跨境监管难题引发的会计战

    最近，我为Forensic Asia撰写了一篇题为《会计战：中国的跨国法规》（Accounting Wars: Transnational Regulation in China）的文章。该文对我先前围绕这一主题所写的一些文章进行了总结。对于那些关注亚洲证券的人来说，我向你们推荐Forensic Asia。

    对于德勤的要求，美国证券交易委员会（SEC）作出的回应是：在SEC起诉其他四大会计事务所和德豪会计事务所（BDO）的案件解决之前，涉及东南融通（Longtop）工作底稿的案件也会继续推进。SEC指出，这些案件的目标各不相同。在东南融通的案件中，SEC要求提供工作底稿。在行政诉讼过程中，SEC谋求谴责或撤销公司在SEC执业的权利（第6页）。

    一直以来，公司会计监管委员会（PCAOB）从未就此事发布任何信息。卡特彼勒（Caterpillar）一案中的惨败将增加PCAOB解决审核问题的压力，因为此事显示了中国所存在的会计问题业已蔓延至跨国公司。卡特彼勒案件似乎是尽职调查的疏漏，而不是审计的疏漏。的确，卡特彼勒的审计方似乎没有参与交易，而这一点在审计结束之前就已经闹得沸沸扬扬。有报道称，四大会计事务所中的两家公司（而不是卡特彼勒的审计方）参与了尽职调查。

    未来几个月内，香港标准水务有限公司（Standard Water）一案将有望判决。此案中，安永（Ernst & Young）以违反中国法律为由，拒绝向香港证券和期货监察委员会（Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission）提交工作底稿。香港标准水务案件与SEC起诉四大家的案件在性质上基本上相同，而且可能会在香港市场引发危机。尽管我认为SEC意欲将中国公司赶出美国证券交易所，但我并未察觉香港监管机构有这样的打算。

    一位读者对我说，很多在美国上市的中国公司希望改在香港上市，而这个举动会面临一个很大的障碍。其中的很多公司通过发行多种类别的股票以保持创始人的控制权，这种运作方式在香港（或其他大多数市场）显然行不通。有一个简单的解决办法——取消为内部人士所做的特殊安排——而且这同时也将改善公司治理。（财富中文网）

    译者：李翔

    I recently penned a piece for Forensic Asia called Accounting Wars: Transnational Regulation in China. It summarizes my previous writings on this topic. I recommend Forensic Asia for those who follow Asian securities.

    The SEC has responded to Deloitte’s request that the case related to Longtop’s working papers remain stayed until the SEC case against the rest of the Big Four and BDO is resolved. The SEC points out that the cases have differing objectives. In the Longtop case the SEC wants working papers to be produced. In the administrative proceeding the SEC is seeking to censure or revoke the right of the firms to practice before the SEC (page 6).

    There has been no news from the PCAOB. The recent fiasco at Caterpillar will up the pressure on the PCAOB to resolve the inspection situation, since it illustrates that accounting problems in China extend to multinationals as well. The Caterpillar case appears to be a failure in due diligence, rather than an audit failure – indeed Caterpillar’s auditor appears to have not been involved in the transaction, which blew up before an audit was completed. Reports have said that two Big Four firms (other than Caterpillar’s auditor) were involved in the due diligence.

    A decision is expected in the Standard Water case in Hong Kong in the next few months. In this case, Ernst & Young refused to turn over working papers to Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission, citing Chinese laws that prohibit it from doing so. The Hong Kong proceedings ares virtually identical to the SEC allegations against the Big Four, and may create a crisis in the Hong Kong markets. While I believe the SEC is willing to kick Chinese companies off of U.S. exchanges, I can’t see Hong Kong regulators taking such a stand.

    A reader has pointed out to me that there is a major obstacle to many U.S. listed Chinese companies moving their listings to Hong Kong. Many of these companies use multiple classes of stock to keep control in the hands of founders. These arrangements are apparently not allowed in Hong Kong (or most other markets). There is an easy fix – get rid of the special arrangements for insiders – that will improve corporate governance at the same time.