Rotation of auditors and its side effects

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs, India & International - Corporate updates | 0

The Companies Act, 2013, has introduced important audit reforms. One of the important reforms is rotation of the auditor.

Important provisions under this reform

  • All listed companies; unlisted public limited companies having paid-up share capital of Rs 10 crore or more; all private limited companies having paid-up share capital of Rs 20 crore or more, and all companies having public borrowings from financial institutions, banks or public deposit of Rs 50 crore or more are required to rotate their auditor.
  • An individual cannot continue as an auditor for more than one term of five years and an audit firm cannot continue as an auditor for more than two terms of five years
  • The cooling off period is five years.
  • The provision must be complied by April 1, 2017.

Benefits of this reform

  • This is expected to improve audit quality, resulting in improved financial reporting.
  • Would give local auditors more leverage, if implemented properly along with some other measures.

Local auditors v/s the Big Four

  • Local firms dominate the Indian audit market. However, the presence of the Big Four audit firms (Deloitte, PWC, E&Y and KPMG) cannot be ignored.
  • The Big Four are the largest professional service network in the world. They provide audit, assurance, tax, consulting, advisory, actuarial, corporate finance and advisory services. In India, they cannot provide audit services directly.
    • It is alleged that they flout rules while providing audit and assurance services. Many foreign investors put a condition that the auditor of their choice should be appointed. This helps the Big Four audit firms to grow in India.
    • There is an apprehension that many companies that get their accounts audited by local firms will appoint one of the Big Four or another large international professional service network as auditors.
    • Hence, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs had notified the constitution of a three-member expert group to look into the complaint that the Big Four are circumventing rules and to find ways to help local firms.

Should the government intervene?

  • Local auditors are mostly present in tier 2 and tier 3 cities and audit 62 % of the companies listed on BSE 500.
  • They provide a variety of services to small companies. They lack aspiration to become big.
  • Therefore, it is debatable whether there is a case for government’s intervention to protect local audit firms

Way ahead and Conclusion

Chartered accountants are prohibited from soliciting professional work through advertisement or otherwise. But they can respond to tenders.

  • The practice of issuing a tender for the appointment of internal auditors is quite common among public enterprises. Such a practice is not common among private-sector companies.
  • Tendering is the right method to search for the right audit firm. This increases choice and reduces auditing cost through competition.
  • Companies should not limit their choice to the Big Four and other international firms or a few large local audit firms.
  • There are local firms that have capabilities to audit large and complex transactions. Search through tendering process would help to identify such firms.

It will be interesting to see how the new rules regarding rotation of auditors will actually impact the auditing profession.

 

Source: http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/rotation-of-auditors-and-its-side-effects-116100900736_1.html

Government may offer foreign auditors direct access

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Corporate Updates, India & International - Corporate updates | 0

In a move that signals the government’s intent to allow foreign audit firms to register and operate directly in the Indian market, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs has written to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) to seek its views and recommendations on the government proposal.

Currently, Indian laws don’t allow any multinational accounting firm to be registered in India as auditors. The thinking within the government is that as part of an ongoing reforms process, the services sector should also be liberalised and global auditing firms could be allowed to operate directly here to make the profession more competitive and robust.

The ministry has written to the institute on August 10, said ICAI president M Devaraja Reddy . The institute is set to discuss this proposal in a meeting to be held on August 24 and then respond to the the request, he added.

The government will have to amend the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 that regulates the accounting profession in India to allow foreign firms to operate in India.

Currently, MNC professional services firms that offer auditing services in India, including the Big Four – EY, PwC, Deloitte and KPMG – audit Indian companies through a bunch of their network or affiliate firms.

Though for all internal purposes, the accounting practice in any of the Big Four is treated just as any other practice area like tax, transactions, or advisory , but on paper, the affiliate firms are run as separate partnerships.

If the Indian government does allow direct entry, more global firms are likely to invest big in their India network and also the market could see the entry of new players.

“Given the significant exposure of global investors in Indian firms, it’s natural to ask for an auditor who they are more comfortable with. More global players will mean more choice and better quality of services. It will also enhance the credibility of Indian markets,” says the CEO of a global firm.

For Indian audit firms, the move could spell further trouble, as they have been steadily losing the most lucrative audit assignments to the Big Four over the past two decades.The four global firms now dominate the book-keeping business in India. As it is, the mandatory audit rotation brought in by the Companies Act 2013, is set to kick off from April 1, 2017 and that will further see a movement of big accounts away from Indian firms towards the Big Four and other two prominent network firms, Grant Thornton and BDO.

