Comments on: IFRS and principles too weak to work? http://neilmcintyre.ca/ifrs-and-principles-too-weak-to-work/ From external to internal audit Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:13:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: IFRS and D&O Insurance Implications « Mitchell Sandham's Blog http://neilmcintyre.ca/ifrs-and-principles-too-weak-to-work/comment-page-1/#comment-3561 IFRS and D&O Insurance Implications « Mitchell Sandham's Blog Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:49:26 +0000 http://neilmcintyre.ca/ifrs-and-principles-too-weak-to-work/#comment-3561 [...] to IFRS in this post will not do justice to Mr. Rosen, so I have attached a few articles, here, here, here. But, what I see as the theme: 1), IFRS takes a big step back from current North American [...] [...] to IFRS in this post will not do justice to Mr. Rosen, so I have attached a few articles, here, here, here. But, what I see as the theme: 1), IFRS takes a big step back from current North American [...]

]]> By: My del.icio.us bookmarks for January 26th through February 2nd | AccMan http://neilmcintyre.ca/ifrs-and-principles-too-weak-to-work/comment-page-1/#comment-1837 My del.icio.us bookmarks for January 26th through February 2nd | AccMan Mon, 04 Feb 2008 01:47:32 +0000 http://neilmcintyre.ca/ifrs-and-principles-too-weak-to-work/#comment-1837 [...] IFRS and principles too weak to work? - Neil has really grown well into his position as a Canadian CA. A sharp analysis of IFRS v GAAP that makes for good debate fodder [...] [...] IFRS and principles too weak to work? – Neil has really grown well into his position as a Canadian CA. A sharp analysis of IFRS v GAAP that makes for good debate fodder [...]

]]> By: Krupo http://neilmcintyre.ca/ifrs-and-principles-too-weak-to-work/comment-page-1/#comment-1677 Krupo Fri, 18 Jan 2008 06:54:22 +0000 http://neilmcintyre.ca/ifrs-and-principles-too-weak-to-work/#comment-1677 Whoa, I must completely disagree with the idea that mandatory rotation would decrease costs in and of itself due to 'more competition'. The only reason it would decrease costs if you're getting gouged and don't realize it until you switch to someone else and they come in at a more reasonable level. Although anything's possible, I doubt that many companies would let themselves be gouged so hard - they would rotate to a new auditor *now* if they were being overcharged. No, mandatory rotation would cause unnecessary shifts in auditors. Yeah, it's true the incumbent may know a client really well, but that in and of itself isn't a reason to be concerned. If you're doing a quality job, it doesn't matter if it's your 2nd or 12th year auditing a company, you should still be questioning everything that deserves a deeper look. Taking on a new audit involves HUGE investments of time and energy. It's fun and I encourage everyone to switch to my firm for their services , but it really is a huge investment and in the short term, you'll definitely either face higher fees or at least higher costs on the audit firm's side. To some extent, audit firms will have absorb some of the 'first year' costs, but in teh end, someone has to pay for the cost of business. As for what's wrong with IFRS, I'd like to hear some specific complaints rather than some generalized moaning. Whoa, I must completely disagree with the idea that mandatory rotation would decrease costs in and of itself due to ‘more competition’.

The only reason it would decrease costs if you’re getting gouged and don’t realize it until you switch to someone else and they come in at a more reasonable level.

Although anything’s possible, I doubt that many companies would let themselves be gouged so hard – they would rotate to a new auditor *now* if they were being overcharged.

No, mandatory rotation would cause unnecessary shifts in auditors. Yeah, it’s true the incumbent may know a client really well, but that in and of itself isn’t a reason to be concerned. If you’re doing a quality job, it doesn’t matter if it’s your 2nd or 12th year auditing a company, you should still be questioning everything that deserves a deeper look.

Taking on a new audit involves HUGE investments of time and energy. It’s fun and I encourage everyone to switch to my firm for their services , but it really is a huge investment and in the short term, you’ll definitely either face higher fees or at least higher costs on the audit firm’s side.

To some extent, audit firms will have absorb some of the ‘first year’ costs, but in teh end, someone has to pay for the cost of business.

As for what’s wrong with IFRS, I’d like to hear some specific complaints rather than some generalized moaning.

]]>