Attestation Update – A&A for CPAs

Technical stuff for CPAs providing attestation services

Posts Tagged ‘CA Bd of Accountancy

California Board of Accountancy is serious about audit quality and enrollment in peer review.

leave a comment »

Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

The Winter 2017 Update newsletter (#83) from the California Board of Accountancy shows that the board is continuing its active efforts on disciplinary actions.

There are obviously quite a few of our colleagues who are not performing up to standards.

I’ve heard stories from a distance that the Board has hired more enforcement staff. As I have read the last few issues of Update, it sure seems to me that the increased staffing is showing up in an increased pace of closed cases. Maybe my perception is off, but it seems there are more cases closed with more serious consequences in the last year or so.

I count 39 cases documented in this edition of Update. Only 2 of these have discipline level of suspension or less. All the others are surrenders, revocations, or stayed revocations. Just as a guess, I think that means the editor of Update is filtering out most of the suspensions.

I count 19 cases of those 39 with peer review problems or audit, review, or compilation failures or some combination thereof. I’ll break that down further:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Jim Ulvog

September 19, 2017, 7:28 am at 7:28 am

If you have been blowing off Peer Review, you really ought to get with the program.

with one comment

Image courtesy of DollarPhotoClub.com

Image courtesy of DollarPhotoClub.com

Seriously, if you are providing audit, review, or compilation services to your clients, you really need to be in the peer review program. And you really, really need to be doing fairly good work. I doubt any CPAs in California who desperately need to read this post will be doing so, but it is still worth mentioning.

The California Board of Accountancy is coming down hard on CPAs who have avoided the peer review program. Seriously missing the boat on audit quality is getting hammered as well.

Quarterly newsletter

The Spring/Summer 2016 edition of the quarterly Update newsletter from CBA, issue 81, has several reports of firms drawing serious sanctions. There are 21 pages of narrative describing the sanctions through April 24, 2016. Of 28 disciplinary issues, 7 deal with peer review, which are the ones I will highlight.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Jim Ulvog

July 19, 2016, 9:09 am at 9:09 am

Misbehavin’ CPAs #7. Sanctions by California Board of Accountancy, part 2

leave a comment »

That may be how the vast majority of CPAs perform all the time, but some CPAs miss the target completely. Image courtesy of DollarPhotoClub.com

That may be how the vast majority of CPAs perform all the time, but some CPAs miss the target completely. Image courtesy of DollarPhotoClub.com

Previously mentioned that I looked disciplinary actions reported in the last four newsletters from the California Board of Accountancy (CBA). Want to better understand what happened with firms that got in trouble for audit quality or for not getting a peer review when one was required.

Will continue that discussion by looking at sanctions imposed on smaller firms and then self-imposed trouble generated by some larger firms.

Sanctions

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Jim Ulvog

January 5, 2016, 8:09 am at 8:09 am

Misbehavin’ CPAs #6. Sanctions by California Board of Accountancy, part 1.

leave a comment »

That may be how the vast majority of CPAs perform all the time, but some CPAs miss the target completely. Image courtesy of DollarPhotoClub.com

That may be how the vast majority of CPAs perform every day, but some CPAs miss the target completely. Image courtesy of DollarPhotoClub.com

Three times a year the California Board of Accountancy issues a newsletter. It contains a variety of information useful for CPAs. If you are a CPA, you really ought to be reading the newsletter.

That newsletter is also where the board publicizes disciplinary actions against CPAs.

In the last few newsletters I’ve noticed a number of cases where firms are sanctioned for substandard audits. Have also noticed a number of firms sanctioned for not getting a peer review when it was required or fibbing to the board whether they had complied with the peer review standards.

I wanted to understand better what I’ve noticed in passing so decided to dive into the disciplinary reports to get a better picture of the extent of sanctions for audit quality and peer review issues. I looked at the Fall 2014, Winter 2015, Summer 2015, and Fall 2015 newsletters.

That covers 16 months of reporting for disciplinary actions by CBA.

I focused on sanctions for audit issues excluding anything that was a follow-up to PCOAB or SEC sanctions. That rules out quite a few cases.

Also ignored a long list of social misbehavior such as DUIs (several incidents), fabricating Form E (once – fabricating the experience report? – really??), embezzlements, disbarment (once), and other such human foibles. Also excluded a variety of contingency fee violations, breaches of client trust, and sundry tax fiascos.

For context, the Fall 2015 newsletter had 28 disciplinary actions of which 5 were of interest for this little bitty research project. Of those 5 cases, the public notices refer to 2 firms which had substandard audits, 1 had a substandard compilation, and 4 included failures to get a peer review when required of which 2 fibbed to CBA about compliance with the peer review requirement.

Scope and result of my analysis

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Jim Ulvog

January 4, 2016, 9:20 am at 9:20 am

Reporting restatements to the California Board of Accountancy

leave a comment »

If you report on financial statements with a restatement of prior year numbers, you may have to notify the CBA.

The board has a very brief summary of the three circumstances when you have to notify them in the current issue of their newsletter, Update.  You can see the short article on page 10 of this issue.

Here is my really fast summary –

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Jim Ulvog

January 6, 2012, 8:24 am at 8:24 am