The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board imposed its largest ever penalty of $25 million against KPMG’s firm in the Netherlands, in addition to $2 million in fines against Deloitte’s firms in Indonesia and the Philippines, accusing the firms Wednesday of cheating on exams and sharing answers.
In the KPMG Netherlands case, the PCAOB posted two settled disciplinary orders sanctioning KPMG Accountants N.V. in addition to its former head of assurance, Marc Hogeboom, accusing them of violating the PCAOB rules and quality control standards pertaining to the firm’s internal training program and monitoring of its quality control system. The PCAOB said it found widespread improper answer sharing happening at the firm over a five-year period and that the firm made multiple misrepresentations to the PCAOB about its knowledge of the misconduct. The PCAOB learned of the exam cheating through a whistleblower report it received in 2022.
“The growth and breadth of exam cheating in this case was enabled by the firm’s failure to take appropriate steps to monitor, investigate and identify potential misconduct,” said PCAOB chair Erica Williams during a press conference Wednesday. “Furthermore, during the course of our investigation, the firm submitted and failed to correct multiple inaccurate representations to the PCAOB. For example, the firm claimed to have no knowledge of answer sharing prior to the 2022 whistleblower report. Yet this could not have been true because members of the firm’s management board and supervisory board who signed off on that submission to the PCAOB have in fact cheated themselves. But it doesn’t end there. KPMG Netherlands’ CEO learned the submissions were inaccurate and failed to inform anyone until months later, when a second whistleblower came forward. Only then did the firm correct the inaccurate representations to investigators. This misconduct reveals an inappropriate tone at the top and a complete failure of firm leadership to promote an ethical culture worthy of investors’ trust.”
PCAOB chair Erica Williams
The sanctions imposed by the PCAOB included a $25 million civil money penalty on KPMG Netherlands — the biggest fine ever levied by the PCAOB — along with a permanent bar and $150,000 civil money penalty on Hogeboom.
KPMG Netherlands acknowledged the problems at the firm and its CEO apologized. The investigation revealed that from at least October 2017, over 500 people at the firm were involved in some form of improper conduct, including sending or receiving answers to training tests and providing or receiving assistance in taking such tests. The firm said the settlement reflects that KPMG Netherlands violated a number of PCAOB rules.
“The conclusions are damning, and the penalty is a reflection of that,” said KPMG Netherlands CEO Stephanie Hottenhuis in a statement. “I deeply regret that this misconduct happened in our firm. Our clients and stakeholders deserve our apologies. They count on our quality and integrity as this is our role in society, with trust as our license to operate.”
The firm said that after the investigation, people, at all levels of seniority, who participated in answer sharing have been sanctioned, and some of them had to leave the firm. After the second whistleblower notification, with regard to a member of the management board, all members of the board of management and supervisory board were subject to additional personal investigations into their involvement in answer sharing. The investigation led to the departure of the former head of assurance as a partner in the firm. The chairman of the supervisory board resigned after admitting he had received assistance in completing a training test.
The PCAOB and the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets conducted parallel investigations, and the Dutch AFM separately imposed enhanced supervision measures under Dutch law to prevent recurrence of such behavior.
KPMG Netherlands said it has now taken several targeted remedial measures and is working on further improvements in policies and procedures relating to the assessment of mandatory training and internal culture. The remediation process is under the enhanced supervision of the AFM. The supervisory board of KPMG Netherlands will also monitor this closely.
“It is a hard lesson, and we are learning from this,” said Hottenhuis. “We have reviewed our approach to mandatory testing and made meaningful changes to our learning and development programs. We also have implemented controls to monitor whether training tests are being completed appropriately and will continue to do so going forward. We will continuously improve, and we must ensure we do our training sessions appropriately, sustainably.”
KPMG Netherlands also plans to encourage its employees to speak up about improper behavior. “This is a significant failure in our duty to serve the public interest,” said Hottenhuis. “Trust is essential in our business, and we must learn from this and make a change in our culture and behavior. Additional programs on ethical decision making are being rolled out for all teams. This is a critical topic that will remain on the agenda of all leaders and for everyone at our firm.”
The PCAOB said that from 2017 until 2022, hundreds of professionals at KPMG Netherlands engaged in improper answer sharing — either by providing access to test questions or answers, or by receiving such access without reporting it — in connection with tests for mandatory firm training courses. The courses related to different topics, including U.S. auditing standards, professional ethics and independence. The improper answer sharing reached as far as partners and senior firm leaders, including Hogeboom (who at the time was the firm’s head of assurance and a member of the firm’s management board). The growth of this widespread answer sharing was exacerbated by the firm’s failure to take appropriate steps to monitor, investigate and identify the potential misconduct. For example, starting in June 2020, the firm was aware that answer sharing had occurred at a KPMG service delivery center serving KPMG Netherlands and KPMG LLP in the United Kingdom, and the sharing had extended to the U.K. firm’s personnel. Nevertheless, KPMG Netherlands took virtually no steps to investigate potential answer sharing among its employees until a whistleblower reported the misconduct in July 2022.
Without admitting or denying the findings, the firm and Hogeboom agreed to the PCAOB’s respective orders against them. KPMG Netherlands was censured and agreed to pay a $25 million civil money penalty. The firm also agreed to review and improve its quality control policies and procedures to provide reasonable assurance that its personnel act with integrity in connection with internal training, and to report its compliance to the PCAOB. Hogeboom was censured, permanently barred from being an associated person of a registered public accounting firm, and agreed to pay a $150,000 civil money penalty.
Attorneys for Hogenboom and KPMG Netherlands did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Deloitte Indonesia and Philippines
In the cases involving Deloitte’s member firms in Indonesia and the Philippines, the investigations also uncovered problems with exam cheating and answer sharing on training tests and coverups at high levels of the firms.
The PCAOB announced three settled disciplinary orders sanctioning Imelda & Raken (Deloitte Indonesia), Navarro Amper & Co. (Deloitte Philippines), and the Philippines firm’s former national professional practice director, Wilfredo Baltazar, for violating PCAOB rules and quality control standards relating to the firms’ internal training programs and monitoring of their systems of quality control that led to pervasive cheating.
From 2017 to 2019, the PCAOB said Deloitte Philippines’s audit partners and other personnel engaged in widespread answer sharing — either by providing answers or using answers — or received answers without reporting such sharing in connection with tests for mandatory firm training courses. On at least six occasions, Baltazar, who was the partner who was supposed to be responsible for e-learning compliance, shared answers to training assessments with other audit partners at the firm. (He has since left the firm.) Attorneys for Baltazar and the firms did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
From 2021 to 2023, over 200 professionals at Deloitte Indonesia engaged in answer sharing. The firm’s failure to detect and deter improper answer sharing by its personnel happened despite numerous warnings from Deloitte Global and regional leadership that answer sharing was impermissible.
Without admitting or denying the findings, Deloitte Indonesia, Deloitte Philippines and Baltazar agreed to the PCAOB’s respective orders against them. Deloitte Indonesia and Deloitte Philippines were censured, and each agreed to pay a $1 million penalty. The firms also agreed to review and improve their quality control policies and procedures to provide reasonable assurance that their personnel act with integrity in connection with internal training, and to report their compliance to the PCAOB.
Baltazar was censured, barred from being an associated person of a registered public accounting firm with a right to apply to terminate his bar after three years, and agreed to pay a $10,000 civil money penalty that reflects his financial resources. The PCAOB said it would have imposed a civil money penalty of $50,000 if it hadn’t considered his financial resources.
“Today’s orders demonstrate that an inadequate tone at the top, particularly with regard to issues of integrity and personnel management, can permeate all levels of a firm,” said Robert Rice, director of the PCAOB’s Division of Enforcement and Investigations, in a statement.
Since 2021, the PCAOB has sanctioned nine registered firms for quality control deficiencies related to the inappropriate sharing of answers on internal training exams.
“I want to be very clear: The PCAOB will not tolerate exam cheating, nor any other unethical behavior period,” said Williams. “Impaired ethics erode trust and threaten the investor confidence our system relies on. The PCAOB will take action to hold firms accountable when they fail to enforce culture, honesty and integrity.”
Accounting Today asked Williams during the press conference whether the new standards proposed Tuesday for firm reporting and engagement metrics would have ferreted out such conduct.
“The goal of those proposals is to provide consistent information about audit firms in their audit engagements to help bolster confidence in our markets and strengthen oversight and empower investors and audit committees as they make informed decisions in order to help drive product quality forward,” Williams responded. “As I noted yesterday, I look forward to reviewing all the input we receive and encourage anyone who’s interested to submit a comment.”
Record levels of enforcement activity
The PCAOB has been cracking down on firms and auditors alike, according to a report released Wednesday by Cornerstone Research.
The report found the PCAOB publicly disclosed 46 total enforcement actions, 37 of which related to the performance of an audit (auditing actions), an increase of more than 28% from 2022. Twenty-nine of the 37 auditing actions were concluded in the second half of 2023, matching the total number of auditing actions for 2022. Monetary penalties totaled $19.7 million, nearly doubling the previous record of approximately $10.5 million in 2022.
“There was a notable shift in the types of respondents in 2023 auditing actions,” said Jean-Philippe Poissant, who co-authored the report and is co-head of Cornerstone Research’s accounting practice, in a statement. “In the past, two-thirds of respondents were individuals. Yet in 2023, two-thirds of respondents were firms. This shift was the result of a substantial jump in the number of auditing actions that only involved firms.”
