Deloitte caught in Standard Chartered scandal

Kashflow logo
Share this content

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.

Please Login or Register to read the full article

The full article is available to registered members only. To read the rest of this article you’ll need to login or register. Registration is FREE and allows you to view all content, ask questions, comment and much more.

About Robert Lovell

Business and finance journalist


    Please login or register to join the discussion.

    10th Aug 2012 11:43


    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)
    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)
    By JC
    10th Aug 2012 16:50

    rquaye - agreed ...

    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)
    By rgudoi
    10th Aug 2012 18:22


    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)
    11th Aug 2012 07:58

    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)
    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)
    to ManFin
    14th Aug 2012 15:42




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


    Thanks (0)