Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
SMSF adviser logo
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA

ASIC reveals figures on SMSF auditor enforcement action

news
By mbrownlee
October 26 2018
1 minute read
ASIC
expand image

Since SMSF auditor registration commenced in 2013, ASIC has removed 76 SMSF auditors from the register and imposed conditions on another 24.

In an online update, ASIC revealed that from when the registration of SMSF auditors began up to 30 June 2018, it has deregistered, suspended or imposed conditions on a total of 101 SMSF auditors for audit quality and independence issues or on fit and proper person criteria.

Out of the 101, ASIC has removed 76 SMSF auditors from the auditor register, suspended one auditor for a period, and imposed conditions on the registrations of a further 24 auditors.

==
==

ASIC said it has considered the conduct of over 120 SMSF auditors in total, including 98, which were referred by the ATO.

The types of conditions imposed by ASIC include restrictions on the funds the auditor can conduct audits for, limiting the number of SMSF audits that can be conducted and having audits peer reviewed, with the results being reported to ASIC.

It can also impose conditions such as additional training requirements, passing the SMSF auditor competency exam, strict timeframes for responding to the ATO or ASIC and providing notice of registration conditions to professional associations.

One of the common reasons for ASIC taking enforcement action was the failure to meet auditor independence requirements including auditing their own fund, a family member’s fund, a business partner’s fund, or funds for which the auditor has also been responsible for preparing accounts or financial statements.

Another key reason was the failure to comply with auditing standards through inadequate planning, performing audits poorly, obtaining insufficient audit evidence and not adequately documenting audit work.

“These cases included deficiencies in auditing asset values and the treatment of limited recourse borrowing arrangements in fund financial reports,” ASIC explained.

Failing to identify or report non-compliance, including non-compliance with fund trustee composition and ownership of assets requirements as well as the sole purpose test, was anther key area of concern for ASIC.

The other main reason for enforcement action by ASIC was failure to meet the fit and proper person requirement where auditors provide false and misleading statements, are insolvent or bankrupt, engaged in fraud, are not managing their own tax compliance, are not cooperating with enquiries by the ATO or ASIC and have breached their duties as a registered company auditor.

ASIC commissioner John Price said SMSF auditors perform an important role in giving independent assurance over fund financial reports and reporting non-compliances with fund requirements.

“As gatekeepers, they are expected to adhere to the highest standards in the performance of their role. ASIC will continue to take action where the conduct of SMSF auditors is inadequate,” said Mr Price.

 

 

Miranda Brownlee

Miranda Brownlee

Miranda Brownlee is the deputy editor of SMSF Adviser, which is the leading source of news, strategy and educational content for professionals working in the SMSF sector.

Since joining the team in 2014, Miranda has been responsible for breaking some of the biggest superannuation stories in Australia, and has reported extensively on technical strategy and legislative updates.
Miranda also has broad business and financial services reporting experience, having written for titles including Investor Daily, ifa and Accountants Daily.

You can email Miranda on: miranda.brownlee@momentummedia.com.au