In major markets, the global giants have a monopoly over the audit business – 99 per cent of companies in FTSE are audited by the Big Four firms, while 86 per cent of those listed on the NYSE work with these audit firms.

But in India, 62 per cent of the BSE 500 companies, including some of India Inc’s biggest firms, are still not audited by the Big Four.For example, Reliance has had Chaturvedi & Shah as auditors for decades, L&T books have been audited by Sharp & Tannan and Hindalco had stayed on with Singhi & Co for long time.In China, the Big Four lost domination to local firms after the government brought in regulations that were unfavourable for the global players. Indian accounting firms are also betting on government regulations that will keep their interests protected.

“The government will have to find a middle ground. It will have to create a regulatory framework that allows the global firms to invest and practice, also keeping in mind the concerns of the Indian accounting firms which service a large section of Indian companies, both big and small,” said the CEO of a leading Indian accounting firm.

Audit giants see dominance waning

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0

India’s audit landscape is undergoing a quiet change as the new rules for time-based rotation of auditors gather pace.

Early audit changes this year indicate the larger entities, such as Deloitte’s network, could face some pressure on their dominance. And, those lower down the order could gain ground. Leading firms are looking at increasing the focus on quality and are exploring new opportunities, such as private equity-backed ones in the unlisted space. Smaller entities such as Walker Chandiok, part of the Grant Thornton network, have ramped up their staff strength to handle new clients.

Close to 400 companies listed on the National Stock Exchange (NSE) have already changed auditors over the past three years, with clients changing hands among top audit firms. There is also pressure on pricing as the war for market share begins to intensify among top audit firms. This has resulted in a spike in demand for experienced auditors, with joining remuneration seeing 20-30 per cent jumps.

Audit giants see dominance waning
The revamped Companies Act of 2013 said every Indian company with a paid-up equity capital of Rs 20 crore or more was required to replace auditors after two five-year terms in succession. The law had given a three-year transition period for those which had to change auditors, ending March 2017. In the current financial year, 2016-17, around 40 NSE-listed companies have already switched to new auditors. More announcements are expected over the coming three months, shows data from Prime Database. In 2014-15 and 2015-16, a total of 339-NSE listed companies had settled for new auditors.

“We will be rotating off some of the larger companies. Simply because of the number and size of listed companies we audit, there will be changes in our audit market share,” said Shyamak Tata, partner, Deloitte Haskins Sells. He said large-scale changes in their portfolio were only expected from the third year onwards.

The Deloitte group’s network of audit companies is expected to see the largest churn. It has the biggest number of marquee audit clients. The network earned Rs 300 crore in fees for the year 2014-15, representing 15 per cent of the total pie of the Rs 2,000 crore audit fee market for 1,451 NSE-listed firms. It also audited the highest number of listed entities, at 149. The EY network made Rs 121 crore from the 108 companies. The PwC network audited 65 listed ones but had the lowest fee income among the ‘Big Four’ in audit, of Rs 65.6 crore. The KPMG network audited the lowest number of listed entities, at 58; however, it earned more than PwC at Rs 99.4 crore. Companies are still in the process of reporting the FY16 numbers.

Churn on
Early numbers suggest this pecking order is already going through a churn. A Business Standard analysis of data provided by Prime Database showed of the 41 auditor changes reported so far this year in listed companies, the KPMG network was the biggest gainer, with 11 new firms for the financial year ending March 2017. It was rotated out of two existing clients, a net gain of eight for FY17. The EY network added six and lost two, while Walker Chandiok gained a lone company. The PwC and Deloitte networks have lost more than they’ve gained so far this year. At the end of the changes, other smaller audit firms had 23 clients, up from 18 in FY16, among these 40 companies.

Grasim, Cipla, Biocon, Vedanta, Hindustan Zinc, United Spirits and Century Textiles are some of the large companies that have reported auditor changes for the new financial year.  In FY16, as many as 168 listed companies changed their auditors. The Deloitte network was the top gainer among the first five, gaining 17 and losing 11. The KPMG network was also a net gainer, with seven gains and four losses. EY, PwC and Walker Chandiok lost more than they gained.

In FY15, when 171 companies changed auditors, Walker Chandiok’s client list swelled by eight. While the EY network and Deloitte registered a net gain of one each, the KPMG and PwC networks recorded a net loss of four and one, respectively.

Strategy
Deloitte, expecting a strong attack on its dominance, is looking for greener pastures. “We are large in the listed company space, and have a majority share across industry sectors.  Our audit breadth and experience in this changing regulatory environment provides us, currently and over the next two-three years, an opportunity to provide audit services to untapped listed and unlisted entities, with a bias in favour of unlisted clients,” said Tata.

