Connect with us

Accounting

PCAOB ramps up enforcement as it faces possible shutdown

Published

on

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board increased its enforcement activity in 2024 to its highest level since 2017, according to a new report, even as the PCAOB faces the prospect of perhaps being absorbed in the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The report, released Wednesday by Cornerstone Research, found that monetary penalties levied by the PCAOB reached their highest for the third consecutive year. The report also compares PCAOB enforcement activity under President Biden to President Trump’s first term.

The report found the PCAOB publicly disclosed 51 total enforcement actions, including 40 actions involving the performance of an audit. Most of these actions came in the first half of the year, with only 10 auditing actions finalized after the Supreme Court ruled against the use of administrative law judges in SEC v. Jarkesy. At $35.7 million, the number of total monetary penalties in 2024 marked a 78% increase over 2023 and represented nearly 40% of all monetary penalties imposed since the PCAOB’s inception.

“The PCAOB continued aggressive enforcement in 2024, finalizing 30 auditing actions in the first half of 2024, more than triple the number of actions finalized in the first half of 2023,” said Jean-Philippe Poissant, one of the report’s co-authors and co-head of Cornerstone Research’s accounting practice, in a statement. “In one in five auditing actions, the PCAOB alleged violations of not only auditing standards, but quality control standards and ethics and independence, as well.”

The report compares PCAOB enforcement under the Biden administration, and found that under the Biden administration, the PCAOB finalized 160 total actions, including 124 auditing actions, compared to 126 and 101, respectively, under the Trump administration. The total value of the monetary penalties imposed were nearly seven times higher during the Biden administration, reaching approximately $68 million, compared to just over $10 million during the first Trump administration.

“The type of respondents in enforcement actions shifted from a majority of individual respondents during the Trump administration to a near even split between individual and firm respondents during the Biden administration,” said Russell Molter, a principal at Cornerstone Research and report coauthor, in a statement. “Additionally, the percentage of respondents fined in Auditing Actions climbed from a little over half (59%) to nearly all respondents (94%).”

With 2024 marking the 20th year since the PCAOB finalized its first enforcement action, the report also analyzed the agency’s enforcement results in the past two decades. In these 20 years, the PCAOB finalized 487 total actions involving 675 respondents, the majority of which (344) were individuals. The PCAOB has imposed $94 million in monetary penalties since its inception.

Changes at the PCAOB and SEC

The report’s release coincides with new concerns over the future of the PCAOB under the Trump administration, which has been laying off thousands of federal employees as part of a cost-cutting initiative, while moving to all but close down agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the U.S. Agency for International Development. The aggressive work of the PCAOB has occurred under PCAOB chair Erica Williams who was brought in by former SEC chair Gary Gensler with a mandate to get tougher on auditing firms and ramp up inspections, enforcement and standard-setting. The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 planning document that was circulated prior to Trump’s election called for the PCAOB to be abolished, along with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and said their regulatory functions should be absorbed into the SEC.

Trump has nominated Paul Atkins, a former SEC commissioner who was previously critical of the PCAOB, as the next chair of the SEC. That could prompt another wave of turnovers at the board, as occurred during the previous Trump administration and the Biden administration.

“As it relates to the PCAOB and the SEC, I think there’s been a lot of projection, a lot of hypotheses or predictions that the PCAOB would be folded into the SEC based upon prior views of the administration or Chairman Atkins,” said Andrew Gragnani, president of CBIZ CPAs P.C. “That leads to a lot of questions regarding the nature and timing of inspections, the nature and timing of funding, etc. It does not change the need to continue to perform high-quality audits. We’re not planning that there will be wholesale changes to the inspection process. I don’t think that’s a healthy way to look at how this will all play out, but there are changes that people have projected that would impact firms. I think the primary one that people are focused on with the administration is the view that there’ll be less enforcement activity, so that obviously would be one that would be most significant to the firms, given that the PCAOB, under Chairman Williams, has been very active in their enforcement against firms for inspections. That might be the most meaningful change if there was to be this folding of the PCAOB into the SEC. That’s the one major expectation from the administration that has been anticipated.”

