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.
Guidelines and FAQs issued to clarify alternative performance measures
The proposed moratorium would last for three months, with the possibility of an extension, if needed
IPA issues first personal insolvency licence after licensing regime opended to greater competition
Law Society claims that the public interest cannot prove to have been served by the ICAEW's move into probate - and as such should not be used by the institute as evidence to back its push into further legal services