Auditors told to be more sceptical when reviewing company accounts
Efforts to improve the quality of auditing have arrived in the form of a new document on professional scepticism drafted by the Financial Reporting Council.
Replies (12)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Are you casting aspersions on the firms that somehow get named regularly in relation to audit matters?
If so then I concur
Quite ... I'd assumed it was a fundamental pre-condition (like being able to drive before applying for a job as a bus-driver - even if you still require further training).
If the bedrock isn't in place then everything else is built on a shaky/shifting bed of sand ... oh, wait a minute, you're talking about the Big 4 aren't you? Rules (and common sense) don't apply to them!
Should the auditor be remunerated by the Company it’s critical about . Work that out for yourselves !
How much regard is given to professional scepticism regarded when it comes to admissions to the partnership, compared with, say, meeting budgets?
While Auditors have one eye on repeat fees and non audit fees there will always be a conflict!
Personally, for Large companies, PLC's etc the decision of who to appoint should not be in the directors hands.
Or perhaps this should be headed ....... be even more sceptical of the Auditors doing the auditing ??
I sort of feel sorry for auditors who have a seemingly impossible task- as the regulators expect them to review everything and find everything when in practice there just isn't the time to do that at any reasonable cost, and then issue fines when inevitably something is missed.
Add to that the fact no one really wants to pay the fees incurred in what is for many companies a huge box ticking exercise with zero benefit to the company who has to bear the costs.
Who would want to be an auditor?
I'm sorry, but in several cases recently they didn't even do the basics (banks recs / external bank documentation, etc), so I have no sympathy.
I agree that the audit model is broken, but when the directors of these companies get million pound salaries, then properly funding the audit shouldn't be impossible. Then we might get experienced staff, who have worked in industry, rather than graduates straight out of uni.
Who, indeed, would wish to be an auditor?
A totally thankless task - the client doesn't want it and resents paying for it, the auditor sees it as a way to other work sources so it is a tickbox job but with huge risks.
I suppose the regulators like it as it gives them a podium on which to stand and criticise which is about all they can do.
Wait a minute, if it's bust and can't be fixed why not get rid of it and save businesses a lot of money?
An audit free world - fantastic!