ACCOUNTING FIRMS ACCUSED BY SEC OF FAILURE TO PRODUCE AUDIT WORK PAPERS

　
FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C., Dec. 3, 2012 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today began administrative proceedings against the China affiliates of each of the Big Four accounting firms and another large U.S. accounting firm for refusing to produce audit work papers and other documents related to China-based companies under investigation by the SEC for potential accounting fraud against U.S. investors.

The SEC charged the following firms with violating the Securities Exchange Act and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires foreign public accounting firms to provide the SEC upon request with audit work papers involving any company trading on U.S. markets:
BDO China Dahua Co. Ltd
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Certified Public Accountants Ltd
Ernst & Young Hua Ming LLP
KPMG Huazhen (Special General Partnership)
PricewaterhouseCoopers Zhong Tian CPAs Limited
According to the SEC’s order instituting the proceedings, SEC investigators have been making efforts for the past several months to obtain documents from these firms. The audit materials are being sought as part of SEC investigations into potential wrongdoing by nine China-based companies whose securities are publicly traded in the U.S. The audit firms have refused to cooperate in the investigations.

"Only with access to work papers of foreign public accounting firms can the SEC test the quality of the underlying audits and protect investors from the dangers of accounting fraud," said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. "Firms that conduct audits knowing they cannot comply with laws requiring access to these work papers face serious sanctions."

An administrative law judge will schedule a hearing and determine the appropriate remedial sanction against the firms. The order requires the administrative law judge to issue an initial decision no later than 300 days from the date of service of the order.

The SEC has launched an initiative to address concerns arising from reverse mergers and foreign issuers. Through the work of a Cross Border Working Group, the agency has deregistered the securities of nearly 50 companies and filed fraud cases against more than 40 foreign issuers and executives. The SEC’s Enforcement Division has taken a series of actions against China-based audit firms. Earlier this year, the SEC announced an enforcement action against Shanghai-based Deloitte Touche Tomatsu for refusing to produce documents for an SEC investigation into one of its China-based clients. That proceeding is ongoing. The SEC previously filed a subpoena enforcement action in federal court against the firm for failing to produce documents in response to a subpoena pertaining to its longtime client Longtop Financial Technologies Limited. In the separate administrative proceeding against Longtop, an administrative law judge found that Longtop was delinquent in its reporting obligations and ordered Longtop’s securities registration to be revoked.

"U.S. investors should be able to rely on the quality of audited financial statements," said Kara Brockmeyer, co-head of the SEC’s Cross Border Working Group. "Our Working Group’s actions demonstrate how the SEC is proactively identifying emerging risks to protect U.S. investors from accounting fraud."

This enforcement action was coordinated by the Cross Border Working Group and involved investigative teams in SEC offices in Washington D.C., Boston, New York, Fort Worth, and Los Angeles.

SEC BRINGS ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST SHANGHAI-BASED DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMATSU CPA LTD.

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C., May 9, 2012 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced an enforcement action against Shanghai-based Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu CPA Ltd. for its refusal to provide the agency with audit work papers related to a China-based company under investigation for potential accounting fraud against U.S. investors.

According to the SEC’s order instituting administrative proceedings against D&T Shanghai, the agency has been making extensive efforts for more than two years to obtain documents related to the firm’s work for the company, which issues U.S. securities registered with the SEC. The firm is charged with violating the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires foreign public accounting firms to provide audit work papers concerning U.S. issuers to the SEC upon request. D&T Shanghai has nonetheless failed to provide the documents, citing Chinese law as the reason for its refusal.

“As a voluntarily registered U.S. public accounting firm, D&T Shanghai cannot benefit from the financial and reputational rewards that come with auditing U.S. issuers without also meeting its U.S. legal obligations,” said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.  “Foreign firms auditing U.S. issuers should not be permitted to shield themselves from regulatory scrutiny to the detriment of U.S. investors.”
Scott Friestad, Associate Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, added, “Without access to work papers of foreign public accounting firms, our investigators are unable to test the quality of the underlying audits and fulfill our responsibilities to investors.”

