德勤巴西：遭PCAOB罚800万， 十二名合伙人经理受处分, 又是审计底稿惹的祸
德勤巴西：
遭PCAOB最高罚单800万
十二名合伙人经理等受处分
又是审计底稿惹的祸
继民财经汇评论：12月5日， PCAOB（美国上市公司会计师监督委员会） 对德勤巴西公司开出金额高达800万美元的罚单，并处罚该所包括八名合伙人在内的共十二名专业人员；本案涉及巴西德勤对 Gol Intelligent 航空公司的审计，这家公司同时在巴西和美国纽交所上市，其中几个重要看点包括：
-德勤巴西认错；这是第一家向PCAOB 认错的“四大”会计公司，第一家向SEC 认错的会计公司是BDO; 通常只有性质比较严重和影响比恶劣的违规行为， PCAOB 和SEC 才会将承认错误作为和解的条件，否则和解常见的条款是既不承认也不否认；
-PCAOB 认为德勤巴西是故意出具重大虚假审计报告；
- 在PCAOB 入场检查过程中，德勤巴西的项目组篡改或者隐瞒了原先的工作底稿，而且在配合检查过程中作了伪证， 由此构成妨碍检查；
- 而且篡改工作底稿和伪证行为，是涉及到数名合伙人和审计团队成员，还涉及到跨职能部门，除了审计项目组参与之外，还包括风险管理部门的合伙人，和质量管理部门的人员，而且巴西德勤高层对此是知情的；所以，类似系统性篡改底稿和妨碍检查；
-由于其中一名高级审计经理向PCAOB 举报，才导致PCAOB 一举拿下这些当事人；这位“出卖”审计同事的高级经理后来获得了PCAOB 从轻处罚；他向PCAOB 举报德勤巴西高层参与了工作底稿的篡改，而将原来德勤合伙人和高级经理之间相关的沟通予以录音，该沟通是用葡萄牙语言， 后来录音被翻译成英文；
- 除了800万美元罚款金额创下PCAOB 的罚单金额记录之外，共有十二名人员受到PCAOB 的处罚，这也是历史记录，受处罚人员中包括八名合伙人， 一名总监级别员工， 三名经理（高级）经理；这些责任人除了遭受PCAOB 的处罚之外，都已经或者从德勤退休，离职或者被解雇。
被PCAOB处罚人员包括：
José Domingos do Prado, 2010年该审计项目合伙人，原审计部负责人，直接和实质参与本案的违规行为，被永久禁止执业)；
Maurício Pires de Andrade Resende, 原风险和声誉管理负责合伙人Risk and Reputation Leader，因直接和实质性参与了妨碍PCAOB检查工作，考虑到之后的特殊配合之后，被禁止执业五年；
Wanderley Olivetti, 原德勤巴西全国执业质量总监(National Professional Practice Director)，因直接和实质性参与了妨碍PCAOB检查工作被禁止执业五年；
André Ricardo Aguillar Paulon, 2010 年该项目审计高级经理，后提为合伙人，因为篡改工作底稿，不配合检查，被禁止执业一年；
James Roderick Talbot Oram, 2010年该项目审计质量负责合伙人( audit engagement quality reviewer), 被禁止执业一年；
Joao Rafael Belo de Araujo Filho, 高级经理，后成为合伙人，因为篡改工作底稿和不配合检查，被禁止执业一年， 罚款一万美元；
Leonardo Fonseca de Freitas Maia, 高级经理，后成为合伙人，因为篡改工作底稿和不配合检查，被禁止执业一年， 罚款一万美元；
José Fernando Alves, 2010年该项目IT 审计合伙人( Audit partner for information technology
work) , 因为不配合检查，被禁止执业一年，罚款两万美元；
Renata Coelho de Sousa Castelli, 2010年该项目审计IT 经理，应不配合检查，被禁止执业三年；
Marco Aurelio Paulino Neves, 审计第二合伙人( audit second partner), 因篡改工作底稿和不配合检查，被禁止执业三年和罚款两万美元；
Simone Pacheco Lemos do Amaral, 审计高级经理(audit senior manager), 因篡改工作底稿和不配合检查，被禁止执业一年；
Walter Vinicius Barreto Brito Silva, 审计经理（audit manager），因篡改工作底稿和不配合检查，被禁止执业一年。
就在同一天2016年12月5日，同样是因为审计工作底稿的问题， PCAOB 还对德勤墨西哥所开出75万美元的罚单，并处分了两名合伙人和一名其他专业人员。德勤墨西哥所对一些上市公司的审计，没有按照要求在审计报告签发45天之内进行完整归档，反而在PCAOB 检查期间提供经过篡改的工作底稿。 PCAOB 指出该所的工作底稿内控流程存在缺陷。
审计工作底稿一方面是会计师事务所的“秘密武器”和“护身符”，是审计结论的依据所在，如果出现诉讼，会计师可以依此保护自身权利；但是，同时审计底稿如果管理不善，也会给公司惹来祸害； 最为著名的就安然事件中的安达信，由于涉嫌销毁部分工作底稿，而遭致灭顶之灾；而今年，国内所瑞华，也是因为审计工作底稿，导致和交易商协会之间发生了一些令人关注的纠纷。如果说审计是一门艺术，那么审计工作底稿的管理更是一门高难度的艺术，其必然会耗费事务所的大量资源，不可掉以轻心。
下图为PCAOB所掌握的德勤巴西在篡改工作底稿过程中的录音内容,以及德勤巴西相关责任人内部是如何妨碍PCAOB 检查的主要行为：
以上是继民财经汇分析和评论，接下来是PCAOB 的处罚通告：
PCAOB Announces $8 Million Settlement with Deloitte Brazil for Violations Including Issuing Materially False Audit Reports and 12 Individuals Also Sanctioned for Various Violations The firm admitted to certain violations, the first admissions the PCAOB has obtained from a global network firm
WASHINGTON, Dec. 5, 2016
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board today announced that Brazil-based Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Auditores Independentes will pay an $8 million civil penalty, the largest ever imposed by the PCAOB, to settle charges including issuing materially false audit reports and attempting to cover up audit violations by improperly altering documents and providing false testimony.
The PCAOB also announced sanctions against 12 former partners and other audit personnel of the firm, including certain firm leaders, for violations including noncooperation with a PCAOB inspection and subsequent investigation. A former engagement partner also was charged with causing the firm to issue materially false audit reports.
Deloitte Brazil admitted that it violated quality control standards and failed to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection and investigation, the first admissions the PCAOB has obtained from a global network firm.
"Deloitte Brazil failed in its public watchdog role to protect the interests of investors by issuing materially false audit reports," said Claudius B. Modesti, director of the PCAOB Division of Enforcement and Investigations. "The orders released today detail some of the most serious misconduct the PCAOB has ever uncovered."
The PCAOB found that Deloitte Brazil knowingly issued materially false audit reports for the 2010 financial statements and internal control over financial reporting of its client, a Brazilian airline. In advance of a 2012 PCAOB inspection, a Deloitte Brazil engagement partner, who also served as the firm's audit practice leader, directed junior personnel to alter work papers from the 2010 audit to conceal known audit deficiencies. The firm presented the improperly altered work papers, as well as other misleading documents and information, to PCAOB inspectors.
After the PCAOB began an investigation of the audit, Deloitte Brazil took additional steps to conceal its audit deficiencies and work paper alterations, with the knowledge and participation of senior firm leaders. Multiple firm partners provided false testimony under oath and made false representations to PCAOB staff about the 2010 audit in an attempt to obstruct the PCAOB investigation.
In addition to the $8 million civil penalty, Deloitte Brazil agreed to sanctions including:
Censure
Undertakings to improve the firm's system of quality control
Appointment of an independent monitor to review and assess the firm's progress toward achieving remedial benchmarks
Immediate practice limitations, including a prohibition on accepting certain new audit work until the monitor confirms the firm's progress in achieving its remedial benchmarks
Additional professional education and training for the firm's audit staff
"The firm leaders who participated in the misconduct not only set a tone of disregard for compliance with PCAOB rules, standards, and oversight, but also actively subverted that oversight," noted Director Modesti.
The 12 former Deloitte Brazil partners and other audit personnel sanctioned in the case included partners who held the senior leadership positions of risk and reputation leader, national professional practice director, and audit practice leader, in addition to six other partners and three other audit personnel. All but one were barred or suspended from associating with a registered public accounting firm.
The Board granted significant credit for extraordinary cooperation to one individual — a senior manager on the audit — after he reported to PCAOB staff that senior firm management was obstructing the PCAOB investigation. The Board also granted credit to two other individuals for providing substantial assistance to the investigation.
The individual respondents and their sanctions can be found in an accompanying attachment.
December 5, 2016
The 12 orders with individual respondents in the Deloitte Brazil order released December 5, 2016, are listed below. All individuals were censured and received the sanctions below. None are currently associated with Deloitte Brazil. All of the individual respondents neither admitted nor denied the allegations contained in their respective orders.
