Breakup of auditors could boost their legal arms, say former Big Four lawyers
Proposals to split accounting firms could free up Big Four legal teams to take work from top clients
May 23, 2018 at 07:27 AM
3 minute read
A potential breakup of the Big Four accounting firms could see their legal arms boosted by the removal of conflict issues that restrict the clients they can target, according to former Big Four lawyers.
Pressure has mounted on KPMG, Deloitte, EY and PwC in recent days after all four came under heavy criticism in last week's (16 May) final parliamentary report into the collapse of construction giant Carillion.
The report states that the failures around Carillion were caused by a market that "works for the Big Four firms but fails the wider economy" and calls for the Competition and Markets Authority to consider breaking up their audit arms or splitting audit functions from non-audit services.
While these proposals have provoked strong pushback in the accounting community, with both PwC and Deloitte stating that a breakup would "hurt audit quality", lawyers who have worked at the Big Four say that an audit split-off could give accounting firms' legal departments greater access to clients previously off-limits due to conflict rules.
One former PwC lawyer now in private practice said: "Because of the rules which do not allow them to provide legal services to audit clients, a breakup could give Big Four legal teams the opportunity to broaden their client base. It has always been a challenge for the Big Four legal departments that they can't go after work for audit clients.
"If they could go after existing audit clients, the Big Four have 99% of the FTSE 100 on their audit books. Ultimately, when you have people like the Big Four with the resources and money to invest in growing a practice, you have to see that as a concern, especially with the ongoing consolidation in the legal market."
Discussions around breaking up the accounting and professional services arms of the Big Four have been aired before, but are likely to gain more traction following the Carillion collapse, according to one Big Four lawyer, who also spoke of frustration at not being able to pursue clients held by their auditing wing due to conflict rules.
A former Big Four lawyer now in private practice said that while on a "cost-benefit analysis" the Big Four would not choose to split their businesses unless forced to, such a move would open doors to wider range of potential clients for their legal teams.
They said: "It will help the legal departments if they get split up. Historically they have been unable to chase most existing clients of the business, and it would help the legal side in relation to the clients that they audit, if they could get around existing rules."
All of the Big Four have said they have drawn up contingency plans for a breakup of their UK businesses. A Deloitte spokesperson said that while the firm does "recognise the concerns" raised by the report, "audit-only firms would reduce audit quality", while a spokesperson for PwC said: "Contingency planning is regularly considered by the firm's key governance bodies."
Last year, research conducted by ALM Intelligence found that Deloitte, EY, KPMG and PwC collectively employ about 8,500 lawyers globally. PwC, which has the largest legal arm of the Big Four, has about 2,500 lawyers, making it the world's sixth-largest legal services provider by that measure.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHSF Hires Trio for Luxembourg Launch, Builds Private Capital Practice
To Thrive in Central and Eastern Europe, Law Firms Need to 'Know the Rules of the Game'
7 minute readWhat About the Old Partners Who Have No Interest in AI?
Netflix Offices Raided by Authorities in Paris and Amsterdam
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250