Audit committee chairs question Brussels' reforms

by Rose Orlik

More from this author

01 Nov 2011

  • Comments
A fresh vision

AUDIT REFORM proposals enjoy mixed support among audit committee chairs, as many question the rationale behind the measures and argue UK audit is the best in Europe.

More than one-fifth (22) of FTSE 100 audit committee chairs were questioned by Brunswick Research on behalf of the ICAEW.

The majority called for greater competition - ideally a Big Five or Six - more obvious independence in the auditor-client relationship, greater transparency and improved understanding of the function of audit outside the profession.

Of the European Commission's leaked reform proposals, chairs were most averse to audit-only firms, saying this would depress quality and could lead to major competitors exiting the market.

Joint audits were also unpopular, with one respondent warning of a "massive chance of miscommunication" and more work for companies.

Mandatory rotation and tendering engendered a mixed reaction, with the latter more popular, but audit committee chairs willing to consider a compromise.

"I personally would think that mandatory tendering as opposed to rotation is adequate, but would I throw up my hands in horror at mandatory rotation? No.", said one.

Unsurprisingly, audit committee chairs pointed to improvements that have already been made - such as the reduction of non-audit services fees as a proportion of audit fees - and professed themselves open to change.

They called on regulators to recognise the limitations of audit, understand and clearly delineate the audit committee's role and examine accounting standards rather than audit quality.

However, they admitted their experience of tendering is low, saying audits are rarely put out to tender due to cost, complexity and satisfaction with incumbent auditors.

Increasing competition from Group A firms is respondents' main priority, as well as boosting transparency and communication on the audit process.

Visitor comments

blog comments powered by Disqus
display:none

Add your comment

We won't publish your address


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms & Conditions

Your comment will be moderated before publication

Submit
  • Send

Financial Planning and Performance AnalystCabinet Office-Greater London-Competitive

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Newsletters

Get the latest financial news sent directly to your inbox

  • Best Practice
  • Business
  • Daily Newsletter
  • Essentials

Careers

Search for jobs
Click to search our database of all the latest accountancy roles

Create a profile
Click to set up your profile and let the best recruiters find you

Jobs by email
Sign up to receive regular updates with the latest roles suitable for you

Briefings

budget-management

Why budgeting fails: One management system is not enough

If budgeting is to have any value at all, it needs a radical overhaul. In today's dynamic marketplace, budgeting can no longer serve as a company's only management system; it must integrate with and support dedicated strategy management systems, process improvement systems, and the like. In this paper, Professor Peter Horvath and Dr Ralf Sauter present what's wrong with the current approach to budgeting and how to fix it.

cchcover

iXBRL: Taking stock. Looking forward

In this white paper CCH provide checklists to help accountants and finance professionals both in practice and in business examine these issues and make plans. Also includes a case study of a large commercial organisation working through the first year of mandatory iXBRL filing.