommends that authoritative bodies and agencies should be 
encouraged to provide low-cost, affordable access to digitized 
searchable authoritative literature and materials, such as Financial 
Accounting Standards Board (FASB) codification and eIFRS, to students 
and faculty members. Moreover, since the content of professional 
examinations, such as the Uniform CPA Examination, is based upon 
research using digitized materials, students need to have access to, 
among other things, searchable accounting standards.\37\ The Committee 
believes that low-cost affordable access to such primary materials 
would thus enhance student learning and performance and technical 
research.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Stephanie Woodruff, Chief Revenue Officer, AverQ, Inc, 
Comment Letter Regarding Draft Report and Draft Report Addendum 
(June 2, 2008), available at https://comments.treas.gov/
index.cfm?FuseAction=Home.ViewPopup&Topic--id=9&FellowType--
id=1&Reply--id=95&SuppressLayouts=True (suggesting the use or study 
of ``technology'' to address auditing profession challenges).
    \37\ See Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written 
Submission of Phillip M.J. Reckers, Professor of Accountancy, 
Arizona State University, 14), available at https://www.treas.gov/
offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/02042008/Reckers020408.pdf 
(affirming the need for student access to digitized searchable 
accounting and auditing materials).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) Require that schools build into accounting curricula current 
market developments.
    A common theme of our first set of recommendations is that 
accounting curricula should reflect recent developments, including 
globalization and evolving market factors. As a further catalyst to 
curricula development and evolution by educational institutions, the 
Committee recommends ongoing attention to responsiveness to recent 
developments by the bodies that accredit educational institutions. 
Accrediting agencies review institutions of higher education and their 
programs and establish that overall resources and strategies are 
conformed to the mission of the institutions. For example, the 
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) and the 
Association of Collegiate Business Schools and Programs (ACBSP) 
accredit business administration and accounting programs. Since 1919, 
the AACSB has accredited business administration programs and, since 
1980, accounting programs offering undergraduate and graduate degrees. 
The AACSB has accredited over 450 U.S. business programs and over 150 
U.S. accounting programs. Since 1988, the ACBSP has accredited business 
programs offering associate, baccalaureate, and graduate degrees. As of 
February 2008, over 400 educational institutions have achieved ACBSP 
accreditation. The accreditation standards at both accrediting agencies 
relate to, among other things, curricula, program and faculty 
resources, and faculty development.
    The Committee believes that the accreditation process and 
appropriate accreditation standards can contribute to curricular 
changes. In particular, accreditation standards that embody curricular 
requirements to reflect the dynamism and complexity of the global 
capital markets and that evolve to keep pace in the future can be 
helpful in maintaining and advancing the quality of accounting 
curricula. The AACSB has emphasized in its accreditation standards that 
accounting curricula should reflect recent market developments. For 
example, educational institutions must include in their curricula 
international accounting issues in order to receive AACSB 
accreditation. The Committee supports the accrediting agencies' efforts 
to continually develop standards specifically emphasizing the need to 
update accounting programs.
    Recommendation 2. Improve the representation and retention of 
minorities in the auditing profession so as to enrich the pool of human 
capital in the profession.
    The auditing profession presents challenging and rewarding 
opportunities for those who pursue a career in auditing and the 
profession actively recruits talent from all backgrounds.\38\ Yet, the 
Committee was concerned by what it heard from individuals with various 
backgrounds about minority representation and retention in the auditing 
profession.\39\ In

[[Page 44321]]