Other large entities are also gearing up for the transition. Russell Parera, partner, Price Waterhouse Chartered Accountants LLP, said his network had embarked on a transformation programme focussing on people, technology and processes for close to two years. “We have taken significant efforts in training our people for this change. Also, with rotation kicking in, it is going to be important to focus on investing in relationship building.”

The PwC network also bets on technology as another aspect, which will go a long way in these ever-evolving market scenario. “Today, technology has become a crucial enabler, with more data audits getting conducted. It is also relevant in cross border and multi-location audits to ensure consistency. We as a firm have been preparing for this change,” Parera added.  Tata of Deloitte spoke of pricing pressure in certain pockets. “We are seeing this as a section of the market looks to gain market share.  There will be some short- term blips. However, with continuing investment in innovation and quality, which will lead to enhancing value to clients, over the short term, this will correct. We already have a large pool of audit talent. We are looking at consolidating and not dramatically increasing the headcount. Audit will remain the primary identity of our firm and, with our focus on quality, we will retain our leading position in the overall  space.”

Impact
According to Akhil Bansal, deputy chief executive of KPMG India, with European audit rotation also coming into effect, the impact of Indian mandatory company rotation regulations will be felt around the globe. “The choice of the audit firm in India might influence the choice in Europe and other geographies,” he added. Bansal said the impact of mandatory firm rotation will also be felt on other services, including internal audit, due to stringent independence requirements. “It is important that the companies make their choice of audit firm early, since the best resources will be committed to clients who are first off the block,” he said.

Audit companies have been preparing for this, with investment in personnel, training and ramping up headcount numbers. For instance, the Grant Thornton network plans to double its auditor numbers across its network from 1,500 to 3,000. Vishesh Chandiok, national managing partner, Grant Thornton India LLP, said: “Several local Indian firms are very competent and the belief that only us international firms are the option is misplaced. Not all 50,000 firms for each company but certainly 50 firms can audit most companies, not only four of five firms.”

The EY group, which has 3,000 auditors across its network, added 400 over the past 12 months. “Internally, our focus continues to be on strengthening our teams with more hiring, greater investments in training, sharpening technical and industry capabilities  and increasingly, using more technology and, data analytic tools when performing audits,” said  Sudhir Soni, national leader, SR Batliboi, the Indian member-firm of EY Global.

Most audit companies have resorted to internal promotions and inducting of new talent to expand resources.

With the threshold for audit rotation being low, most audit companies are looking at tapping the unlisted private audit space in a big way. That’s a space the Deloitte network companies plan to play the game hard, indicated Tata. The client churn among audit firms is expected to last over the next two-three years, before it stabilises.

Source: http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/audit-giants-see-dominance-waning-116062600777_1.html

Post Bank likely to handle DBT schemes

by | posted in: Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0
The entire direct benefit transfer (DBT) scheme for distribution of government subsidy is likely to be handled by the Post Bank — the new payments bank which will be under the Department of Posts.

The entire direct benefit transfer (DBT) scheme for distribution of government subsidy is likely to be handled by the Post Bank — the new payments bank which will be under the Department of Posts.

“Earlier initial capital approval sought for setting up Post Bank was about Rs 300 crore which has been increased to Rs 800 crore as there is proposal now that entire DBT scheme should be handled by it as well as saving accounts currently handled by DoP should also be moved under it,” an official source told PTI.

Public Investment Board (PIB) will consider this proposal in its meeting on January 15 and then send its recommendation to Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs for final approval, the official said.

The Reserve Bank of India has granted Payments Bank permit to the postal department, which has 1.55 lakh branches across country and already provides financial services.

Pilot for the Payments Bank is set to start from January 2017 while full-fledged operations are to start from March 7, 2017.

Under DBT scheme government directly transfer subsidies in to bank account of people eligible for it. Subsidies of around 35-40 government schemes are covered under it including that provided on domestic LPG connections.

As per official data, till December 27 around Rs 40,000 crore was directly reaching the beneficiaries through various schemes.

As many as 40 international financial conglomerates, including World Bank and Barclays, have shown interest to partner with Postal Department for the payments bank.

The DoP has shortlisted six consultants including McKinsey, KPMG, Ernst and Young and PricewaterhouseCoopers. The postal department expects to finalise consultant for setting up of payment banks by end of this month.

At the end March 2015, the DoP housed around 20 lakh saving accounts which held total deposit of about Rs 47,800 crore. The payment bank wing of DoP is also proposed to manage these accounts.