Dan Goelzer, one of the original members of the PCAOB and later an acting chair, recently told Accounting Today that a change in the composition of the board is likely.

“I suppose it’s probably pretty likely that there will be maybe a complete change in the membership of the board,” said Dan Goelzer, one of the original members of the PCAOB and later an acting chair. “That happened both of the last times around when there was a change in administration. I don’t really say that with any pleasure. I’d rather see a less political PCAOB. But as a practical matter, I certainly think the new SEC would look to change the chair of the PCAOB — I suppose that’s quite likely at least — and some of the other board members as well.”

There may be a restructuring of the PCAOB as well, along with its possible absorption into the SEC. “The other big picture issue is whether broad efforts to restructure or streamline the government are going to include the idea of folding the PCAOB into the SEC,” said Goelzer. “That came up during the prior Trump administration and was actually proposed in one of Trump’s budgets, and it’s in the Heritage Foundation report. I suspect that will come up as a discussion item, at least. Whether it would actually make it through Congress is far from clear.”

The SEC has overhauled the membership of the PCAOB under Gensler, and during the Trump administration under former SEC chair Jay Clayton, but there were some differences. 

“I do think there’s a distinguishing factor with Jay Clayton in that most, if not all, of the PCAOB board members at that time were serving on expired terms, which was different from four years later, when Gary Gensler was the chair,” said Center for Audit Quality CEO Julie Bell Lindsay. 

She believes effective oversight of the audit profession requires impartiality without political considerations. “The pendulum swinging back and forth every four years is not good,” said Bell Lindsay. “It’s not conducive for long-term audit quality. It’s not conducive to market efficiency and to stability of the capital markets. We would like to avoid the pendulum swinging every four years.”

She pointed out that both the SEC and the PCAOB have enforcement authority over auditors.

“With respect to enforcement over the public company audit profession, there are two cops on the beat,” said Bell Lindsay. “Both the PCAOB and the SEC have enforcement authority when it comes to public company auditors. Where there are bad actors, bad actors need to be held to account. The pendulum has swung pretty far in one direction, and there have been some concerns about the impact of the current enforcement thinking when it comes to retention of talent in the audit profession. This is not a profession that is necessarily bursting at the seams with new talent coming in, so the impact on talent and on public company audit firms wanting to stay in the business of auditing public companies. I think it’s really important to remember that at least 75% of the mid to small cap companies in the U.S. are serviced by mid to small size public company audit firms. A huge swath of the marketplace is serviced by small to mid sized public company auditors, and the impact that standard-setting, enforcement, etc can have on those firms can have unintended consequences.”

Goelzer is seeing similar concerns expressed at small auditing firms. “I’ve certainly heard people say that smaller firms are reconsidering whether they want to be engaged in public company auditing,” he said. “If you only have a handful of public company clients, you look at these penalties and the cost of complying with new auditing standards and regulations, firms may well conclude that they’ll simply leave this space and concentrate on private company auditing or other kinds of services for clients that has a spillover effect than on smaller public companies, which have less auditor choice, and probably increased audit fees as a result.”

The PCAOB board composition is likely to change at the very least. “If you think back to the previous administration, there was a complete overhaul of the board last time around, and we expect that there will be a similar reaction to the regime change,” said Jackson Johnson, president of Johnson Global Advisory, a Washington, D.C.-based firm that helps auditing firms navigate the PCAOB inspection process. “I do expect that the majority of the board will be replaced.”

He expects to see the SEC and the PCAOB taking a less aggressive stance and levying fewer penalties. “The current board’s priorities were to use enforcement as a regulatory tool, more standards and more enforcement,” said Johnson. “The next board will be quite different. The next board will be a more collaborative mindset with firms, more information gathering with stakeholders, more economic analysis to inform standard setting, more robust economic analysis to inform standard setting.”

