Hmm, why’s that then?

If there is a need for audit reform it must be the replacement of the Financial Reporting Council

The reason being:

the FRC’s own failure to take account of public demands for for better corporate reporting, as best represented by country-by-country reporting, to which it has never given attention.

They must be replaced because they’ve not forced everyone to adopt the invention by me. What I wrote, Candidly.

13 thoughts on “Hmm, why’s that then?”

  1. Personally I insist of county by county reporting. You wouldn’t want the ‘Northern Powerhouse’ failing to get its fair share!

  2. And yet the most recent big corporate scandal involved a group for whom country by country reporting would have been all but irrelevant. In fact, it is arguable that the massive thickness of annual reports gets in the way of understanding. Adding to the thickness by detailed geographic analysis would be of what value to anyone, apart from printers?

    As it was, Carillion’s annual report was 156 pages but the key indicators were obvious on a mere 2 pages. The financial press and associated bloggers have taken 2 weeks to find them because they were obsessed with the goodwill figure. I highlighted them here on the very first day. Why does it take the experts so long? What were the Board playing at? And the auditors?

  3. There’s a good potential model in this area already.

    The Fair Tax Mark accredits businesses which practise fair taxation policy. Could its expertise not be extended to the audit world?

    Objective expert review and certification of audit businesses for a reasonable fee, who could possibly object to that?

  4. “The push for tax transparency in the extractive industries sector began in 1999 with a scathing report about a high profile scandal that involved the global oil giant BP, the state-owned oil company of Angola, and the alleged embezzlement of state funds by the Angolan political elites. This led to the 2002 founding of the Publish What You Pay (PWYP) global network of civil society organisations that began lobbying for transparency in the extractive industries sector.xxv In September 2002, their activities resulted in the creation of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).”

    Murphy always claims to have ‘invented’ CbyC reporting, which is of course bollocks. As the extract above shows(link to full document below) Murphy just joined a bandwagon. 1999 was when it began, Murphy first pitched in in 2003 after what he claims was a conversation in October 2002 (note the date of the formation of the EITI). All Murphy did was say, hey, this thing they are doing in the extractive industries, let’s get everyone to do it. hardly inventing anything at all.

    I have tried to point this out to him on his blog but he never answers………

  5. @Diogenes “Adding to the thickness by detailed geographic analysis would be of what value to anyone”

    It would make Spud feel important. “See that? That’s me who made them do that”

  6. I’ve tried having convesrsatikns in his blog with him in the last about it, I recall it from doing professional exams in the 1980’s and it wasn’t a new idea then.
    Some of the abandoned accounting standards/guidelines that tried to deal with excess inflation in the 70’s make for interesting reading, I get the occasional offer that with professional qualifications I can do a shortcut Masters programme and if I ever get round to it the concept of defining value/cost is most probably what I’d look at

  7. “I can’t go anywhere without hearing people demanding country by country reporting”

    I believe they talk of little else in Ely….

  8. Yes that local in Ely where a rapt audience hears the man in the pink cardigan with the pink complexion holding forth over a pint of bitter about his invention of CBC reporting, secrecy jurisdictions, the Green New Deal, Labour economic policy and his prospects of vermine….

    “Ooh Arr Mr Murphy, you’m certainly told them Sir!”

    “It’s PROFESSOR Murphy actually”

  9. Diogenes said:
    “Adding to the thickness by detailed geographic analysis would be of what value to anyone, apart from printers?”

    Murphy and his (former?) chums at the “Tax Justice Network”, and some of the big campaigning charities (Oxfam?, Christian Aid?) would be able to trawl through the accounts, find the companies whose effective tax rate is lower than the statutory tax rate in some country or other, and accuse them of thereby killing 3rd world babies.

    Never mind that the various statutory differences between accounting profit and taxable profit mean that the effective tax rate is never equal to the statutory tax rate, in any country, and that in different years and in different countries either one can be legitimately higher than the other. That won’t stop them complaining, loudly and publicly, and with the support of the Guardian and BBC.

    That’s what country by country reporting is for.

  10. Bloke in North Dorset


    I didn’t get the details, I caught the end of a local news story. It sounded like they’d done some tweaks to the original proposal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *