Nieuws 08 december 2008

Basel Committee: structuur accountantsnetwerken bedreiging voor kwaliteit bank-audits

Volgens het Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, de koepel van banktoezichthouders, heeft de globalisatie van de grote accountantskantoren bijgedragen aan de complexe structuur van deze organisaties en een gebrek aan transparantie. Dit vormt een bedreiging voor de kwaliteit van bank-audits.

Dat stelt de commissie in een paper over de relatie tussen de kwaliteit van externe accountantscontrole en bankentoezicht.

De publicatie, External audit quality and banking supervision, beschrijft het toegenomen belang voor banktoezichthouders van een kwalitatief hoogwaardige accountantscontrole. Dit heeft onder andere te maken met de steeds ingewikkelder verslaggevingsregels voor financiële instrumenten en uitdagingen van fair value-waardering, zeker sinds het uitbreken van de kredietcrisis. Hierdoor is de afhankelijkheid van toezichthouders van de expertise van de externe accountant toegenomen.

Het Basel Committee is van mening dat in tijden van crisis de externe accountantscontrole een belangrijke rol kan spelen bij het herstellen van het vertrouwen in de financiële markten.

Echter, de commissie is van mening dat de huidige structuur van de internationale accountantsnetwerken een bedreiging kan vormen voor de kwaliteit van audits.

Tegelijkertijd erkent de commissie dat de kantoren wel stappen ondernemen om de problemen die samenhangen met de organisatiestructuur het hoofd te bieden.

"The largest internationally active accounting firms have a global presence but most are currently not managed globally. While the head office or global leadership can influence member firms in different countries (ie predominantly through moral suasion backed-up with a threat of dropping the firm relationship), they do not commonly have direct authority over them. The structure of global network firms is influenced by national regulation and legislation relevant to audit firms. However, the firms stress the importance of having a strong tone at the top and state that they have robust commitments to audit quality. For example, recently, audit firm partner remuneration has reportedly become more closely aligned with audit quality."

"The large globally active firms do not provide sufficient public information about how the firms are managed on a global basis, how audit quality is assured at the global level, or about their world-wide overall financial condition and profitability."

"Consistent interpretation of accounting standards is challenging because there may be influence by national accounting traditions or weak communication within a global firm. Firms attempt to resolve these challenges through centralised knowledge bases, enhanced communication networks and training programs. Consistent interpretation of auditing and ethics standards can be challenging when firms are not managed on a global basis, particularly when a firm does not have firm-wide quality control policies or programs. Audit quality on a national level can also present challenges; however, firms attempt to mitigate these challenges. For example, smaller local offices may have to go through an approval process before being allowed to accept an audit in a specialised field. Additionally, before allowing some smaller offices to accept an engagement with a "one-off" client in a specialised field, they may be required to have specialised training, join forces with a more experienced office, or have audit processes reviewed by more seasoned partners from other offices."

Het Basel Committee doet in het rapport de volgende aanbevelingen om de kwaliteit van accountantscontroles bij banken te waarborgen:

• Enhance promotion of sound auditing guidance and practices in areas of specific interest to banking supervisors, notably through an increased focus on:
  • auditing fair value estimates derived through models,
  • auditing disclosures (eg risks, fair value estimates and methodologies and uncertainty surrounding estimates),
  • auditing loan-loss provisions, day-one gain recognition and own credit risk adjustments reflected in fair value estimates,
  • auditing consolidation of and other involvement with off-balance sheet vehicles and
  • auditors' responsibilities related to internal controls over fair value and other accounting estimates.
• Enhance audit quality by encouraging clarification of accounting principles in areas of specific interest to banking supervisors, such as valuations, consolidation, impairment and other areas that could be improved by relying on lessons learned from the current market turmoil.
• Encourage dialogue within and among audit firms to prepare for and address processes that should be conducted during future times of financial stress.
• Enhance engagement with independent audit oversight authorities.
• Encourage greater transparency of the corporate governance structures and the financial position of the global network firms.
• Encourage dialogue within and among the global network firms and other relevant bodies about the challenges that the firms face with respect to audit quality in audits of banks. In particular, the firms could identify impediments to their ability to consistently apply, on a global basis, accounting and auditing standards or internally developed guidance.
• Participate with the IAASB when it redrafts/updates International Auditing Practice Statement (IAPS) 1004, The Relationship Between Banking Supervisors and Banks' External Auditors, January 2002 and IAPS 1006, Audits of the Financial Statements of Banks, October 2001.
• Continue to support audit quality by:
  • participating in groups involved with audit and ethics standard setting and auditor oversight,
  • monitoring and responding to emerging issues related to international auditing and accounting that may affect audit quality, such as developments in the area of auditor liability and
  • responding to requests for comment by the audit and ethics standard setters.