LORD SHARMAN‘s conclusions on going concern are to be applauded. The system we have has long since been problematic and not nearly nuanced enough.
In a report this week Going Concern and Liquidity Risks he concludes that the current system is too “binary” – a company is a going concern or it isn’t.
That doesn’t nearly cover all the possibilities. After all, a business may be deemed a going concern for the purposes of reporting, but may indeed face serious difficulties that stakeholders should know about. Hence the need for more information and in different forms.
A more nuanced approach should also mean that disclosures can be made without becoming the killer blow that causes a company to collapse. This is why the all or nothing approach of the current going concern regime is inadequate. The International Accounting Standards Board has to listen because accountants and company directors really do need a better system.
Internal auditors are earn more than external consulting auditors, analysis by salary-bench marking site Emolument.com has found
ICAS and the FRC have called for action to prevent a potential audit skills gap in the future, with the launch of a new report
Steve Absolom and Will Wright from KPMG Restructuring have been appointed joint administrators to City Motor Holdings and associated companies
Partners from Johnston Carmichael have been appointed as joint administrators to Axon Well Interventions Products UK