Some argue that allowing auditors to carry out any non-audit services for their audit clients weakens their independence, objectivity and professional scepticism. We disagree.
Certain activities are without doubt in conflict with the independence of the audit and should be prohibited. For all other services, we believe the audit committee, as the shareholders’ representative charged with governance, is in the best position to decide whether they are consistent with the company’s own governance, are in its stakeholders’ best interests in relation to quality, price and efficiency, and do not impair the independence of the audit.
Taking away or limiting a company’s ability to choose its best provider would not enhance objectivity, scepticism, or the public interest. Neither would a defined list of permitted services or an artificial cap on services promote audit quality, independence or governance.
PwC Point of View setting out alternative options to enhance the quality of the audits of financial institutions, including banks
How do artificial market interventions like mandatory auditor rotation and audit-only restrictions impact audit market competition? PwC says they increase costs and reduce efficiency.
Download this PwC Point of View to learn where we stand on European Commission proposals to curb the collective reach of the Big Four accounting firms, and on the benefits of scale for a global firm in a global business environment.
At PwC, independence, objectivity and integrity are at the heart of everything we do. Download this PwC Point of View to learn where we stand on corporate governance, transparency, and the role of the audit committee.
At PwC, independence, objectivity and integrity are at the heart of everything we do. Download this PwC Point of View to learn where we stand on new safeguards and measures to maintain, or regain, public trust.