????美國(guó)證券交易委員（SEC）會(huì)起訴五家中國(guó)會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所一案已引發(fā)眾多討論：這起訴訟有著怎樣的意義,？對(duì)在華經(jīng)營(yíng)的跨國(guó)公司可能產(chǎn)生怎樣的影響,？筆者從這一事件的最初就開(kāi)始寫文章，現(xiàn)可以更詳細(xì)地來(lái)分析一下這個(gè)問(wèn)題,。

????這里可能牽涉到有兩項(xiàng)行動(dòng),。第一，美國(guó)證券交易委員會(huì)早已提交了針對(duì)這些會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所的訴訟,。第二,，美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì)（PCAOB）可能更改規(guī)定，取消中國(guó)會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所的注冊(cè)資格,。迄今為止,，美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì)尚未采取行動(dòng)。

????SEC一案的結(jié)果可能是行政初審法官判定五家會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所未向SEC提交審計(jì)工作文件應(yīng)受處罰,。處罰措施可能橫跨譴責(zé)這些會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所到全面禁止其為SEC提供審計(jì)報(bào)告,。全面禁止也可能包括，禁止它們繼續(xù)服務(wù)于跨國(guó)公司,。筆者認(rèn)為這種可能性很小,。更可能的情況是法官禁止它們?yōu)楹Ｍ馑綘I(yíng)發(fā)行人提供審計(jì)服務(wù)，不涉及跨國(guó)公司客戶,。如果是這種情況,，跨國(guó)公司就不會(huì)有問(wèn)題。話雖如此,，但我估計(jì)美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì)的條例制定流程會(huì)考慮這起SEC訴訟,，可能取消那些它無(wú)法實(shí)施檢查的會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所的注冊(cè)資格。

????如果這些事務(wù)所的美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì)注冊(cè)資格被取消,，跨國(guó)公司面臨的問(wèn)題會(huì)很嚴(yán)重,。根據(jù)美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì)的規(guī)定,，任何在美國(guó)上市公司審計(jì)中承擔(dān)關(guān)鍵角色的會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所必須是在美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì)登記注冊(cè)的事務(wù)所。如果這些事務(wù)所喪失了登記注冊(cè)資格,，就不能再繼續(xù)承擔(dān)關(guān)鍵角色,。

????下面美國(guó)上市公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會(huì)條例中對(duì)于關(guān)鍵角色的定義：

????(p)(ii) 在一份審計(jì)報(bào)告的準(zhǔn)備或提交過(guò)程中承擔(dān)關(guān)鍵角色

????“在一份審計(jì)報(bào)告的準(zhǔn)備或提交過(guò)程中承擔(dān)關(guān)鍵角色”意味著——

????-1 為發(fā)行人提供實(shí)質(zhì)性服務(wù)，會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所運(yùn)用或依賴這樣的服務(wù)發(fā)布全部或部分與發(fā)行人相關(guān)的審計(jì)報(bào)告,，或者

????-2 為發(fā)行人子公司或部分業(yè)務(wù)提供主要審計(jì)服務(wù),，這些子公司或部分業(yè)務(wù)的資產(chǎn)或營(yíng)收須達(dá)到發(fā)行人并表資產(chǎn)或營(yíng)收的20%或以上，是主會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所發(fā)布該發(fā)行人審計(jì)報(bào)告時(shí)不可缺少的部分,。

????注1:第(1)段定義里的“實(shí)質(zhì)性服務(wù)”意味著主會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所為發(fā)布該發(fā)行人審計(jì)報(bào)告的全部或部分,，投入的服務(wù)小時(shí)數(shù)或服務(wù)收費(fèi)在總量中的占比分別達(dá)到20%或更多。該服務(wù)不包括向非審計(jì)客戶提供的非審計(jì)服務(wù),。

????注2:第(2)段定義里的“子公司或部分業(yè)務(wù)”包括所有的子公司,、部門、分支機(jī)構(gòu),、辦公室或其他業(yè)務(wù),，不管其組織結(jié)構(gòu)和/或與發(fā)行人的控制關(guān)系。

????There has been a great deal of discussion about the implications of the SEC case against the five Chinese accounting firms and its potential impact on multinational companies operating in China. I posted on this when the issue first came up, and it is worth a more detailed look.

????There are two possible actions involved here. First we have the present case already filed by the SEC against the firms. Next we have a potential change in the rules by the PCAOB that would deregister Chinese accounting firms. The PCAOB has yet to act.

????The SEC case could lead to the Administrative Trial Judge penalizing the five firms for failing to provide working papers to the SEC. Those penalties could range from censure to completely banning the firms from practice before the SEC. A complete ban could include prohibiting them from serving multinationals. I think the chance of that is remote. More likely, the judge will ban them from auditing foreign private issuers and will leave the MNC clients alone. In that case, there is no issue for MNCs. Nonetheless, I think the SEC process will be subsumed by a PCAOB rulemaking process that proposes to deregister accounting firms that it cannot inspect.

????If the PCAOB moves to deregister the firms, then the risk for MNCs is more serious. PCAOB rules require any firm that plays a substantial role in the audit of a U.S. listed company must be registered with the PCAOB. If the firms lose their registration, then they cannot play a substantial role.

????Here is the definition of substantial role from the PCAOB rules:

????(p)(ii) Play a Substantial Role in the Preparation or Furnishing of an Audit Report

????The phrase "play a substantial role in the preparation or furnishing of an audit report" means –

????-1 to perform material services that a public accounting firm uses or relies on in issuing all or part of its audit report with respect to any issuer, or

????-2 to perform the majority of the audit procedures with respect to a subsidiary or component of any issuer the assets or revenues of which constitute 20% or more of the consolidated assets or revenues of such issuer necessary for the principal accountant to issue an audit report on the issuer.

????Note 1: For purposes of paragraph (1) of this definition, the term "material services" means services, for which the engagement hours or fees constitute 20% or more of the total engagement hours or fees, respectively, provided by the principal accountant in connection with the issuance of all or part of its audit report with respect to any issuer. The term does not include non-audit services provided to non-audit clients.

????Note 2: For purposes of paragraph (2) of this definition, the phrase "subsidiary or component" is meant to include any subsidiary, division, branch, office or other component of an issuer, regardless of its form of organization and/or control relationship with the issuer.