Continue Reading

Accounting

Accounting firms seeing increased profits

Published

on

Accounting firms are reporting bigger profits and more clients, according to a new report.

The report, released Monday by Xero, found that nearly three-quarters (73%) of firms reported increased profits over the past year and 56% added new clients thanks to operational efficiency and expanded service offerings.

Some 85% of firms now offer client advisory services, a big spike from 41% in 2023, indicating a strategic shift toward delivering forward-looking financial guidance that clients increasingly expect.

AI adoption is also reshaping the profession, with 80% of firms confident it will positively affect their practice. Currently, the most common use cases for AI include: delivering faster and more responsive client services (33%), enhancing accuracy by reducing bookkeeping and accounting errors (33%), and streamlining workflows through the automation of routine tasks (32%).

“The widespread adoption of AI has been a turning point for the accounting profession, giving accountants an opportunity to scale their impact and take on a more strategic advisory role,” said Ben Richmond, managing director, North America, at Xero, in a statement. “The real value lies not just in working more efficiently, but working smarter, freeing up time to elevate the human element of the profession and in turn, strengthen client relationships.”

Some of the main challenges faced by firms include economic uncertainty (38%), mastering AI (36%) and rising client expectations for strategic advice (35%). 

While 85% of firms have embraced cloud platforms, a sizable number still lag behind, missing out on benefits such as easier data access from anywhere (40%) and enhanced security (36%).

Continue Reading

Accounting

Private equity is investing in accounting: What does that mean for the future of the business?

Published

on

Private equity firms have bought five of the top 26 accounting firms in the past three years as they mount a concerted strategy to reshape the industry. 

The trend should not come as a surprise. It’s one we’ve seen play out in several industries from health care to insurance, where a combination of low-risk, recurring revenue, scalability and an aging population of owners create a target-rich environment. For small to midsized accounting firms, the trend is exacerbated by a technological revolution that’s truly transforming the way accounting work is done, and a growing talent crisis that is threatening tried-and-true business models.

How will this type of consolidation affect the accounting business, and what do firms and their clients need to be on the lookout for as the marketplace evolves?

Assessing the opportunity… and the risk

First and foremost, accounting firm owners need to be aware of just how desirable they are right now. While there has been some buzz in the industry about the growing presence of private equity firms, most of the activity to date has focused on larger, privately held firms. In fact, when we recently asked tax professionals about their exposure to private equity funding in our 2025 State of Tax Professionals Report, we found that just 5% of firms have actually inked a deal and only 11% said they are planning to look, or are currently looking, for a deal with a private equity firm. Another 8% said they are open to discussion. On the one hand, that’s almost a quarter of firms feeling open to private equity investments in some way. But the lion’s share of respondents —  87% — said they were not interested.

Recent private equity deal volume suggests that the holdouts might change their minds when they have a real offer on the table. According to S&P Global, private equity and venture capital-backed deal value in the accounting, auditing and taxation services sector reached more than $6.3 billion in 2024, the highest level since 2015, and the trend shows no signs of slowing. Firm owners would be wise to start watching this trend to see how it might affect their businesses — whether they are interested in selling or not.

Focus on tech and efficiencies of scale

The reason this trend is so important to everyone in the industry right now is that the private equity firms entering this space are not trying to become accountants. They are looking for profitable exits. And they will do that by seizing on a critical inflection point in the industry that’s making it possible to scale accounting firms more rapidly than ever before by leveraging technology to deliver a much wider range of services at a much lower cost. So, whether your firm is interested in partnering with private equity or dead set on going it alone, the hyperscaling that’s happening throughout the industry will affect you one way or another.

Private equity thrives in fragmented businesses where the ability to roll up companies with complementary skill sets and specialized services creates an outsized growth opportunity. Andrew Dodson, managing partner at Parthenon Capital, recently commented after his firm took a stake in the tax and advisory firm Cherry Bekaert, “We think that for firms to thrive, they need to make investments in people and technology, and, obviously, regulatory adherence, to really differentiate themselves in the market. And that’s going to require scale and capital to do it. That’s what gets us excited.”