2004, minorities accounted for 22% of all bachelor's and masters' 
degrees awarded in accounting, while in 2007, minorities accounted for 
21%.\40\ In 2004, African Americans represented 1% of all CPAs, 
Hispanic/Latino, 3%, and Asian/Pacific Islander, 4%.\41\ See Figure 1. 
These percentages changed very little in 2007 when African Americans 
represented 1% of all CPAs, Hispanic/Latino, 2%, and Asian/Pacific 
Islander, 4%.\42\ See Figure 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ The Committee discussed the issue of representation and 
retention of females in the profession and the Committee found that 
the profession is undertaking significant efforts to hire and retain 
females and notes that these issues are being much better managed 
today. See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Oral Remarks 
of Amy Woods Brinkley, Global Risk Executive, Bank of America 
Corporation, 57), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/
domestic-finance/acap/agendas/minutes-06-03-08.pdf (noting that the 
Committee spent considerable time discussing this issue of females 
in the profession); Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written 
Submission of Kayla J. Gillan, Chief Administrative Officer, 
RiskMetrics Group, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/
domestic-finance/acap/submissions/06032008/Gillan060308.pdf (urging 
the Committee to examine the issue of females in the profession); 
Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Oral Remarks of Anne M. Lang, 
Chief Human Resources Officer, Grant Thornton LLP, 100-101), 
available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/
agendas/minutes-06-03-08.pdf (stating that ``* * * certainly 
recruiting women into the profession is something that [Grant 
Thornton LLP has] done extremely well for the last several years * * 
* [the] advancement of * * * women is something that [Grant Thornton 
LLP] still need[s] to pay attention to''). The Committee notes the 
following statistics: In 2007, at the partner level, females 
represented 23% of partners on average, while in 2004 they were 19% 
and in 1994 they were just 12% of all partners. See American 
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, A Decade of Changes in 
The Accounting Profession: Workforce Trends and Human Capital 
Practices 5 (Feb. 2006) and Dennis R. Reigle, Heather L. Bunning And 
Danielle Grant, 2008 Trends In The Supply of Accounting Graduates 
And The Demand For Public Accounting Recruits 60 (2008), available 
at https://ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/C1E23302-17D3-4ED5-AE81-
B274D9CD7812/0/AICPA_Trends_Reports_2008.pdf. According to Public 
Accounting Report surveys, the percentage of female professionals at 
the largest firms was 47.3% in 2007 and 44.2% in 2004. See Women at 
Big Four Gain Ground in Partnership Percentage, Public Accounting 
Report 6 (Oct. 31, 2004) and Women Post Gains in Partnership 
Percentage, Public Accounting Report 11 (Jan. 31, 2008). From 2005 
to 2007, women represented about half of the new hires at the six 
largest firms. See Center For Audit Quality, Report Of The Major 
Public Company Audit Firms To The Department Of The Treasury 
Advisory Committee On The Auditing Profession 58 (Jan. 23, 2008). 
The Committee also considered the effects of workload compression on 
retention in the profession. Some Committee members believe that 
audit firms and their clients could benefit from spreading tax 
preparation work throughout the year. See, e.g., Record of 
Proceedings (Oct. 15, 2007) (Oral Remarks of William D. Travis, 
Director and Former Managing Partner, McGladrey & Pullen LLP, 71), 
available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/
agendas/minutes-10-15-07.pdf (noting that ``[a] significant 
challenge for retention of personnel in mid-size and small audit 
firms is the extreme seasonality * * * during the winter season. 
This reality places enormous pressure on audit quality and balanced 
lives of * * * professionals''); Record of Proceedings (Mar. 13, 
2008) (Oral Remarks of Barry C. Melancon, President and Chief 
Executive Officer, American Institute of Certified Public 
Accountants, 118), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/
domestic-finance/acap/agendas/minutes-03-13-08.pdf (noting that the 
Human Capital Subcommittee discussed workload compression issues).
    \39\ See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written 
Submission of Ira Solomon, R.C. Evans Distinguished Professor, and 
Head, Department of Accountancy, University of Illinois, 13), 
available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/
submissions/12032007/Solomon120307.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Dec. 
3, 2007) (Questions for the Record of George S. Willie, Managing 
Partner, Bert Smith & Co., 2 (Jan. 30, 2008)), available at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/12032007/
Willie120307.pdf; Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written 
Submission of Julie K. Wood, Chief People Officer, Crowe Chizek and 
Company LLC, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-
finance/acap/submissions/12032007/Wood120307.pdf.
    \40\ Dennis R. Reigle, Heather L. Bunning And Danielle Grant, 
2008 Trends In The Supply Of Accounting Graduates And The Demand For 
Public Accounting Recruits 30 (2008), available at https://
ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/C1E23302-17D3-4ED5-AE81-B274D9CD7812/0/
AICPA_Trends_Reports_2008.pdf.
    \41\ Beatrice Sanders, And Leticia B. Romeo, The Supply Of 
Accounting Graduates And The Demand For Public Accounting Recruits-
2005: For Academic Year 2003-2004 35 (2005), available at https://
ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/11715FC6-F0A7-4AD6-8D28-6285CBE77315/0/
Supply_DemandReport_2005.pdf.
    \42\ Dennis R. Reigle, Heather L. Bunning And Danielle Grant, 
2008 Trends In The Supply Of Accounting Graduates And The Demand For 
Public Accounting Recruits 61 (2008), available at https://
ceae.aicpa.org/NR/rdonlyres/C1E23302-17D3-4ED5-AE81-B274D9CD7812/0/
AICPA_Trends_Reports_2008.pdf.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30JY08.038

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30JY08.039

    African Americans accounted for 5.4% of new hires in 2007 at the 
largest

[[Page 44322]]

six accounting firms, Hispanics, 4.6%, and Asians, 21.3%.\43\ See 
Figure 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Center For Audit Quality, Report Of The Major Public 
Company Audit Firms To The Department Of The Treasury Advisory 
Committee On The Auditing Profession 59 (Jan. 23, 2008), available 
at https://www.thecaq.org/publicpolicy/data/TRData2008-01-23-
FullReport.pdf.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30JY08.044

    In 2007, 1.0% of the partners in the six largest accounting firms 
were African American, 1.6% were Hispanic/Latino, 3.4% were Asian, and 
less than 1.0% were Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander or American 
Indian/Alaska Native, aggregating less than 7% of the total 
partners.\44\ See Figure 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Center For Audit Quality, Report Of The Major Public 
Company Audit Firms To The Department Of The Treasury Advisory 
Committee On The Auditing Profession 60 (Jan. 23, 2008), available 
at https://www.thecaq.org/publicpolicy/data/TRData2008-01-23-
FullReport.pdf.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN30JY08.040

    The Committee recognizes that important groups within the minority 
population are significantly under-represented in the accounting and 
auditing profession, especially at senior levels, and this under-
representation of minorities in the profession is unacceptable from 
both a societal and business perspective. As the demographics of the 
global economy continue to expand ethnic diversity, it is imperative 
that the profession also reflect these changes. The auditing 
profession's historic role in performing audits in an increasingly 
diverse global setting and in establishing investor trust cannot be 
maintained unless the profession itself is viewed as open and

[[Page 44323]]

representative. To ensure the continued health and vibrancy of the 
profession, it is imperative that all participants in the financial, 
investor, educator, and auditor community adopt and implement policies, 
programs, practices, and curricula designed to attract and retain 
minorities. In order for minority participation in the accounting and 
auditing profession to grow and sustain itself, minority recruitment 
and retention needs to be a multi-faceted, multi-year effort, 
implemented and championed by community leaders, families, and most 
importantly business and academic leaders who educate, recruit, employ, 
and rely on accountants and auditors.
    In this regard, the Committee recognizes the importance of setting 
goals and measuring progress against these goals and thus makes the 
following recommendations:
    (a) Recruit minorities into the auditing profession from other 
disciplines and careers.
    The Committee heard from witnesses that the auditing profession has 
``fallen short'' on its minority recruitment goals.\45\ Accordingly, 
the Committee recommends that auditing firms actively market to and 
recruit from minority non-accounting graduate populations, both at the 
entry and experienced hire level, utilizing cooperative efforts by 
academics and firm-based training programs to assist in this 
process.\46\ Generally, auditing firms hire individuals for the audit 
practice who are qualified to sit for the Uniform CPA Examination.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See, e.g., Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written 
Submission of Julie K. Wood, Chief People Officer, Crowe Chizek and 
Company LLC, 2), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-
finance/acap/submissions/12032007/Wood120307.pdf.
    \46\ See Ernst & Young LLP, Comment Letter Regarding Draft 
Report and Draft Report Addendum 22 (June 27, 2008), available at 
https://comments.treas.gov/_files/EYACAPCommentLetterFINAL2.pdf 
(supporting this Recommendation).
    \47\ See Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for the 
Record of James S. Turley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, 
Ernst & Young LLP, 4 (Feb. 1, 2008)), available at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/QFRs-12-3-07.pdf (noting 
that since 1997, Ernst & Young LLP has typically hired individuals 
qualified to sit for the Uniform CPA Examination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Committee recommends that auditing firms expand their 
recruitment initiatives at historically black colleges and universities 
(HBCUs), and explore the use of proprietary schools as another way to 
recruit minorities into the profession.\48\ Currently over 100 
educational institutions established before 1964 to serve the African 
American community are designated as HBCUs and over fifty of these 
HBCUs maintain accounting programs. Approximately 290,000 students are 
enrolled in HBCUs \49\ and HBCUs enroll 14% of all African American 
students in higher education.\50\ Twenty-seven HBCUs have one or more 
of the six largest accounting firms recruiting professional staff on 
their campus.\51\ Both the number of these schools visited by the 
largest firms and the number of firms recruiting at these schools 
should increase. Proprietary schools are for-profit businesses that 
teach vocational or occupational skills and there are over 2,000 
proprietary schools in the United States.\52\ In 2005, these schools 
enrolled over 1 million students: African Americans accounted for 23% 
of these students, Hispanics, 13%, and Asian/Pacific Islander, 4%.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of 
Frank K. Ross, Director, Center for Accounting Education, Howard 
University School of Business, 3), available at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/06032008/
Ross060308.pdf (agreeing that this Recommendation will help increase 
minority recruitment).
    \49\ Stephen Provasnik and Linda L. Shafer, Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities, 1976 to 2001 2 (NCES 2004-062), available 
at https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004062.pdf.
    \50\ White House Initiative On Historically Black Colleges And 
Universities, available at https://www.ed.gov/about/inits/list/
whhbcu/edlite-index.html.
    \51\ Center For Audit Quality, Supplement To Report Of The Major 
Public Company Audit Firms To The Department Of The Treasury 
Advisory Committee On The Auditing Profession 1 (Mar. 5, 2008), 
available at https://www.thecaq.org/publicpolicy/data/TRData2008-03-
05-Supplement1.pdf.
    \52\ Thomas D. Snyder, Sally A. Dillow, And Charlene M. Hoffman, 
Digest Of Education Statistics 2007 Table 5 (NCES 2008-022), 
available at https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008022.pdf.
    \53\ Thomas D. Snyder, Sally A. Dillow, And Charlene M. Hoffman, 
Digest Of Education Statistics 2007 Table 220 (NCES 2008-022), 
available at https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008022.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Institute initiatives to increase the retention of minorities 
in the profession.
    The Committee considered testimony on the retention of minorities 
in the profession.\54\ As discussed above, minorities are significantly 
under-represented in leadership and partnership positions within the 
profession. The Committee recognizes the lack of minority mentors and 
role models \55\ in the profession and the profession's awareness of 
this situation.\56\ In a 2006 National Association of Black Accountants 
(NABA) survey, almost 60% of African American respondents stated that 
their mentors come from outside of the profession and almost 55% of 
respondents stated that they had been with their current employer for 
three years or less.\57\ The Committee considered testimony that 
African Americans leave the profession for other careers or do not wish 
to become managers or partners because they see that there are few 
African Americans in leadership positions within the firms.\58\ The 
Committee also heard testimony that the retention rate for Hispanics 
``is low.'' \59\ In 2004, Hispanics represented 3% of the professional 
staff at all CPA

