Text/HTML
Text/HTML
If you are a registered user please log in to see more postings.
 

The AAO Weblog covers accounting issues and current events as they relate the practice of investment analysis.

 
 
Mar 24

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
3/24/2006 6:34 AM 

In this case, you can relax and enjoy the peace and quiet.

In August 2004, the PCAOB released its first reports on its inspections of the Big Four auditing firms. The quality control issues it noted in those inspections remained private - unless the firms did not remedy them within twelve months. And apparently, they addressed them well; none of the gory details have ever been made public. The threat of public embarrassment is a pretty big carrot/stick.

On Tuesday, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (a subscriber to The Analyst's Accounting Observer) released two reports. One described its process for evaluating how well the previously-inspected public accounting firms have improved their quality control. (No link to this report; I'm afraid you'll have to look for it. One of those internet mysteries where the mere act of creating a link causes the browser to sizzle and fry.)

The second report is a bit more interesting; it details some of the steps taken by firms to improve their quality controls. Among them:

- changing the organizational structure so that there's separation of the audit performance function from responsibility for ethics, independence, client acceptance, and audit quality monitoring. (Seems so basic, you wonder why it had to be brought up.)

- adding internal guidance requiring more experience audit personnel review the contractst carry the most risk for material misstatement. (Another common-sense step.) - increasing the number and depth of the firms' own inspections and evaluations of audits. (This refers to the fact that audit firms have their own internal auditing functions; they inspect how effectively the firm has carried out their engagements.)- changing the way partners are compensated and promoted by increasing the emphasis on technical auditing skills and decreasing the emphasis on "rain-making."

- tightening up on the criteria for client continuation

There's plenty more, but you get the drift: what were once habits are now recognized as vices. The dog didn't bark this time; there's nothing to bark about. The firms kept their end of the bargain and straightened their respective houses. But let's hope the watchdog stays awake.

Tags:
 

Pension & Other Benefit Plans: A Look Ahead


    Investors in firms with defined benefit pension plans always face the risk of suddenly being pushed farther back in line when it comes to being served their returns. Variability in plan assets and variability in benefit plan obligations are the reason: poor asset returns coupled with sinking interest rates always spell tough times for defined benefit plan funding. In that regard, this year’s asset returns combined with the Fed’s “Operation Twist” add up to “Operation Agony” for defined benefit pension plans. If trends continue along their current path, firms that may have anticipated moving to more realistic pension accounting - like Honeywell, AT&T and Verizon already have done - might forego that decision. It could be just too painful. 

    Pensions aren’t the only kind of benefit plan affected by Operation Twist. Other postemployment benefit (OPEB) plans share much the same accounting model as pensions, including the calculation of a projected benefit obligation that similarly incorporates a discount rate - one that will also be affected by Operation Twist. The net OPEB obligations were slightly less than pension obligations at the end of 2010, but also promise to grow in 2011. Investors perceive them as less threatening than pension obligations because they don’t require funding. Strangely, there are a number of firms that are recognizing income from these benefit plans - without ever creating a dime of cash for investors.

A recent edition of The Analyst’s Accounting Observer dissects these issues, and is available only to paid subscribers. A condensed version is available for free upon request. To receive it, send an e-mail to Brenda Rappold at brappold@accountingobserver.com, with “PENSIONS” in the subject line.

For information about subscribing to The Analyst’s Accounting Observer, click here.