LETTER: Limited liability for auditors
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mr Keith Woodley
Sir: In his letter (16 September) Austin Mitchell, MP, argued that there was no case for any liability concessions to audit firms and that any such concessions will further reduce the incentive to do good audits. As you might expect, I disagree.
The main public interest must be in the quality of audits and it is right that auditors should be liable to the extent of their responsibility for any losses that may have been suffered. The present method of determining liability, under which auditors are held jointly and severally liable with other parties, is, however, fundamentally unfair in that auditors can end up being held financially liable, not only for their own mistakes, but also for the mistakes of others.
That is why we are seeking reform of joint and several liability and the right for auditors to be allowed under company law the normal commercial freedom to agree reasonable limits to their liability, subject to adequate safeguards for the interests of the shareholders. That is also the issue which we hope the Government will tackle and why we welcome the feasibility study by the Law Commission that has recently been announced.
The suggestion by Mr Mitchell that now is the time to end the accountants' statutory monopoly of external audits and invite banks, pension funds, financial institutions and others to enter the field also does not bear close examination if the objective is to ensure a good-quality audit. Auditing is a regulated and highly competitive activity in the UK and elsewhere in the European Union and can only be carried out by those with the requisite skills and training. To go the route he suggests would in no way serve the interests of the consumers of audit services.
Yours faithfully
Keith Woodley
President
The Institute of
ts
in England & Wales
London, EC2
18 September
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments