Articles

Last month, the Public Company Oversight Board reported that it had censured a CPA working at an Ernst & Young office. The board took the action because the audit partner and a manager instructed the young woman to put backdated items into a clients audit workpapers. But despite noting more than once that the more senior members of the team gave these orders, the PCAOB didn't name them.

Because I am not intricately familiar with how the enforcement process took place, I'm not sure there is more that should have been done. But the language concerning what happened  that drew the censure is clear: "The Engagement Partner and the Senior Manager subsequently directed Respondent improperly to remove, add, and backdate
documents in the external working papers."

The PCAOB then cited four separate instances of documents that were incorrectly subject to these actions. Twice this action was taken at the instruction of the engagement partner, once at the direction of the senior manager and once both gave the word. As mentioned the names of the two senior staff members didn't appear and there's no suggestion in the PCAOB order that these two have been suggested to any review.

Again, maybe there's something in this process that I understand. But it sure doesn't look right.

• Prev
• Next