Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
AIA

Deloitte caught in Standard Chartered scandal

by
8th Aug 2012
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

The US arm of Deloitte has been implicated in a scandal involving Standard Chartered Bank (SCB), which is facing allegations that it schemed with Iran to launder billions of dollars.

The bank is accused of devising a method of masking Iranian client transactions to bypass US money laundering defences and watered down an independent report into the bank's practices.

The New York State Department of Financial Services' order found the bank's actions left the US financial system "vulnerable to terrorists, weapons dealers, drugs kingpins and corrupt regimes", in which £160bn was hidden from US regulators between 2001 and 2010. The report also alleges that Standard Chartered was helped by its accountants Deloitte.

The department said: "SCB carefully planned its deception and was apparently aided by its consultant Deloitte & Touche, which intentionally omitted critical information in its 'independent report' to regulators."

Deloitte's report was part of a written agreement between Standard Chartered's New York branch and banking regulators, following separate compliance failures at the bank.

The firm denied the allegations in the following statement: "Deloitte Financial Advisory Services performed its role as independent consultant properly and had no knowledge of any alleged misconduct by bank employees. Allegations otherwise are unsupported by the facts."

Deloitte is also alleged to have unlawfully provided Standard Chartered with confidential historical transaction review reports that it had prepared for two other foreign banking clients that were under investigation for money laundering.

The order goes into detail how Deloitte was involved:

“Having improperly gleaned insights into the regulators’ concerns and strategies for investigating U-Turn-related misconduct, SCB asked D&T to delete from its draft “independent” report any reference to certain types of payments that could ultimately reveal SCB’s Iranian U-Turn practices.  In an email discussing D&T’s draft, a D&T partner admitted that “we agreed” to SCB’s request because “this is too much and too politically sensitive for both SCB and Deloitte.  That is why I drafted the watered-down version.”

US accounting tabloid GoingConcern.com said this could prove to be a very unfortunate statement. According to the footnotes of the order, the Deloitte partner in question was the "Global Leader of Anti-Money Laundering/Trade Sanctions Division" and this was written "to SCB’s Head of Compliance, Project Manager for the Lookback Review, Compliance Officer and a Manager from Deloitte and Touche dated October 8, 2005."

Standard Chartered also denied the position in the department’s order and said in a statement: "The group strongly rejects the position or the portrayal of facts as set out in the order issued by the DFS."

It has also been suggested in the report that the allegations could extend to more countries: "The Department's initial focus is on SCB's apparent systematic misconduct on behalf of Iranian clients. However, the Department's review has uncovered evidence with respect to what are apparently similar SCB schemes to conduct business with other US sanctioned countries, such as Libya, Burma and Sudan. Investigation of these additional matters is ongoing."

Replies (7)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By brownbuchanan
10th Aug 2012 11:43

scb/deloitte

as accountants,but were they not finance advisors they should know that 2+2 equals whatever you want.basic accounting principle.thus why be surprised

Thanks (0)
avatar
By rquaye
10th Aug 2012 12:29

Deloitte caught in Standard Chartered scandal

Both Deloitte and SCB have rejected the allegations, so innocent until proven,  what happens after the NY authorities are found to have exaggerated the issues? How can SCB and Deloitte regain their reputation? Why are the regulators in London silence on this issue? Are they always to be led by the americans?

Thanks (1)
avatar
By User deleted
10th Aug 2012 16:50

rquaye - agreed ...

https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/blog-post/another-bank-skeleton-tumbles-out-cupboard

US current approach seems to be - try to trash a company & then blackmail fines out of them because litigation to clear their name is hugely costly

Thanks (0)
avatar
By rgudoi
10th Aug 2012 18:22

ARE WE PRACTICING DUE DELIGENCY AND MINDFUL OF FULL DISCLOSURES

What happened to the fullscope audits and or comprehensive audits?

What happened to ethical measure to be observed?

Why were there no indications of risk audits fully disclosing the complainces at that time audit or during the audit?

Who minds about organisational reputation for both Deloitte and the Standard Chartered Bank?

who are the accomplice?

So as a fraud examiner I would look into all aspects of controls and ears to the ground to look into the praqctices of the bank and the auditors. What full disclosures did the auditors give  and what were the reactions of the board?

the question of insolvency is key in audit matters so then what advice the auditors give. Fow how long ahs this been happening and did at any one time the auditors perform due diligency and where there any quarterly audits? What were the fears for non disclosure of cooking books. What about offshore investments wit the bank? If this is a tip of the iceberg. Fraud and fraud and professional negligence, which way forward.

All I know is that the responsbilty for full disclosure lies with management but when the auditors are good, they can use other mechnisms to discover fraud . Why because fraud is committed by smart people who abate the system so if the auditor goes back to the drawing baord, he or she will identify the gaps. So what went wrong in this case is a matter for the professionals to tell us what exactly went wrong. Eisi My Lord, God Bless the World.

Richard Gudoi

Thanks (0)
By Steve-EBL
11th Aug 2012 07:58

Bankers
If the ccab members are not careful it's associates will start to be as well thought of as bankers, scheming for themselves and not to be trusted. Really the record of accountants has been greatly tarnished over the last two decades. It would not surprise me if ultimately audit became a government service.

Thanks (0)
Chris M
By mr. mischief
13th Aug 2012 16:04

3 principles of auditing

When I qualified the 3 planks of auditing were:

1.  Independence.

2.  Integrity.

3. Confidentiality.

Now it is:

1. Confidentiality.

2.  What is my fee?

3.  What is my fee again please?

Thanks (1)
Replying to ManFin:
By Steve-EBL
14th Aug 2012 15:42

Planks

 

 

I know of 3 planks in audit, but they will remain nameless.

 

Thanks (0)