In a separate matter last year, the SEC filed a subpoena enforcement action against D&T Shanghai in federal court after the firm failed to produce documents in response to a subpoena related to an SEC investigation into possible fraud by one of its longtime clients, Longtop Financial Technologies Limited. The SEC later filed charges against Longtop for alleged reporting failures.

According to the SEC’s order in this latest enforcement action, D&T Shanghai is a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). In April 2010, SEC staff began seeking D&T Shanghai’s audit work papers related to its independent audit work for the client involved in an SEC investigation. The SEC served Deloitte LLP, the U.S. member firm, with a subpoena requesting various related documents. Counsel for Deloitte LLP informed the staff that the U.S. firm did not perform any audit work for the client and therefore did not possess the documents related to the subpoena.

According to the SEC’s order, in the SEC staff’s continuing quest for the audit work papers in D&T Shanghai’s possession, they were later informed by counsel for Deloitte’s global firm that the agency’s request for audit work papers had been specifically communicated to D&T Shanghai. Subsequently, the staff served D&T Shanghai with a request through Deloitte LLP for the audit work papers pursuant to Section 106 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. D&T Shanghai would not produce the relevant audit work papers because of its interpretation that it is prevented from doing so by Chinese law. SEC staff also has sought to obtain the relevant audit work papers through international sharing mechanisms, yet these efforts have been unsuccessful.

This is the first time the Commission has brought an enforcement action against a foreign audit firm failing to comply with a Section 106 request.

In the SEC’s order, the Enforcement Division alleges that D&T Shanghai willfully violated the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by failing to provide the SEC with the audit work papers. The administrative proceeding will be assigned to an Administrative Law Judge at the agency. The judge would determine the appropriate remedial sanctions if the judge finds in favor of the SEC staff.

SEC COMMISSIONER GALLAGHER SPEAKS AT OPEN MEETING ON PUBLIC COMPANY ACCOUNTING OVERSIGHT BOARD'S PROPOSED 2012 BUDGET

The following excerpt is from the SEC website:

"Thank you, Chairman Schapiro. I would like to echo the gratitude already expressed by my fellow commissioners to the staffs of the PCAOB and SEC for their hard work, and I would also like to thank Chairman Doty and his fellow board members for being here today.

As has been noted, section 109(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that the PCAOB’s budget be approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

It would have been possible to approve the Board’s annual budget and accounting support fee in a non-public process, but I believe it is important that the Commission exercise its approval authority in the uniquely public manner that an open meeting affords us. Indeed, as Chairman Doty recognized, the PCAOB support fees, like many other regulatory fees, are ultimately paid by investors and so this is highly important. I want to thank Chairman Schapiro for finding time on our very busy calendar to hold this meeting.

Congress provided that the Board should be funded primarily through an accounting support fee (Sec. 109(c)(1)). That means the appropriations process by which the Congress oversees the SEC and many other Government departments and agencies does not apply to the Board’s accounting support fee, and so has no potential to constrain the Board’s budget or guide the various activities it funds. The role Congress has assigned to the Commission, then, is essentially to stand in the Congress’s stead in ensuring that the Board raises and spends its funds in the best interest of the investing public and, thereby, that of accounting profession as a whole.

Having reached the end of its review process for the PCAOB’s 2012 budget, the Commission’s staff, represented this morning by the Office of the Chief Accountant, recommends that the Commission approve the Board’s budget – and I am happy to play my part in doing so.

But, consistent with our responsibility, I want to join my colleagues in raising certain questions, which I’ll direct to Jim Kroeker, our Chief Accountant, and Jim Doty, the Board’s Chairman, as appropriate."

FORMER CEO AGREES TO RETURN BONUS MONEY RECEIVED WHILE HIS COMPANY WAS COOKING THE BOOKS

(RARE AND/OR WELL DONE!) The following excerpt is from the SEC website: “Washington, D.C., Nov. 15, 2011 –The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that the former chief executive officer and chairman of CSK Auto Corporation has agreed to return $2.8 million in bonus compensation and stock profits that he received while the company was committing accounting fraud. Maynard L. Jenkins of Scottsdale, Ariz., was not personally charged by the SEC for the company’s misconduct, however he is still required under Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) to reimburse CSK Auto for incentive-based compensation and stock sale profits that he received during the company’s fraudulent period. The SEC filed court papers against Jenkins in July 2009 saying he violated the SOX “clawback” provision by failing to reimburse the company. It marked the agency’s first SOX clawback case against an individual who was not alleged to have otherwise violated the securities laws. "CEOs should know that they can be deprived of bonuses or stock profits they received while accounting fraud was occurring on their watch," said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement. Rosalind Tyson, Director of the SEC’s Los Angeles Regional Office, added, “Jenkins received incentive-based pay while CSK Auto was fraudulently overstating its income to shareholders. His bonuses and stock profits are now being rightfully returned to the company for the benefit of the shareholders.” The settlement with Jenkins is subject to court approval. Jenkins has agreed to reimburse $2,796,467 to O’Reilly Automotive Inc., which has since acquired CSK Auto. The SEC previously charged four former CSK Auto executives who perpetrated the accounting fraud, and separately charged the company for filing false financial statements for fiscal years 2002 to 2004. The company settled the charges, and the litigation against three of the former executives is continuing (CSK’s former chief operating officer has since died). The U.S. Department of Justice brought a criminal indictment against those same executives, who have pleaded guilty to various charges. CSK Auto recently entered into a non-prosecution agreement with the DOJ in which it agreed to pay a $20.9 million penalty. The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Dabney O’Riordan, Robert Conrrad, Rhoda Chang, Spencer Bendell, and Lorraine Echavarria in the Los Angeles Regional Office. The litigation effort was led by Donald Searles. The SEC thanks the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service, and U.S. Postal Service for their substantial assistance in the investigation.”

SEC GETS NEARLY 180 MILLION BACK FOR INVESTORS

The SEC has forced Millennium Partners to return 178 million dollars to investors. Unfortunately this distribution of funds fraudulently obtained by Millennium was from an enforcement action started way back in 2005. Can the wheels of justice turn any more slowly when it comes to financial crimes? The following is an excerpt of the action taken by the SEC and posted on their government web site:

“Washington, D.C., May 21, 2010 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced the completion of a distribution of more than $178 million to investors affected by improper market timing by Millennium Partners and its related entities. The Millennium Fair Fund distributions went to more than 1,000 mutual funds and annuities.

“The total distribution of more than $178 million in this case further demonstrates the SEC’s commitment to holding wrongdoers accountable and recovering funds for injured investors from illegal activity,” said George Canellos, Director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 gave the SEC authority to increase the amount of money returned to injured investors by allowing civil financial penalties to be included in distributions. Prior to Sarbanes-Oxley, only ill-gotten gains could be returned to investors.

In 2005, the SEC brought an enforcement action charging Millennium Partners, L.P., Millennium Management, L.L.C., Millennium International Management, L.L.C., and several individuals with devising and carrying out a fraudulent scheme to avoid detection and circumvent restrictions that mutual funds imposed on market timing. The Millennium Fair Fund distribution fully reimburses the recipient mutual funds and annuities for their injury from the market timing. Pursuant to the Plan of Distribution, any remaining funds will be sent to the U.S. Treasury."

It appears that in this case the Sarbanes-Oxley Act that was mentioned so prevalently in the press when it was passed in 2002, made a difference in regards to the amount of the recovery for investors. Under Sarbanes-Oxley civil financial penalties were increased which allows for increased compensation for the parties who were harmed by criminal activities.