The great majority — 79% — of the auditing actions in 2023 included alleged violations of auditing standards. Some 60% of those actions included additional allegations related to ethics and independence standards, quality control standards or both. For the first time, the PCAOB included allegations related to critical audit matters, or CAMs, in enforcement actions, with three actions including such allegations.
Of the $19.7 million in total monetary penalties in 2023, $18.8 million were imposed on firms, nearly twice the $9.5 million imposed on firms in 2022. Some 15% of the firm respondents were required to obtain an independent consultant.
Many of the penalties involve firms outside the U.S., as in the cases today involving Big Four affiliates in the Netherlands, Indonesia and the Philippines.
“More than two-thirds of the PCAOB’s record-setting monetary penalties were imposed on non-U.S. respondents in 2023, even though non-U.S. respondents accounted for less than half of the auditing actions during the year,” said Russell Molter, a principal at Cornerstone Research and report co-author, in a statement.
The number of respondents in auditing actions totaled 53, a 23% increase over 2022, according to the report. The PCAOB settled four actions involving three China-based firms after securing access to inspect and investigate Chinese firms in 2022.
For the second year in a row, there were no enforcement actions related to a company’s disclosure of a material weakness in internal control. In contrast, SEC enforcement actions that referred to an announced restatement and/or material weakness in internal control reached their highest levels in recent years.
Violations of quality control standards were alleged in more than half of the actions involving firm respondents. Nearly 80% of the total monetary penalties in 2023 were assessed on just six defendants. The proportion of individual respondents who were barred increased from 64% in 2022 to 85% in 2023.
Enforcement activity appears to be on course for another record-setting year in 2024.
“This board set a goal to strengthen PCAOB enforcement, and we are doing just that,” said Williams during Wednesday’s press conference. “As of today, the PCAOB has imposed $34 million in penalties this year alone, and it’s only April. We set a record in 2022. We broke that record in 2023, and we are breaking it again today.”
During the height of tax season, billionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency is reportedly aiming to centralize all IRS data around a single portal allowing third parties easier access to taxpayer information, and will begin efforts next week with a “hackathon” to find solutions. DOGE apparently believes it can complete this project in about 30 days.
As first reported by Wired, the goal is the creation of a central application programming interface, or API, a type of software that lets computer programs communicate with each other, enabling direct passage of data. Any software integration depends on API access to function.
While the IRS already makes use of APIs—such as those it maintains for e-Services, Income Verification Express Service and Information Return Intake System—the group’s aim is to create a single super API from which one could access all agency data, enabling users to view and manipulate it in one place. Such a move would also facilitate increased cloud connectivity by third party developers. The project will likely need a private sector partner, and Wired said it would likely be surveillance tech company Palentir, run by fellow billionaire Peter Thiel.
Such a move would also serve to take the dozens of disparate systems housed in on-premises data centers, purposely compartmentalized from the cloud, into this new API. It is unknown whether, or how, the new API would account for the numerous special permissions currently required to access certain types of data. Wired said this has led to security concerns, as the IRS has sensitive data that would be of great value to criminals, and centralizing everything under a single API could disrupt the systems of control the service already has in place to safeguard taxpayer information.
It is unknown how the wave of layoffs at the IRS might affect this project. Of particular note is the fact that the administration has placed 50 senior IRS tech leaders on paid administrative leave. However, overall headcount in the short term seems subject to rapid change, as many of those same IRS employees who were laid off were rehired to help with the tax season load. Nevertheless, last week the IRS shuttered its Office of Civil Rights and Compliance, which had 130 employees, made plans to lay off 20,000 more, and most recently has eyed further staff reductions.
Meanwhile, the IRS and the Department of Homeland Security have reached an agreement to share IRS information on immigrants with DHS’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement unit. Under the memorandum of understanding, ICE will be able to ask the IRS for information such as addresses of people who have been ordered to leave the U.S. IRS officials had previously objected to sharing more extensive information such as Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers, and the disagreement reportedly led to the departure of the IRS’s former acting chief counsel.
Musk, via DOGE, has said little about the IRS on his social media but has criticized the agency for its reliance on contractors as well as the slow pace of its modernization program. Recently, the government froze $1.5 billion in modernization contracts, which will either be canceled or be modified along pay-for-performance lines.
A group of over 100 lawmakers reintroduced legislation in the House to expand and strengthen the Low Income Housing Tax Credit.
Rep. Darin LaHood, R-Illinois, Suzan DelBene, D-Washington, Claudia Tenney, R-New York, Don Beyer, D-Virginia, Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, and Jimmy Panetta, D-California, reintroduced the Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act on Tuesday along with about 100 cosponsors. The bill has been repeatedly reintroduced in Congress since 2016 without winning final passage. A companion bill in the Senate is slated for introduction soon. Last Congress, the Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act had 273 bipartisan cosponsors in the House of Representatives and 34 in the Senate.
The Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act would support the financing of an estimated nearly 2 million new affordable homes across the country by increasing the number of credits allocated to each state by 50% for the next two years and making the temporary 12.5% increase secured in 2018 permanent. The credits have already helped build more than 59,000 additional affordable housing units across the U.S.
The bill would also increase the number of affordable housing projects that can be built using private activity bonds, stabilizing the financing for workforce housing projects built using private activity bonds by decreasing the amount of private activity needed to secure LIHTC funding. Proponents believe that as a result, projects would be able to carry less debt, and more projects would be eligible to receive funding.
“As I travel throughout Illinois’ 16th Congressional District, I frequently hear how the shortage of affordable housing impacts our communities throughout central and northwestern Illinois,”LaHood said in a statement. “To address this growing crisis across the country, Congress must strengthen tools to drive investment into affordable workforce housing and expand housing options for hardworking families nationwide. I am proud to reintroduce the bipartisan Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act alongside Representatives DelBene, Tenney, Beyer, Feenstra, and Panetta to strengthen our communities and support economic development.”
The bill would also improve the LIHTC program to serve communities such as veterans, victims of domestic violence and rural Americans.
“Too many families are struggling to find a safe, affordable place to call home,” said DelBene in a statement. “This is a pervasive problem across America and in Washington. When people have stable housing, it has a ripple effect throughout other aspects of life. They’re better able to support their families and succeed at work. This overwhelmingly bipartisan legislation makes smart, targeted investments to increase affordable housing supply and help meet the needs of growing communities both in Washington and across the country.”
Since it was created in 1986, the LIHTC has helped build or restore more than 3.5 million affordable housing units, nearly 90% of all federally funded affordable housing during that time. Approximately 8 million American households have benefited from the credit, according to proponents, and the economic activity that it generated has supported 5.5 million jobs and generated more than $617 billion in wages.
In the previous Congress, over half the membership of the House cosponsored the AHCIA, including majorities of both Republicans and Democrats. Key provisions from the bill passed the House with overwhelming support as part of the Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024 (H.R.7024): restoring the 12.5% expansion of the LIHTC initially signed into law by President Trump (but allowed to expire in 2021), and easing the private activity bond threshold requirements for accessing four percent credits. This year’s reintroduction of the bill comes as communities across the country struggle with higher housing costs and dwindling supply, according to proponents.
“The overwhelming bipartisan support for the Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act of 2025 underscores the critical need to increase the supply of affordable rental homes,” said Affordable Housing Tax Credit Coalition CEO Emily Cadik in a statement. “We thank the bill’s sponsors for their leadership and the more than 100 bipartisan House cosponsors for supporting this commonsense solution to expand and strengthen the Housing Credit.”
“With our nation’s housing crisis reaching record levels, there is a strong imperative for Congress to act,” said Dudley Benoit, president of the AHTCC board of directors and executive vice president of Walker & Dunlop, in a statement. “The affordable housing crisis affects every state and all types of communities. The Housing Credit has proven to be an effective tool in urban and rural areas alike. Without action, this crisis will continue to spiral, leaving more families unable to find affordable housing in their communities and making it more difficult for those communities to support a workforce.”
Change is not at hand;a question for brokerages;the IRS Simple Installment;and other highlights from our favorite tax bloggers.
Sweet liberty
Tax Vox (https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox): By cutting funding and staff, Congress and President Trump have largely ended the Biden administration’s plans for “transformational change” at the IRS.
The Tax Times (https://www.thetaxtimes.com): The IRS may be facing eradication, but it still had long, long arms when it came to a former Florida resident living in Italy who didn’t file tax returns.
Berkowitz Pollack Brant (https://www.bpbcpa.com/articles-press-releases/): Beneficial ownership information reporting requirements do still apply … to some. A look at the remaining narrow group that still must report.
Eide Bailly (https://www.eidebailly.com/taxblog): Republicans wished they could focus on extending the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act before this year runs out. Then came “Liberation Day.”
The end’s in sight
Breaking through the noise
Illogical yet revolutionary
Current Federal Tax Developments (https://www.currentfederaltaxdevelopments.com/): The Massachusetts Appeals Court’s decision in Craig H. Welch & Another vs. Commissioner of Revenue provides guidance for navigating the state’s income tax for non-residents, particularly concerning capital gains from the sale of stock.
Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (https://itep.org/category/blog/): Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle L. Parker’s proposal to cut the city’s business income and receipts tax, based off the Philadelphia Tax Reform Commission’s recommendation, is “illogical and imprudent.”
Tax Foundation (https://taxfoundation.org/blog): South Carolina lawmakers and their governor intend to have the state join the flat tax revolution. “Unfortunately, while the plan would implement a low, flat rate that is highly competitive with other states’ systems, it yields a significant tax increase for many households that have historically had very little liability.”