Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
Related: About this forumFormer KPMG Executive And Former PCAOB Employee Convicted Of Wire Fraud For Scheme To Steal And Use
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-kpmg-executive-and-former-pcaob-employee-convicted-wire-fraud-scheme-steal-andDepartment of Justice
U.S. Attorneys Office
Southern District of New York
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, March 11, 2019
Former KPMG Executive And Former PCAOB Employee Convicted Of Wire Fraud For Scheme To Steal And Use Confidential PCAOB Information
Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced that DAVID MIDDENDORF, who was the National Managing Partner for audit quality at the accounting firm KPMG LLP (KPMG), and JEFFREY WADA a former employee of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (the PCAOB), were convicted of wire fraud charges in connection with their scheme to defraud the PCAOB by obtaining, disseminating, and using confidential lists of which KPMG audits the PCAOB would be reviewing so that KPMG could improve its performance in PCAOB inspections.
(snip)
The PCAOB is a nonprofit corporation overseen by the SEC that inspects the audit work performed by registered accounting firms (Auditors) with respect to the financial statements of publicly traded companies (Issuers). The PCAOB inspects the largest U.S. accounting firms on an annual basis. As part of the inspection process, the PCAOB chooses a selection of audits performed by the accounting firm for a closer review, commonly referred to as an inspection. Until shortly before an inspection occurs, the PCAOB does not disclose which audits are being inspected, or the focus areas for those inspections, because it wants to ensure that an Auditor does not perform additional work or modify its work papers in anticipation of an inspection. Following the completion of an inspection, the PCAOB issues an Inspection Report containing any negative findings or comments with respect to both the specific audits reviewed and the accounting firm more generally.
KPMG is one of the largest accounting firms in the world. In recent years, KPMG fared poorly in PCAOB inspections, and in 2014 received approximately twice as many comments as its competitor firms. By at least in or about 2015, KPMG was engaged in efforts to improve its performance in PCAOB inspections, including but not limited to recruiting and hiring former PCAOB personnel. At the time, MIDDENDORF was head of KPMGs National Office, also known as the Department of Professional Practice (the DPP), which was broadly responsible for the quality of KPMGs audits and KPMGs performance in PCAOB inspections.
KPMGs efforts to improve inspection results, however, were not limited to legitimate means. Instead, between 2015 and 2017, MIDDENDORF and others worked illicitly to acquire valuable confidential PCAOB information concerning which KPMG audits would be inspected in an effort to game the system and improve inspection results. For example, beginning in 2015, Brian Sweet, a former PCAOB employee who had joined KPMG, provided MIDDENDORF, Thomas Whittle, and others with the PCAOBs confidential 2015 list of inspection selections, at MIDDENDORFs request, so that the information could be used by MIDDENDORF, Whittle, and others, to improve KPMGs performance on PCAOB inspections.
WADA was an Inspections Leader at the PCAOB, who was obligated to keep confidential the PCAOBs nonpublic information. WADA joined the conspiracy in the fall of 2015 and began passing confidential information to KPMG. In March 2016, WADA provided Cynthia Holder, a KPMG employee, with confidential information on certain of the PCAOBs 2016 inspection selections. Holder, in turn, provided the 2016 inspection selections to Sweet, who passed them to MIDDENDORF, Whittle, and others. MIDDENDORF, Whittle, Sweet, and others then agreed to launch a stealth program to re-review the audits that had been selected, and agreed to keep their stealth re-reviews within their circle of trust. In order to cover up their illicit conduct, other KPMG engagement partners were given a false explanation for the re-reviews. The stealth re-review program allowed KPMG to strengthen its work papers.
In January 2017, WADA, who had been passed over for promotion at the PCAOB, again stole valuable confidential PCAOB information, misappropriating a preliminary list of confidential 2017 inspection selections for KPMG audits and passing it on to Holder, referring to it in a voicemail as the grocery list. At the same time, WADA provided Holder with his resume and sought her assistance in helping him to acquire employment at KPMG. Sweet internally shared the preliminary inspection selections provided by WADA with Whittle, another co-conspirator, who in turn shared it with MIDDENDORF, who approved its use to improve the audits on the list.
In February 2017, WADA texted Holder saying, I have the grocery list. . . . All the things youll need for the year. WADA then spoke to Holder and provided her with the full confidential 2017 final inspection selections. Holder again shared the stolen information with Sweet, who shared it with MIDDENDORF, Whittle, and others, so that it could be acted upon to improve the audits on the list.
In 2017, a KPMG partner learned from Sweet that one of her audits was on the PCAOB inspection list, and she reported the matter to her supervisor. The matter was then ultimately reported to KPMGs Office of General Counsel.
(snip)
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
0 replies, 787 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post