READERS ARE SPLIT over the basis on which reprimands should be meted out in Accounting and Actuarial Disciplinary Board (AADB) disciplinary proceedings.
Just over half of Accountancy Age readers polled – 52% – feel punishments should fit the crime in question, while a significant minority of 42% would prefer to see penalties based on who is in the dock, with larger, more powerful defendants apportioned greater responsibility.
The remaining 6% of the 47 respondents were unsure where they stand on the issue.
The AADB – the disciplinary arm of the FRC – was warned this month that changes to the way disciplinary sanctions are calculated could damage the profession and deter people from entering the industry and continuing membership with institutes.
It is currently considering increasing fines on larger member firms because current penalties do not incentivise the right behaviour and are failing to be a "credible" deterrent to misconduct.
Following KPMG's announcement of staff cuts, do you expect other firms to follow suit?
Click here to take part in Accountancy Age's latest poll.
You may also like
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.
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.