Blake Oliver

In a stunning courtroom moment, auditing giant BDO argued that its own audit opinions were too generic to be relied upon by investors. This shocking admission underscores a disturbing trend: the rapid erosion of trust in the value of audits.

In this eye-opening episode of The Accounting Podcast, we sit down with accounting professor Ed Ketz to confront the harsh realities facing the auditing profession amidst a crisis of confidence. How have the limitations of audit opinions, the pass/fail nature of audits, and high-profile failures contributed to this erosion of trust? What does the alarmingly high rate of audit deficiencies reveal about the state of the profession? Can the value of audits be restored, or are we facing a fundamental reckoning?

The Limitations of Audit Opinions

At the heart of the trust crisis lies a troubling question: How much value do audit opinions provide investors? In the AmTrust case, BDO made a jaw-dropping argument that strikes at the core of the audit’s purpose. As Prof. Ketz explains:

“Essentially, they said that the audit opinion is just too general. It cannot be refined or dug down into very far, and therefore, it really couldn’t have value. Therefore, they wanted the case dismissed. They said it was not actionable because it didn’t say anything, which is an incredible statement for an accounting firm. They’re basically trying to talk themselves out of a business.”

This stunning admission from an audit firm raises doubts about the usefulness of opinions in their current form. If the auditors themselves disclaim the value of their work, how can investors be expected to rely on it?

The Pass/Fail Problem

The binary pass/fail system of audits has also come under scrutiny as a contributing factor to the erosion of trust. As I pointed out: “When we have this pass/fail system where the bar is seemingly very, very low, and very few companies ever actually fail an audit, we have this system that just doesn’t create much value anymore for investors. If we want the audit to have value and the CPA to be valuable, maybe we should consider changing how we do business to create value for investors.”

The low bar for receiving an unqualified or “pass” opinion fails to provide meaningful information to investors. A more nuanced and informative reporting model is needed for audits to regain trust.

However, Prof. Ketz argues that despite the limitations of the pass/fail model, research suggests audits still provide valuable signals to the market. Studies have found that going concern opinions offer predictive power above and beyond financial ratios alone. UK firms that continued to be audited even when no longer required enjoyed higher credit ratings. So, while the current system is flawed, Ketz cautions against dismissing the value of audits entirely.

Rampant Deficiencies

Compounding the crisis of confidence is the staggering rate of audit deficiencies revealed by regulatory inspections. The PCAOB’s findings of deficiencies in over 40% of audits inspected in 2022 paint a disturbing picture of a profession struggling to uphold basic standards, further eroding public trust.

Can investors trust any audit opinions if 40% of audits are so deficient that they shouldn’t have been relied upon? These findings underscore the need for the profession to get its house in order if it hopes to restore confidence.

High-Profile Failures

Nothing has done more damage to the credibility of audits than the litany of high-profile failures in recent years. From Wirecard to Tingo to Colonial Bank, each scandal has chipped away at public confidence, raising doubts about auditors’ ability to fulfill their essential role.

The Colonial Bank case, in particular, stands out as a damning indictment. As Prof. Ketz notes:

“In that case, PwC was sued by the FDIC, and the FDIC refused to settle the case. Reading Barbara Rothstein, the judge’s opinion, you can see her chastisement. But more to the point, you can understand the over $600 million judgment she levied against PwC.”

Prof. Ketz notes that in addition to regulatory penalties, the tort system plays a vital role in holding auditors accountable. He points to the Colonial Bank case, where PwC faced a $600 million judgment, as evidence that the threat of costly lawsuits can be a powerful deterrent against shoddy audits.

However, such massive failures and the lack of detailed information in audit reports that could help investors understand what went wrong have still affected the profession’s standing.

A Case for Value?

Amid the crisis, it’s crucial to examine the evidence that audits, despite their flaws, still provide value to investors. Research shows that audit opinions improve the prediction of business failures, and data on higher credit ratings for audited UK firms suggest audits aren’t entirely without merit.

However, while this research shouldn’t be ignored, it can’t erase the deep scars on credibility left by failures and deficiencies. While not baseless, the case for audit value faces an uphill battle in the current climate.

Confronting Hard Truths

The erosion of audit trust is not a hypothetical concern – it’s a full-blown crisis threatening the profession’s foundation. Limitations of opinions, binary results, rampant deficiencies, and high-profile failures have all taken a staggering toll.

Rebuilding this lost trust will require a fundamental rethinking of audits conducted and communicated. Band-aid solutions won’t suffice in the face of such deep-rooted problems. The profession must confront hard truths, embrace bold reforms, or risk irrelevance.

This is a conversation the accounting world can’t afford to ignore. Tune in to the full episode to hear more of Prof. Ketz’s insights and join us in grappling with these critical challenges. The future of auditing hangs in the balance.