So there we have it. The organisation that appears to be behind PWC’s web site does not trade, and has no assets or liabilities, despite the fact that it has an impressive list of 21 directors from around the world to achieve this goal.
As an exercise in transparency it’s a staggering example of opacity.
It’s almost as if PWC is really Macavity, the mystery cat for when they reach the scene of crime—Macavity’s not there!
You have a little more explaining to do as yet PWC. Why not start with your global accounts that reflect the single entity you really are, prepared on a country-by-country reporting basis?
This one really steps over into gross idiocy. For of course each PwC unit operates in one jurisdiction only. Usually, but not always, as a partnership. They’re all very separate legal entities. Many countries actually insist that they are for tort and regulatory reasons.
Meaning that each organisation does publish its own accounts in full, on a country by country basis. As is pointed out to the Murphmonster in his comments. The particular organisation he’s looking at is just the coordinating arm. And there’s no revenue sharing across the different partnerships either (except in the normal course of business and client referral etc, all done at arms length pricing).
They’re not, in any form or manner, a single legal entity, And they all do publish country by country accounts.