Merry Christmas to Peter Wilson. When it was suggested that Peter Wilson should be independent of the old board so that we can have a fresh start Peter responded with "That's your issue". Summary of the meeting here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=594
A good summary of where we are up to by Joe Aston of the AFR, linked to from here: viewtopic.php?f=5&p=4137#p4137
If you are new to this website read the story so far: viewtopic.php?t=321#p1793
Check out some of the AFR articles, too many to list and check out some of the ABC reports: http://www.afr.com/business/accounting/ ... 215-h055ej http://www.afr.com/business/accounting/ ... 211-h02x1d http://www.abc.net.au/news/programs/the ... s,/8626662
Please join this website to participate in discussions. Also join our email list at http://eepurl.com/cWsgfb
Image

Section 202B take 2 - They did not do it right make them do it again.

This covers the board and management of CPA Australia
Post Reply
User avatar
nakedadmin
Site Admin
Posts: 641
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:38 pm
Location: Iceland

Section 202B take 2 - They did not do it right make them do it again.

Post by nakedadmin » Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:09 am

Explanatory memorandum:

Section 202 B request for disclosure of Directors remuneration Take 2


Several CPA members have concerns that the section 202 B disclosure of Directors remuneration released earlier this year was deficient in several ways.

1. The first document released on 30 May 2017 (the day Tyrone resigned) did not include the 2 foreign subsidiaries.

2. Tyrone resigned on the same day the first document was released. It could just be a coincidence. This first section 202B disclosure only contained the amounts that had already been disclosed in the financial statements. Yet it took 32 days to prepare the disclosure and on the day it was approved the President resigns.

Accountant’s who approach their work with professional scepticism would find these circumstances cause for taking a closer look.

3. An email from CPA Australia to the AFR stated that the disclosure did not need to include payments made to Directors in a capacity other than being Director. This is not correct, it needs to disclose all payments to the Director regardless of capacity.

Around 7 June an email from CPA Australia to the AFR in response to questions about the section 202 B disclosure stated:

“All executive directors (CPA Australia staff) of the Malaysian and Shanghai subsidiaries received zero remuneration for these roles. A non-staff director of the Malaysian subsidiary was paid a nominal amount of 5,000RM, or approximately $1,600.”

Which is incorrect because Directors of subsidiaries are included and payments in all capacities are included. Thus implying that the 30 May disclosure did not include payments to Directors in capacities other than Director.

4. When finally on 30 June the second section 202B disclosure was made it was a supplementary disclosure rather than a corrected document. Whilst CPA Australia did combine the numbers that was not in the audited section.

If the original disclosure plus the second disclosure was the complete information there would have been no cost saving in separating it. In fact they have combined the amounts but the auditor did not express an opinion on the combined numbers.

Thus we have 2 separate disclosures, with 2 differently worded basis of preparation and 2 differently worded audit opinions.

The corporations law does not allow this to be released as 2 separate documents. Not to mention the playing around with the wordings.

End result:

The end result is that the disclosure may exclude payments made to Directors of the Australian entities in a capacity other than Director. It may exclude payments made to the Directors of the Australian entities from the foreign subsidiaries and possibly other payments.

Request for different auditors

Considering the following questionable actions of the existing auditor we request the board to use a different auditor:

* Failure to disclose the substantial equity contribution to CPA Advice in the 2016 financial statements related party disclosure, hiding the extent of the losses.

* Failure to pick up the incorrect reference to how the payments are made to Directors in the CPA Australia Advice financial statements.

* Failure to list Suzanne Haddan amongst the KPM in the CPA Australia 2016 financial statements.

* Failure to alert members to the fact that some Directors were paid amounts in excess of the limits in Article 45 of the constitution. Ever though both sets of financial statements stated the Directors were paid under that section.

* Failure to pick up the fact that the first section 202B disclosure released on 30 May excluded 2 subsidiaries or knowing this restricting their audit to the basis of preparation which did not satisfy the requirements of section 202B, in full knowledge that the document was to be used as a complete satisfaction of the requirements of section 202B.

* Failure to qualify the audit report of the second section 202B disclosure even though it excluded the 2 Australian companies including the head company to which the section 202B request was made.

Request:

For these technical failings and ethically questionable actions of the Auditor and CPA Australia we request that the section 202B disclosure be redone correctly by the new Board of Directors and audited by a new Auditor.

CPA members have the right to the information and deserve much better than what has been given to us considering the above.

Please email the signed scanned document to:

CPAboardspill@gmail.com
Attachments
s202B_Take2_Explanatory_Memo.pdf
(29.01 KiB) Downloaded 131 times
s202B_request_take2.pdf
(10.89 KiB) Downloaded 322 times
s202B_Take2_Explanatory_Memo.pdf
(29.01 KiB) Downloaded 28 times
The Naked Webmaster

Post Reply