José Domingos do Prado, 2010 Gol Audit engagement partner, former Audit Practice Leader – Permanently barred from being an associated person of a registered firm for:
directly and substantially contributing to the firm's violation of Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, and PCAOB standards
violating PCAOB standards during the 2010 Gol Audit
improperly altering audit documentation
failing to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection and directly and substantially contributing to the firm's failure to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection
failing to cooperate with a PCAOB investigation and directly and substantially contributing to the firm's failure to cooperate with a PCAOB investigation
Maurício Pires de Andrade Resende,
former Risk and Reputation Leader – Barred from being an associated person of a registered firm with a right to request terminating the bar after five years for: failing to cooperate with a PCAOB investigation and directly and substantially contributing to the firm's failure to cooperate with a PCAOB investigation
Resende's penalty reflected credit for extraordinary cooperation
Wanderley Olivetti,
former National Professional Practice Director – Barred from being an associated person of a registered firm with a right to request terminating the bar after five years for: failing to cooperate with a PCAOB investigation and directly and substantially contributing to the firm's failure to cooperate with a PCAOB investigation
Olivetti's penalty reflected credit for extraordinary cooperation
André Ricardo Aguillar Paulon,
2010 Gol Audit senior manager, later firm partner – One year restriction on service as engagement partner or engagement quality reviewer for: improperly altering audit documentation
failing to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection and failing to cooperate with a PCAOB investigation
Paulon's penalty reflected significant credit for extraordinary cooperation
James Roderick Talbot Oram,
2010 Gol audit engagement quality reviewer – One year suspension from being an associated person of a registered firm for: violations of PCAOB standards during the 2010 Gol Audit
Joao Rafael Belo de Araujo Filho,
senior manager, later firm partner – Barred from being an associated person of a registered firm with a right to request terminating the bar after one year and will pay a $10,000 civil money penalty for: improperly altering audit documentation
failing to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection
Leonardo Fonseca de Freitas Maia,
senior manager, later firm partner – Barred from being an associated person of a registered firm with a right to request terminating the bar after one year and will pay a $10,000 civil money penalty for: improperly altering audit documentation
failing to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection
José Fernando Alves,
2010 Gol Audit partner for information technology work – Barred from being an associated person of a registered firm with a right to request terminating the bar after one year and will pay a $20,000 civil money penalty for: failing to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection
Renata Coelho de Sousa Castelli,
2010 Gol Audit manager for information technology work – Barred from being an associated person of a registered firm with a right to request terminating the bar after three years for: failing to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection and failing to cooperate with a PCAOB investigation
Marco Aurelio Paulino Neves,
"Issuer 2" audit second partner – Barred from being an associated person of a registered firm with a right to request terminating the bar after three years and will pay a $20,000 civil money penalty for: improperly altering audit documentation
failing to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection
Simone Pacheco Lemos do Amaral,
"Issuer 2" audit senior manager – Barred from being an associated person of a registered firm with a right to request terminating the bar after one year for: improperly altering audit documentation
failing to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection
Walter Vinicius Barreto Brito Silva,
"Issuer 2" audit manager – Barred from being an associated person of a registered firm with a right to request terminating the bar after one year for: improperly altering audit documentation
failing to cooperate with a PCAOB inspection
PCAOB Announces $750,000 Settlement with Deloitte Mexico for Failing to Effectively Implement Quality Control Policies and Procedures for Audit Documentation Three individuals also were sanctioned for violations including improperly altering work papers
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board today announced that Mexico-based Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C. (Deloitte Mexico) was censured
Two former Deloitte Mexico partners and another former auditor also were sanctioned for violations including audit deficiencies and improper alteration of work papers on a 2010 audit of a large U.S.-based mining company.
From 2011 to 2015, Deloitte Mexico failed to archive audit documentation of numerous public company audits within 45 days of the audit report release date in violation of Auditing Standard No. 3, Audit Documentation. The firm also violated PCAOB quality control standards by failing to effectively implement policies and procedures to ensure the timely archiving of audit documentation by its engagement teams.
"By failing to prevent repeated late archiving of its audit documentation over many years, Deloitte Mexico undermined its own quality control system and increased the risk that work papers might be improperly altered," said Claudius B. Modesti, director of the PCAOB Division of Enforcement and Investigations.
After the 2010 audit, the three individuals sanctioned — the engagement partner, a second partner, and another auditor on the engagement team — participated in the deletion and improper alteration of the archived audit documentation in advance of an internal audit practice review conducted as part of the firm's system of quality control.
The two partners then made available the improperly altered work papers to PCAOB staff during an inspection. During a subsequent PCAOB investigation, the engagement partner once again made available to PCAOB staff the improperly altered documents, as well as other misleading information.
"As these orders against the individuals demonstrate, the Board has zero tolerance for improper alteration of audit documentation in connection with a PCAOB inspection or investigation," said Director Modesti.
The engagement partner for the 2010 audit also violated PCAOB rules and standards by failing to exercise due professional care and skepticism and failing to obtain sufficient audit evidence in several significant areas.
Specifically, he failed to obtain sufficient evidence to support the company's tax treatment of unremitted earnings of a foreign subsidiary, perform sufficient procedures to test journal entries for the existence of fraud, and perform necessary procedures regarding the specialists used on the audit.
The sanctioned individuals are listed below. They are no longer associated with Deloitte Mexico.
Arturo Vargas Arellano, CPC
– Censured, will pay a $50,000 civil penalty, and was barred for five years from association with a PCAOB-registered public accounting firm Miguel Angel Asencio Asencio
– Censured, will pay a $25,000 civil penalty, and was barred for two years from association with a PCAOB-registered public accounting firm Aldo Hidalgo de la Rosa
– Censured
In addition to the censure and $750,000 civil penalty, Deloitte Mexico agreed to undertake significant remedial measures designed to prevent future violations of AS No. 3.
All of the respondents neither admitted nor denied the allegations contained in their respective orders.