Investors, and their professional bodies, have consistently argued against a cap. But as tempting as it may be for auditors to shrug their shoulders at Francis’ comments, research now shows she is not the only one worried about the implications of such a move. This week’s Accountancy Age/Reed Finance Big Question found that nearly half of those FDs questioned believed a cap would be anti-competitive.
Gloomy predictions accompanied the results. ‘The big shall get bigger, the small get smaller and the professionalism of the audits shall deteriorate further,’ said one clearly disillusioned FD. Another added: ‘The only people to benefit would be the large firms.’
These comments will hardly be pleasing for those who have argued for some time that a cap is needed to avoid the possibility of the Big Four turning into a Big Three. It is tempting to dismiss the comments as predictable and small-minded, but that would be a mistake. It’s clear that the Big Four have won a victory – but they must avoid gloating because, as our survey shows, the battle for client confidence may have only just begun.
Firms must now demonstrate to their clients that the cap will be worth it and that auditors can add value, provide quality, and contribute to the business in ways that go beyond simply ticking off the accounts. Reassurance will need to be plentiful and fast. This is no time for auditors to sit back and revel in triumph.
The average cost of fraud increased 35.4% to £3.9m in 2016, compared to 2015 data
Harrison Beale & Owen will (HB&O) have a new chairman and managing director at the helm for 2017
Satvir Bungar promoted to managing director in the mergers and acquisitions team
Carolyn Brown appointed as the first head of client legal services practice RSM Legal