As per RBI guidelines, payments banks would offer a limited range of products such as demand deposits and remittances.

They will, however, not be allowed to undertake lending activities and will initially be restricted to holding a maximum balance of Rs 1 lakh per individual customer.

They will be allowed to issue ATM or debit cards as also other prepaid payment instruments, but not credit cards.

Source: http://www.financialexpress.com/article/industry/banking-finance/post-bank-likely-to-handle-dbt-schemes/191551/

Finance Ministry to ease transfer pricing rules

by | posted in: Corporate Updates, Cross Border Transactions, M&As, Joint Ventures, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies | 0

The finance ministry is streamlining safe harbour rules and advance agreements, two mechanisms to determine the price of services rendered by a multinational to its subsidiary in India.

Safe harbour rules – directives on margins the tax authorities should accept for the transfer price declared by an assessee – have drawn a tepid response since they were introduced a couple of years ago. There is also a huge backlog in advance pricing agreements (APAs), an ahead-of-time understanding between a taxpayer and the tax authority on an appropriate transfer pricing methodology.

ALIGNING INDIAN TAXATION WITH BEST PRACTICES
Safe harbour rules

  • Government looking at lowering safe harbour margins to make it attractive for companies to opt for it
  • Government to make safe harbour definition unambiguous bringing in more clarity

Advance Pricing Agreement

  • With close to 550 cases pending, government looking at expediting clearances through:
  • Sector-specific approach to cases
  • Increasing manpower and filling up vacancies

The move would simplify the tax regime, reduce litigation and help improve the business environment, a finance ministry official said.

The steps will involve lowering the margins in safe harbour rules and definitions will be reworked to remove ambiguities. India announced the safe harbour rules in 2013, but the high margins of up to 25 per cent on total operational profits have made it unattractive for companies to use them.

“We are addressing issues related to transfer pricing to align it with best practices. We are revising the safe harbour rules that will include revisiting the definition and revising the margins, considered high by companies,” said a tax official.

Information technology (IT) and information technology-enabled services (ITeS) companies with transactions of up to Rs 500 crore have a safe harbour operating margin of 20 per cent and those with transactions above Rs 500 crore have a margin of 22 per cent. Knowledge process outsourcing companies have a safe harbour operating margin of 25 per cent.

Experts argue there is ambiguity in the definition of IT, ITeS and knowledge process outsourcing companies with a lot of overlap. Moreover, the margins decided in tribunals or in advance pricing agreements turn out much lower, ranging between 15 and 18 per cent.

“The definitions under the safe harbour rules are fuzzy and sometimes overlap, creating confusion over what rate should apply and which company will fall under which sector. We are expecting clarity on the definition,” said Rahul Garg, leader, direct tax, PwC.

Manisha Gupta, partner, Deloitte Haskins & Sells, said the safe harbour margins were high. “The government agrees to far lower rates at tribunals and in advance pricing agreements,” she said.

The lowering of safe harbour rates will ease the advance pricing agreement backlog. The government introduced the advance pricing scheme in 2012 and there are over 500 applications pending.

“We are considering sector-wise handling of cases by officers to expedite decisions,” the tax official said. “We have already made a request for an increase in manpower to clear the backlog. We expect a decision soon,” he added.

India has the highest incidence of transfer pricing litigation worldwide. The number of cases scrutinised has quadrupled from 1,061 in 2005-06 to 4,290 in 2014-15.

Among measures recently introduced, the government said an officer would be assigned not more than 50 important and complex transfer pricing cases. Officers typically audit more than 70 cases at a time.

Besides, the tax department has incorporated range and multi-year data in transfer pricing calculations to bring Indian laws in line with international practices. Earlier, single-year data and the arithmetic mean were used to arrive at transfer pricing.

Earlier this year, the finance ministry allowed rollback advance pricing agreements so that multinational companies could settle taxes for previous years as well.

“The burden on tribunals, high courts, Supreme Court and even on the APA team can be substantially reduced if the Indian government revamps the safe harbour rules (that is, devising calibrated and more reasonable margins for the sector consistent with the margins finally arrived at post-tribunal orders/MAP/APA and providing clarifications on what constitutes software development activities, KPO, contract R&D,” said a Deloitte & Taxsutra report on transfer pricing.

Approximately over 40 per cent of APA applications are from the IT/ITeS sector. Up to September 2015, more than 575 APA applications have been filed with the APA authorities. Fourteen of these APAs have been concluded, of which 12 are unilateral and two bilateral (with Japan and the UK).

Source:Business Standard