12.1
CB
No to option. The Central Bank does not support the option to require this information to be made available to the relevant competent authority also, given that it may not be in a position to act on matters relating to material
breaches of laws, material threats or a refusal to issue an audit opinion.
Yes to option. In our view the Regulation should be transposed consistently with the modification proposed to be introduced to Regulation 52 of the EU (Capital Requirements) Regulations 2014 (S.I. No. 158 of 2014). This will also enable requests for additional information depending on future developments.
CAI
The Member State Option in this Article relates solely to requiring additional information by Member States. Central Bank legislation in Ireland already imposes wide ranging reporting obligations on auditors. Again, in the interests of ensuring consistency between Member States, avoiding the imposition of additional requirements provides the optimal solution. It should be noted also that other extant legislation in Ireland already addresses wide ranging reporting obligations on statutory auditors beyond the financial sector eg the Companies Acts (to ODCE), and various Criminal Justice Acts in respect of theft and fraud and suspected money laundering.
CPA Ireland
It would appear appropriate to take up this member state option to provide for flexibility. ACCA
No additional matters need be reported. This reporting requirement here are similar in nature to one already existing in S27B of Central Bank Act 1997 as inserted by The Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland Act 2004; the statutory duty report.
PwC
This requirement already applies in certain sectors whereby auditors have reporting obligations to supervisory body and we see no reason why this requirement should not continue, as is prescribed by national law. As a consequence, we do not see it as a matter for decision and that it should be determined on a sector by sector basis through the legislative framework for that sector.
For example, Section 35 of the Insurance Act 1989 requires auditors of insurance companies to report to the financial regulator. Auditors of investment firms are obliged to report under section 33 of the Investment Intermediaries Act 1995, regulations 7, 8 and 9 of the Supervision of Credit Institutions, Stock Exchange Members Firms and Investment Business Firms Regulations 1996 and Regulation 144 of the European Communities
(Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007. Auditors of banks are required to report under section 47 of the Central Bank Act 1989 and regulations 7, 8 and 9 of the Supervision of Credit Institutions, Stock Exchange Members Firms and Investment Business Firms Regulations 1996. Auditors of UCITS are required to report under regulation 85 of the European Communities (Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities) Regulations 2003.
Moreover, the mechanism for such reporting is catered for in professional standards that apply to auditors and audit firms in M46 issued by CCAB-I.
KPMG
The Department will be aware that there are already extensive reporting duties imposed on statutory auditors of regulated entities to report to those responsible for financial markets supervision. These requirements are set out both in International Standards on Auditing and in Central Bank of Ireland Regulations and Directives. In our view, the effective existing reporting requirements together with additional reporting requirements set out Article 12 are sufficient to ensure that any information which comes to the attention of the auditor which would be useful to such Regulators is promptly reported. Therefore, we do not consider that it is a requirement to legislate for any other additional information to be reported. We do not believe it is necessary to adopt this MS Option.
EY
We would not support this member state option being taken.
Auditors of entities regulated by the CBI already adhere to extensive requirements provided for in Irish legislation and which requires that auditors report to the CBI under specified prescribed enactments and which includes at least those provisions set out in Article 12.1.
We therefore oppose the current list in Article 12 being expanded to ensure consistency, and a level playing field for auditors of financial services providers throughout the EU.
Deloitte
At this point of time we see no reason to extend the listing of information to be provided. We therefore believe this member state option should not be availed of in Ireland at this point of time.
Mazars
No additional information required. IFIA
There are already detailed Auditor Protocols in place in respect of the access the Central Bank of Ireland can have to the auditors of Irish regulated funds including PIEs. We do not believe that further measures in this regard are necessary.
BlackRock
We would support this option in order to enhance regulation and supervision. Revenue
We did consider that this option should be taken, but it would probably be more appropriate to other bodies such as Department of Finance to reply to questions. We consider it is not a Revenue matter.
Article 15 Record keeping
MS Option - Article 15 CB
Yes to option. The Central Bank recommends a period of 6 years is imposed rather than 5 years as that would align to the proposal in Section 285 of the Companies Bill, 2012.
CAI
Current CAI Audit Regulations require records to be maintained for a minimum of 6 years – in line with the statute of limitations. We see no compelling to depart from this period of time.
CPA Ireland
Not considered necessary to provide for further time period. The five year period meets with the requirements of International Standard on Quality Control 1.
ACCA
ACCA has no preference and would support the suggested DJEI choice of 5 years, although a 6 year maximum, in keeping with the statute of limitations may be more appropriate.
PwC
We believe that auditors should keep such documentation in line with the existing documentation retention requirements set out in national law.
KPMG
It is our current understanding that existing Irish law requires all statutory auditors to retain audit workpapers for 6 years from the date of signing of the audit opinion. On this basis it appears that the current Irish legislation is stricter than Article 15 and, therefore, it is presumed that this option will be taken to ensure that the longer period currently required continues under Irish law.
EY
In Ireland, the legal requirement is based on the statute of limitation which is 6 years and so there is no reason to adopt a longer period than this.
We would recommend that this option be avoided on the basis that it could lead to inconsistency between different regulators and member states.
Deloitte
We have not identified any reason to extend the period audit firms should be required to keep documentation beyond the 5 year period set out in the regulation. We therefore believe this member state option should not be availed of in Ireland at this point of time.
Mazars
Auditors’ current practice for retaining records is 6 years (as per the Companies Act 1990) plus 1 year to cover any overlap periods. It would appear to make sense to align the retention period for record keeping with the statutory requirement.
IFIA
The current Irish requirement in this regard is six years and therefore there is no need to take any specific MS option.
Article 16 Appointment of statutory auditors or audit firms