Deloitte, the accounting firm that was fined $20 million by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for shielding Chinese companies from U.S. oversight, has been hit with a fine of more than $30 million by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). How did Deloitte find itself in this awkward position between the two big powers? An expert spoke with The Epoch Times to analyze why the Big Four accounting firms are being discarded by CCP authorities after they were punished by the United States.
Meanwhile, China’s Ministry of Finance accused Huarong and its investment arms of failing internal and risk controls and seriously distorting accounting information from 2014 to 2019.
Huarong is central to China’s financial system, one of four institutions created by the CCP in the late 1990s to solve the problem of bad loans at state-owned banks. It then built an empire by lending to high-risk companies using access to cheap loans from state-owned banks, according to a New York Times report.
China’s Ministry of Finance is the company’s second-largest shareholder after state-owned Citic Group. Huarong’s 2020 annual report reported a massive net loss of 102.9 billion yuan ($16 billion). Not long after the disclosure, Lai Xiaomin, Huarong’s former CCP secretary and chairman was sentenced to death on charges including embezzlement and bribery.
Deloitte is one of the world’s “Big Four” accounting firms, along with PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), KPMG, and Ernst & Young (EY). The Big Four are all headquartered in Western countries. Among them, Deloitte, PwC, and Ernst & Young are based in London; and KPMG is headquartered in Amstelveen, a suburb of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
The Big Four audit the finances of many internationally renowned public and private companies. Ninety-nine percent of Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) 100 companies and 87 percent of FTSE 250 companies are audited by the Big Four, according to a November Financial Times report. In the United States, companies on the S&P 500 are almost exclusively audited by Big Four firms.
‘Deep Cross-Line Cooperation’: Analyst
For years, however, the Big Four’s Chinese subsidiaries refused to provide the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) with audit work papers of U.S.-listed Chinese firms, citing data confidentiality as a pretext for accounting fraud for the CCP’s central enterprises.From the CCP’s blame of Deloitte for Huarong’s losses and from the SEC’s accusation that the Big Four had refused to hand over their audit briefs, “it is not difficult to see that the ‘Big Four’ have a long history of ‘deep cross-line cooperation’ with Chinese companies and that the span is relatively large, deep, and wide,” David Huang, a U.S.-based economist, told The Epoch Times on March 19.
Deloitte Helps Chinese Offshore Companies
In February 2021, a Deloitte employee reported audit irregularities online. In a PowerPoint presentation circulated on social media, the whistleblower alleged incidents involving 10 clients. According to the report, when Deloitte was auditing Chinese educational company RYB Education in 2017, a member of the audit project told the whistleblower “not to be so careful, just fill in the numbers” when he found audit amounts that didn’t match the amounts on actual receipts.The whistleblower also alleged that most of the administrative expenses listed by a subsidiary of RYB Educations were actually overseas purchases and expenses for executives and their children, such as golf tuition for the founder’s child in New York.
To prevent false accounting from coming to light, a Deloitte partner decided to define overhead as an accounting item that did not require detailed review during the pre-listing audit of RYB Education in New York, according to the whistleblower.
RYB was listed on the New York Stock Exchange in September 2017. Soon after, the company came under fire. In November 2017, allegations of abuse at a kindergarten owned by the company came to light. Pomerantz LLP, a veteran Wall Street law firm, filed a lawsuit in New York alleging that RYB made materially false and misleading statements about the company’s business, operations, and compliance policies—specifically about its failure to establish safety policies to prevent or remedy abuse—resulting in artificially inflated stock value, and subsequent significant losses for investors.
Just six months later, Deloitte received a fine of RMB 211.9 million from CCP authorities.
Big Four Cast Aside After Being Used
The first inkling of the CCP’s plan to crack down on the Big Four emerged in February.Why are the Big Four, which once helped to secure U.S. listings for Chinese companies, now in the CCP’s crosshairs?
According to Huang, there are several reasons why CCP authorities are going after the accounting firms, which they once deemed helpful.
First of all, the Big Four’s assistance to Chinese enterprises is a double-edged sword: while it helps Chinese companies to circumvent SEC review and get listed in the United States, overlooking fraud also leads to the loss of state-owned assets in China.
Second, the SEC’s 20 million yuan censure of Deloitte’s Beijing office tells China that the United States is well aware of the firm’s problems.
“Deloitte’s ‘historic value’ has come to an end. It is no longer practical to ask Deloitte to ‘unilaterally help’ in the future,” he said.
Moreover, in the CCP’s eyes, the Big Four accounting firms are all controlled by the West. In particular, the United States held high the sword of the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, signed into law in 2020. The law restricts access to U.S. capital markets by foreign public companies if the United States is unable to fully inspect their audits due to interference from foreign governments.
The agreement made it difficult for the Big Four accounting firms to cooperate with the CCP’s directives.
Since the PCAOB began its review of Chinese companies in September, about 60 Hong Kong-listed Chinese state-owned and private companies have changed auditors. The flight from the Big Four indicates the CCP wants to continue to receive international investment in non-core areas and yet “have their say and control” over core economic data, said Huang.
“The CCP wants to get rid of the United States and Europe, because if it can find the ‘delicate balance on the issue,’ it can control the arrangements for specific companies to ‘go overseas’ for maximum economic benefit,” he said.