Over time, this could reshape the industry’s market dynamics by creating the accounting firm equivalent of the Traveling Wilburys — supergroups capable of delivering a wide range of specialized services that smaller, more narrowly focused firms could never previously deliver. It could also put downward pressure on pricing as these larger, platform-style firms start finding economies of scale to deliver services more cost-effectively.

The technology factor

The great equalizer in all of this is technology. Consistently, when I speak to tax professionals actively working in the market today, their top priorities are increased efficiency, growth and talent. Firms recognize they need to streamline workflows and processes through more effective use of technology, and they are investing heavily in AI, automation and data analytics capabilities to do that. Private equity firms, of course, are also investing in tech as they assemble their tax and accounting dream teams, in many cases raising the bar for the industry.

The question is: Can independent firms leverage technology fast enough to keep up with their deep-pocketed competition?

Many firms believe they can, with some even going so far as to publicly declare their independence.  Regardless of the path small to midsized firms take to get there, technology-enabled growth is going to play a key role in the future of the industry. Market dynamics that have been unfolding for the last decade have been accelerated with the introduction of serious investors, and everyone in the industry — large and small — is going to need to up their games to stay competitive.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Trump tax bill would help the richest, hurt the poorest, CBO says

Published

on

The House-passed version of President Donald Trump’s massive tax and spending bill would deliver a financial blow to the poorest Americans but be a boon for higher-income households, according to a new analysis from the Congressional Budget Office.

The bottom 10% of households would lose an average of about $1,600 in resources per year, amounting to a 3.9% cut in their income, according to the analysis released Thursday. Those decreases are largely attributable to cuts in the Medicaid health insurance program and food aid through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

Households in the highest 10% of incomes would see an average $12,000 boost in resources, amounting to a 2.3% increase in their incomes. Those increases are mainly attributable to reductions in taxes owed, according to the report from the nonpartisan CBO.

Households in the middle of the income distribution would see an increase in resources of $500 to $1,000, or between 0.5% and 0.8% of their income. 

The projections are based on the version of the tax legislation that House Republicans passed last month, which includes much of Trump’s economic agenda. The bill would extend tax cuts passed under Trump in 2017 otherwise due to expire at the end of the year and create several new tax breaks. It also imposes new changes to the Medicaid and SNAP programs in an effort to cut spending.

Overall, the legislation would add $2.4 trillion to US deficits over the next 10 years, not accounting for dynamic effects, the CBO previously forecast.

The Senate is considering changes to the legislation including efforts by some Republican senators to scale back cuts to Medicaid.

The projected loss of safety-net resources for low-income families come against the backdrop of higher tariffs, which economists have warned would also disproportionately impact lower-income families. While recent inflation data has shown limited impact from the import duties so far, low-income families tend to spend a larger portion of their income on necessities, such as food, so price increases hit them harder.

The House-passed bill requires that able-bodied individuals without dependents document at least 80 hours of “community engagement” a month, including working a job or participating in an educational program to qualify for Medicaid. It also includes increased costs for health care for enrollees, among other provisions.

More older adults also would have to prove they are working to continue to receive SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps. The legislation helps pay for tax cuts by raising the age for which able bodied adults must work to receive benefits to 64, up from 54. Under the current law, some parents with dependent children under age 18 are exempt from work requirements, but the bill lowers the age for the exemption for dependent children to 7 years old. 

The legislation also shifts a portion of the cost for federal food aid onto state governments.

CBO previously estimated that the expanded work requirements on SNAP would reduce participation in the program by roughly 3.2 million people, and more could lose or face a reduction in benefits due to other changes to the program. A separate analysis from the organization found that 7.8 million people would lose health insurance because of the changes to Medicaid.

Continue Reading

Trending