IMF showing its teeth

kilburn

So they Irish accountancy and audit firms that were in bed with the banks have been barred from doing any work for the imf bailed out banks for the next 3 years. I believe justice has been served

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/imf-puts-bar-on-auditors-that-did-the-banks-books-2465638.html

ted2767

Yeah should be interesting alright.
It's not too suprising however two things come to mind.
First who outside the big 4 has the competence, experience and resources to do such work?
Second as I understand it from the article it seems to be only stress testing is regular audit work unaffected?

Jim2007

This is normal procedure, it stands to reason that if you have been providing consulting and services to a client on a certain subject, you can't suddenly turn around and stand regulating the work you have just done! - Talk about paper won't refuse ink!

Jim

censuspro

ted2767 wrote: »

Yeah should be interesting alright.
It's not too suprising however two things come to mind.

First who outside the big 4 has the competence, experience and resources to do such work?
Second as I understand it from the article it seems to be only stress testing is regular audit work unaffected?

I never bought the argument that only Big 4 firms were the only firms capable of doing govt work. Surely if other firms were awarded the work they would recruit the extra resources needed. Isn't that how every firm/company grows?

Jim2007

censuspro wrote: »

I never bought the argument that only Big 4 firms were the only firms capable of doing govt work. Surely if other firms were awarded the work they would recruit the extra resources needed. Isn't that how every firm/company grows?

In the normal course of events, fees from a single client can not account for more than about 10-15% in any year, if memory serves me correctly. It is to ensure that a firm is not overly dependant on a single client.

There are special transition rules when a firm is starting off, but I don't recall what they are....

Jim.

TiGeR KiNgS

this is proper order, not really news

Kingkong

Completely agree with the IMF stance there is no point the same people getting paid again to produce work they have already done before!

That said, the fact is it has been done before and will cost millions to re produce which wont add much to whats already known about.

What gets me is between the big solictors and accountancy firms they have mopped up tens of millions fee money on fees and often play on both sides of the fence.

Why is it that the central bank, financial regulator, department of finance do the work them selves and get off there asses. Outsources is A typical practice which in many ways I believe is why those regulators havent a clue whats went on in the banks in the first place.

I know for a fact the financial regulator has in the past even outsourced intvesigations!

Cookie_Monster

So instead of investigating them for collusion and fraud they are just banning them from a little bit of work? Hardly worth the bother. Not suprising to see at least 3 of the 4 named either, they should all be under the same level of criminal investigation that Anglo is

MrMatisse

It doesnt say any work it just says stress tests, they can still do the year end audit.