|
<<
news room
Statement
Of The New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG) Before The
Office Of Professions State Board For Public Accountancy
Public Hearing On Certified Public Accountancy
Baruch College, New York, New York
May 16, 2002
Good
afternoon. My name is Russ Haven and I am the Legislative Counsel
for the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG).
Thank you to the Office of the Professions State Board for Public
Accountancy for conducting this hearing on the practice and licensure
of accountants in New York State.
NYPIRG
is New York State's largest non-profit student directed research
and advocacy organization. NYPIRG's primary areas of interest include
consumer protection, corporate accountability, and social justice
issues. In its nearly 30-year history NYPIRG has monitored practices
and oversight of New York's professions, including physicians and
attorneys.
At
the outset what separates those in the professions from others who
may provide similar services are a set of ethics and licensure.
The public expects that when it seeks and pays for the services
of a professional that there is a code of conduct and a licensing
agency standing behind the licensed individual. The public's trust
and confidence are built on this foundation.
As
the licensed financial professionals in New York State, certified
public accountants must be held to high standards commensurate with
the public's trust. This is true whether CPAs are auditing publicly
held corporations, in which members of the public may invest, or
providing services to the small business or to an individual. CPAs
proudly display their degree, certification and licensure in offering
an array of services. New York's oversight of the CPA profession
must match consumers' reasonable expectations.
While
the issue of the oversight and conduct of public accountants is
not new for the profession or regulators, recent events have understandably
raised the public's concerns. The steady drumbeat of reports of
firms using their audits to leverage huge consulting fees, auditors
landing top-level positions with former clients, markets roiled
by profit statement adjustments, and the specter of frantic document
shredding provide the context for the discussion of how to tighten
regulation and restore public confidence in the profession of accountancy.
Against
this backdrop and in light of the likelihood that Congress will
not act to regulate accountants, New York State has an opportunity
as the financial capital of the world to lead the way in restoring
public confidence. Only New York State has full powers to license,
discipline and disbar accountants. It must assert its primacy to
maintain the integrity of the profession. As the regulator with
broad authority, New York must assert its primacy to maintain the
integrity of the profession and protect the public's interest.
NYPIRG
urges that the following statutory and administrative reforms be
pursued.
1.
Separate audit and consulting. To the greatest extent feasible,
the state should seek to ensure that the audit function is separated
from other client services. It's clear that in the current climate
the consulting fees tail is wagging the audit dog.
2.
Rotate audit firms every 5 years. While there are efficiencies
to having the same firm conduct an audit year after year, the risk
is that the independent skepticism of the auditor-client relationship
diminishes over time and that things are overlooked when not viewed
with a fresh set of eyes.
3.
Mandatory cool-off period before hiring former auditors. The
Washington Post reported that according to an SEC order, every CFO
and CAO for Waste Management for the 26-year period from 1971 to
1997 were former Andersen auditors! Audit team members and managers
should be barred from employment or other personal financial relationships
with audit subjects for two years from completion of an audit to
remove any risk or perception of a quid pro quo.
4.
Require a seven-year period for audit record retention. Effective
oversight of the audit performance requires that records be retained
for a sufficient amount of time to ensure they can be reviewed in
the event questions are subsequently raised. Seven years seems like
a reasonable amount of time and is the duration in legislation moving
in the California legislature.
5.
Ban fixed-fee audits. Setting a fixed price for an audit can
create a dynamic that leads to cutting corners and compromises the
independence and thoroughness of the auditor. Firms also may low-ball
the price to get the client and seek more lucrative consulting fees,
using the audit as a "loss leader."
6.
Peer review of audit firms. This requirement should apply to
all firms, regardless of whether they are members of a trade association.
Peer review rules must ensure that there's no exchange of "soft
looks" between firms and that the state can use peer reviews
as a basis for further inquiry.
7.
Expand scope of practice regulation to cover consulting, tax and
consumer services. Other states such as Texas, California, Illinois
and Ohio have broader definitions of scope of practice. The public
assumes that utilizing the services of a "certified public
accountant" covers the range of financial services provided
by the licensed professional. New York State should expand the scope
of practice of the profession to honor this expectation and protect
the public.
8.
Expand enforcement, including the ability to conduct random audits.
The best enforcement is done by deterrence. Individual professionals
and firms would be deterred from illegal and unethical conduct through
the credible risk of enforcement.
9.
Require that 50% of the membership of the State Board for Public
Accountancy be lay members who are independent of accountants and
the industry. Education Law § 7403 establishes the State
Board for Public Accountancy directing that it "shall be composed
of not less than twenty licensed accountants, not less than fifteen
of whom shall be licensed as certified public accountants in this
state. . . ." A review of the current membership indicates
that few members of the current board are independent of the profession
or of accounting firms. Public membership is critically important
to ensuring that there is a sufficient level of distance from self-interested
professionals and that the public's interest is served.
|