Skip to main content

EY has banned as auditor in Germany.

 

EY logo
EY has been banned from tak­ing on any new lis­ted audit cli­ents in Ger­many for two years over fail­ures in its work for col­lapsed pay­ments group Wir­e­card.

In its rul­ing, the coun­try’s audit watch­dog, Apas, also announced a fine of €500,000 for EY and pen­al­ties of between €23,000 and €300,000 for each of five cur­rent and former employ­ees of the Big Four firm.

Apas said that it «con­sidered viol­a­tions of pro­fes­sional duties dur­ing the audits of Wir­e­card and Wir­e­card Bank from 2016 to 2018 as proven», without giv­ing fur­ther details of the viol­a­tions.

Accord­ing to people famil­iar with the reg­u­lator’s think­ing, there has been no decision on whether EY acted with intent or simple neg­li­gence, a key ques­tion in decid­ing the firm’s crim­inal and civil liab­il­it­ies.

«This pen­alty sends a clear mes­sage,» he added.

Klaus-Peter Nau­mann, chair of Ger­many’s Insti­tute of Pub­lic Aud­it­ors IDW, said: «The two-year ban is quite a severe sanc­tion which we have not seen before in Ger­many».

In the wake of the Wir­e­card scan­dal, Ger­many increased liab­il­it­ies for all aud­it­ors and increased its reg­u­la­tion of the industry. Apas and Ger­man fin­an­cial watch­dog BaFin has been given more powers, and the gov­ern­ment has doubled the max­imum pen­alty for pro­fes­sional mis­con­duct to €1mn.

After Wir­e­card’s col­lapse in 2020, Apas filed a crim­inal com­plaint against sev­eral EY audit part­ners, cit­ing evid­ence that the firm might have know­ingly issued fac­tu­ally incor­rect audit opin­ions. Moreover, it had received unqual­i­fied audits from EY for over a dec­ade.

EY Ger­many said that it would exam­ine the Apas decision «care­fully» but had not yet received the detailed rul­ing. «We regret that the col­lus­ive fraud at Wir­e­card was not dis­covered sooner, and we have learned import­ant les­sons from this mat­ter,» the firm said, adding that it had taken «sig­ni­fic­ant action» to improve its audit qual­ity and risk man­age­ment.

www.sba.tax

Comments

Cloud Bookkeeping

HS2 cost cuts new routes and add delays.

 Trans­port depart­ment offi­cials have begun work on «Project Sil­ver­light» sug­gest­ing the high­speed rail scheme might face four addi­tional years of delay. The planned High Speed 2 rail line faces fur­ther delays of up to four years and more cuts to the project under plans being drawn up by min­is­ters to rein in its bal­loon­ing costs. The extra delays to the coun­try’s biggest infra­struc­ture project would mean that it would not be com­pleted until as late as 2045 — 12 years after ori­gin­ally planned. «This is a func­tion of infla­tion; we are hav­ing to find huge sav­ings because the cost of everything the depart­ment is already doing will have become so much more expens­ive by then,» said one gov­ern­ment offi­cial. In Octo­ber, the FT repor­ted that the Treas­ury had asked HS2’s man­age­ment team to identify poten­tial cuts or «scope reduc­tions» to the high-speed line. Trans­port depart­ment offi­cials have sub­sequently begun work on Project Sil­ver­light aimed at fi...

Doubt on CS's collateral.

  Credit Suisse provided an emergency $140mn loan to Greensill Capital based partly on invoices to companies that deny ever doing the business stated on the documents. The Swiss bank provided the loan in October 2020, less than five months before the collapse of Greensill, a supply chain finance firm that counted former British prime minister David Cameron as a senior adviser. Invoices issued by metals magnate Sanjeev Gupta’s Liberty Commodities and sold to Greensill formed part of the collateral for the loan, according to documents seen by the Financial Times and people familiar with the transaction. Yet several of the parties named on the invoices have told the FT they did no business with Liberty. GFG has consistently denied any wrongdoing. Credit Suisse’s loan had a clause dictating that the collateral value had to be equal to or greater than the $140mn borrowed. The terms of the debt agreement only allowed invoices on Green-sill’s balance sheet to count towards this tally if t...

Small business will be excluded from fraud law.

  Min­is­ters are plan­ning to exclude small busi­nesses from anti-fraud legis­la­tion by nar­row­ing the scope of a crim­inal offence tar­get­ing com­pan­ies that fail to pre­vent eco­nomic crimes. MPs and anti-cor­rup­tion cam­paign­ers had hoped the gov­ern­ment would seek to amend the eco­nomic crime and cor­por­ate trans­par­ency bill to ensure the new offence covered all com­pan­ies. The plans to limit the scope of the amend­ments will also dis­ap­point those who had hoped the legis­la­tion would remove key hurdles to the pro­sec­u­tion of white-col­lar crime. A new «fail­ure to pre­vent» offence for fraud would bring it in line with exist­ing sim­ilar cor­por­ate offences for bribery and tax eva­sion. At present, pro­sec­utors need only prove that organ­isa­tions lacked «reas­on­able» or «adequate» con­trols to pur­sue the offence in bribery and tax eva­sion cases. «It would be much more sens­ible for the gov­ern­ment to provide strong guid­ance for SMEs on what these pro­ce...