James Kroker, Shut Up

"[SEC] Chief Accountant James L. Kroker told leaders of the accounting profession that independent auditors will be expected to consider the interests of the 'investing public'--not just their audit clients--when performing their duties. The mission of his office will be to 'put investor protection at the forefront in all that we do,' he said in an address to the [AICPA's] National Conference on SEC Developments. Under his watch, 'you are likely to notice we will be more proactively seeking to understand and discuss the views of investors.' Accountants 'should not be surprised when we ask you whether you have considered the perspective of the investing public.' ... And while auditors can expect to be treated professionally by SEC regulators, Kroker told the AICPA members, 'You should not confuse professionalism with a notion of leniency. Those who fail to live up to their responsibilities and those who cause harm to investors or our capital markets can expect that we will take appropriate action,' he said. ... In this vein, the staff is unfortunately aware of potential structure designed and marketed to "address" assets where prices have and are expected to continue to show weakness by entering into creative off-balance-sheet structures with little apparent transfer of risk.' To guard against such schemes, Kroker called on auditors to be especially 'vigilant when evaluating the substance, or lack thereof, of elements of transactions included to achieve specific accounting results'," my emphasis, Ken Rankin at WebCPA, 8 December 2009, link:

http://www.webcpa.com/news/SEC-Chief-Accountant-Tells-CPAs-Consider-Investors-52682-1.html.

What crap Kroker, "former" D&T partner. See my 12 June 2009 post; http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2009/06/ia-goes-to-meetin.html. CPAs don't need Kroker to remind them of US v Arthur Young, 465 US 805 (1984), or AICPA ethics section 53. Kroker, did you aim this speech at investors? Or did you remind your "former" partners of their "professional responsibilites"? My experience is the SEC staff treats only Big 87654 CPAs "professionally". What action will the SEC take with respect to PWC, AIG's and Vampire Squid's CPAs? Substance versus form considerations from the SEC staff, surely you jest Kroker. What will the SEC do about KPMG and E&Y and the ".001 standard", my 5 March 2008 post:

http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2008/03/enron-accounting-redux.html.