楼主: smury
1379 0

[学术言谈] AICPA Letter to PCAOB Raises Concerns About Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation [推广有奖]

  • 0关注
  • 0粉丝

硕士生

20%

还不是VIP/贵宾

-

威望
0
论坛币
10 个
通用积分
0
学术水平
0 点
热心指数
0 点
信用等级
0 点
经验
961 点
帖子
112
精华
0
在线时间
21 小时
注册时间
2011-9-23
最后登录
2012-1-14

楼主
smury 发表于 2011-12-27 14:34:08 |AI写论文

+2 论坛币
k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群
赵安豆老师微信:zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币!

+2 论坛币
The AICPA recommended that the PCAOB refrain from imposing mandatory audit firm rotation.
AICPA Chairman Greg Anton, and President and CEO Barry Melancon signed a comment letter sent by email Wednesday to the PCAOB stating that mandatory audit firm rotation is costly and has the potential to hinder audit quality rather than enhancing it.
In August, the PCAOB issued a concept release on auditor independence and audit firm rotation seeking comment. The release noted that proponents of rotation contend term limits could decrease client pressure on auditors and create opportunity for a fresh look at a company’s financial reporting.
The AICPA letter supported the PCAOB’s goals for enhancing auditor independence and objectivity, and professional skepticism. But the Institute said the PCAOB should not impose mandatory audit firm rotation without evidence linking audit firm tenure to audit failures detailed in PCAOB inspection findings.
Even if such a link is indicated through further study, the AICPA would like the PCAOB to carefully weigh the costs associated with mandatory firm rotation and consider other potential enhancements that would be less costly and disruptive.
The AICPA cited research indicating that mandatory firm rotation may hurt audit quality and that audit quality increases with audit firm tenure. The letter also said:
Audit firm rotation may limit institutional knowledge and industry specialization, which the AICPA said increases during audit firms’ relationship with a company and is crucial to a high-quality audit.
Mandatory firm rotation may unintentionally undermine the role of the audit committee by preventing the committee from selecting and retaining the most qualified audit firm to perform a company’s audit.
Existing partner rotation requirements provide the necessary “fresh look” to ensure auditors’ objectivity.
The PCAOB’s release is part of the reason audit firm rotation has become a big issue in recent months. Last month, the European Commission proposed limiting to six years the period in which an outside audit firm can perform audits for public companies. Companies that opt for voluntary joint audits would be allowed a nine-year window; a four-year cooling-off period was proposed.
At last week’s AICPA National Conference on Current SEC and PCAOB Developments, Anton said research indicates that mandatory audit firm rotation has the unintended consequence of increasing the propensity for fraud.
“We caution the EU member states and the European Parliament—as well as the PCAOB—to carefully consider the consequences of such proposals and focus on proven solutions to enhanced transparency, increased objectivity and improved audit quality,” Anton said on Dec. 5.
Wednesday was the final day of the comment period. In March, the PCAOB will hold a public round table on auditor independence and mandatory audit firm rotation.
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

关键词:Mandatory concerns Rotation concern letter proponents potential comment release hinder

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 我要注册

本版微信群
加好友,备注ck
拉您进交流群
GMT+8, 2025-12-9 05:58