**Washington**: The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has approved a new rule requiring auditing firms to report specific metrics, aiming to increase transparency. While some believe this enhances accountability, others warn it risks misinterpretation and could damage firms’ reputations amid existing concerns about audit quality.
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) has recently approved a new rule aimed at increasing transparency across the auditing profession, although this has met with resistance from key industry stakeholders including the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) and major accounting firms. On November 21, 2024, the PCAOB formalised a requirement for auditing firms to report specific metrics related to both firm and engagement levels, labelled PCAOB-2024-06.
The metrics to be reported include various facets of audit practice: the involvement of senior professionals, average weekly hours worked by employees, average training hours, experience levels among audit personnel, industry-specific experience, retention rates of audit staff, the allocation of audit hours, and the history of restatements of financial statements audited by the firm over the past three years. The PCAOB states that tracking these metrics will not impose excessive costs or burdens on firms, claiming that many already monitor such data internally.
However, commentary from firms suggests significant concern about the implications of these reporting requirements. For instance, PwC expressed its inability to support the SEC’s approval of the PCAOB’s final rules in a comment letter, citing fears that the rigid and static nature of the prescribed metrics may lead to investors and other stakeholders forming misguided opinions about audit quality based on incomplete data. PwC outlined that while they support transparency, they believe the PCAOB’s expected benefits are overstated and the costs understated, particularly without materiality considerations.
Robert Conway, a retired partner from KPMG and a former PCAOB staff member, has shown a contrasting perspective. Speaking to the publication, he stated that systemic issues, such as the long hours and lack of work-life balance within audit firms, persist year after year. He views the new PCAOB measures as vital to providing the necessary oversight and accountability within the audit profession, arguing that current staffing models may exacerbate risks related to audit quality. Conway noted that inexperienced staff often perform critical audit tasks with minimal supervision, indicating a potentially serious mismatch between the complexity of modern audits and the qualifications of those conducting them.
Conway drew attention to industry trends, suggesting that a significant turnover rate among audit professionals, particularly within the Big Four accounting firms, raises questions about continuity and the overall quality of audit work. He claimed that the average experience level of junior audit staff may not adequately prepare them, especially since many audits may be conducted under pressure of tight deadlines.
The PCAOB’s Chair, Erica Y. Williams, has articulated the belief that these new requirements will enhance the board’s oversight capabilities and provide investors, audit committees, and other stakeholders with clearer and actionable data regarding audit quality. Prominent stakeholders have voiced their opposition, fearing that the increased transparency may lead to misinterpretation of the metrics, potentially damaging firms’ reputations.
Overall, the conversation around PCAOB-2024-06 encapsulates key tensions in the auditing industry regarding accountability, transparency, and the balance between business profitability and quality in audit processes. As debate continues, the SEC will ultimately decide whether to endorse these new rules, which promise to reshape how audit quality is perceived and reported amid growing concerns over the efficacy of the current model employed by major firms.
Source: Noah Wire Services
Subscribe to Industry Updates
