Accountancy Age says:
PricewaterhouseCoopers, auditor of Yukos, has withdrawn ten year's worth of audit opinions at the collapsed Russian oil group, after it became aware of new information which it said had not been known at the time of the audits.
The firm withdrew ten years of audit reports for the period 1994 to 2004 saying representations which was provided to it by Yukos' former management 'may not have been accurate."
Three points:
1) You can't do that. You can't rewrite history. As a matter of fact these audit reports remain on the record, whatever PWC says;
2) If your audit was dependent upon management representation what sort of audit was it? And why didn't you say this at the time if it was material , as it now so obviously is?
3) It's too late, PWC. In auditing if your work was deficient then that's it. It's there for all to see. And if it's deficient for a decade that's not an aberration. That's systemic failure. You can't pass the buck for that.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I wonder if this vindicates in any way:
1. the quasi-nationalisation of Yukos by the Russian government
2. the imprisonment of Khodorkovsky and his colleagues for tax and other fraud and
3. the dismissal by Russia of some of the typically hysterical and extra-territorial judicial claims made in the US courts about Yukos?