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
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
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
Latino, 3.4% were Asian, and less than
1.0% were Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander or American Indian/Alaska
EN30JY08.044
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
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
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
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/
_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