[[Page 44324]]

firms \60\ and this percentage did not change in 2007.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Written Submission of 
George S. Willie, Managing Partner, Bert Smith & Co., 3), available 
at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/submissions/
12032007/Willie120307.pdf (noting that ``firms must do more to 
retain and promote minority professionals''); Record of Proceedings 
(June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of Frank K. Ross, Director, 
Center for Accounting Education, Howard University School of 
Business, 8), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-
finance/acap/submissions/06032008/Ross060308.pdf (noting that 
``auditing firms need to establish aggressive retention programs 
that focus on retention'').
    \55\ Record of Proceedings (Feb. 4, 2008) (Written Submission of 
Gilbert R. Vasquez, Managing Partner, Vasquez & Company LLP, 4), 
available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/
submissions/02042008/Vasquez02042008.pdf (highlighting the lack of 
Hispanic role models and mentors in the accounting profession).
    \56\ See Record of Proceedings (July 12, 2006) (Written 
Testimony of Manuel Fernandez, National Managing Partner--Campus 
Recruiting, KPMG LLP, to the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations of the House Financial Services Committee, 5), 
available at https://financialservices.house.gov/media/pdf/
071206mf.pdf (identifying the lack of minority faculty mentors and 
role models and noting ``[w]hen students of color do not see 
professors of their own ethnic background on the accounting faculty, 
they are less apt to consider the option of a career in 
accountancy''); Record of Proceedings (Dec. 3, 2007) (Questions for 
the Record of George S. Willie, Managing Partner, Bert Smith & Co., 
1 (Jan. 30, 2008)), available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/
domestic-finance/acap/submissions/12032007/Willie120307.pdf 
(recommending the establishment of a mentor program for minority 
accounting students).
    \57\ The Center for Accounting Education, Howard University 
School of Business, NABA Membership Survey, Analysis of Work 
Experience of NABA Members Table 23 and 5 (Sept. 15, 2006), 
available at https://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/
submissions/06032008/NABAMembershipSurvey.pdf.
    \58\ Record of Proceedings (June 3, 2008) (Written Submission of 
Frank K. Ross, Director, Center for Accounting Education, Howard 
University School of Business, 5), available at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/sub