Assessing the effectiveness of internal controls

 

Strong internal controls can help prevent and detect fraud. That’s why Section 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) requires a public company’s management to annually assess the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting. And Sec. 404(b) requires the company’s independent auditors to provide an attestation report on management’s assessment of internal controls. Some smaller entities may be exempt from the latter requirement — but not the former one.

Burdensome for smaller entities

When the SEC published the regulations, smaller public companies told the SEC that the costs of complying with Sec. 404(b) would outweigh the benefits for investors. While the SEC explored ways to ease the compliance burden, the compliance deadline for Sec. 404(b) was repeatedly delayed for nonaccelerated filers — companies with a public float of less than $75 million on the last business day of their most recent second fiscal quarter.

In 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act instructed the SEC to permanently exempt nonaccelerated filers from SOX Sec. 404(b). Absent this exemption, nonaccelerated filers would have been required to comply with Sec. 404(b) beginning with fiscal years ending on or after June 15, 2010.

New definition provides no new Sec. 404(b) relief

Earlier this year, the SEC expanded its definition of “smaller reporting companies” from companies with a public float of less than $75 million to those with a public float of less than $250 million. This change will allow nearly 1,000 more companies to qualify for a lighter set of disclosure rules available to smaller reporting companies. However, the SEC did not raise the public float thresholds for when a company qualifies as an accelerated filer. This means the $75 million threshold still applies in relation to the Sec. 404(b) exemption.

SEC Commissioners Michael Piwowar and Hester Peirce favored raising the accelerated filer threshold to $250 million to expand the number of companies that would be exempt from Sec. 404(b). But, based on feedback from auditors and investor advocate groups, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton decided to keep the current threshold at $75 million — at least for now.

It’s also important to note that not all companies with a public float of less than $75 million are considered nonaccelerated filers. If a company’s public float drops below $75 million, it continues to be an accelerated filer until it drops below $50 million, and thereby “exits” accelerated status.

Still on the hook

Even if your company is exempt from Sec.404(b), you’re still responsible for assessing the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Sec. 404(a). Contact us for any questions about complying with the SOX rules or for information regarding best practices in internal controls.

© 2018

Should cloud computing setup costs be expensed or capitalized?

Companies will be able to capitalize, or spread out the costs of, setting up pricey business systems that operate on cloud technology under an update to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Here are the details.

FASB responds to business complaints

Over the last three years, businesses have complained to the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) about the different accounting treatment for cloud-based services vs. those operated on physical servers onsite. Businesses told the FASB that the economics of these arrangements are virtually the same.

As more businesses moved to cloud-based business applications, those complaints grew louder. So, in August, the FASB published Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2018-15, Intangibles — Goodwill and Other — Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract.

Existing GAAP “resulted in unnecessary complexity and needed to be updated to reflect emerging transactions in cloud computing arrangements that are service contracts,” FASB Chairman Russell Golden said in a statement. “To address this diversity in practice, this standard aligns the accounting for implementation costs of hosting arrangements — regardless of whether they convey a license to the hosted software.”

Old rules, new rules

Under existing GAAP, the accounting for services managed in the cloud differs depending on the type of contract a business has with a software provider. When a cloud computing (or hosting) arrangement doesn’t include a software license, the arrangement must be accounted for as a service contract. This means businesses must expense the costs as incurred.

Under the updated guidance, businesses will be able to treat the expenses of reconfiguring their systems and setting up cloud-managed business services as long-term assets and amortize them over the life of the arrangement.

The update also will align the accounting for implementation costs for cloud-managed systems with the accounting for costs associated with developing or obtaining internal-use software. Businesses will have to record the expense related to the capitalized implementation costs in the same line item in the income statement as the expense for the fees for the hosting arrangement.

Coming soon

The update is effective for public businesses for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years. (This means 2020 for calendar-year companies.) For all other entities, the update is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2020, and interim periods within annual periods beginning after December 15, 2021. Early adoption is also permitted.

© 2018

Identifying and reporting critical audit matters

 

For over 40 years, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has required only a simple pass-fail statement in public companies’ audit reports. But the deadline for mandatory reporting of critical audit matters (CAMs) in audit reports is fast approaching. The revised model will provide insight to help investors and other stakeholders better understand a public company’s financial reporting practices — and help management reduce potential risks.

Deadlines

Under existing SEC standards, auditor communication of CAMs is permissible on a voluntary basis. However, disclosure of CAMs in audit reports will be required for audits of fiscal years ending on or after June 30, 2019, for large accelerated filers; and for fiscal years ending on or after December 15, 2020, for all other companies to which the requirement applies.

The new rule doesn’t apply to audits of emerging growth companies (EGCs), which are companies that have less than $1 billion in revenue and meet certain other requirements. This class of companies gets a host of regulatory breaks for five years after becoming public, under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act.

Criteria

In 2017, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) published Release No. 2017-001, The Auditor’s Report on an Audit of Financial Statements When the Auditor Expresses an Unqualified Opinion and Related Amendments to PCAOB Standards. The main provision of the rule requires auditors to describe CAMs in their audit reports. These are issues that:

  • Have been communicated to the audit committee,
  • Are related to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements, and
  • Involve especially challenging, subjective or complex judgments from the auditor.

By highlighting a CAM, an auditor is essentially saying that the matter requires closer attention. Examples might include complex valuations of indefinite-lived intangible assets, uncertain tax positions, goodwill impairment, and manual accounting processes that rely on spreadsheets, rather than automated accounting software.

New guidance

In July 2018, the Center for Audit Quality issued a 12-page guide on implementing the revised model of the auditor’s report. The guide instructs auditors to select CAMs based on:

  • The risks of material misstatement,
  • The degree of auditor judgment for areas such as management estimates,
  • Significant unusual transactions,
  • The degree of subjectivity for a certain matter, and
  • The evidence the auditor gathered during the review of the financial statements.

The guide doesn’t say how many CAMs are required in an audit report or provide a checklist of potential issues. Instead, CAMs will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Coming soon

PCAOB Chairman James Doty has promised that CAMs will “breathe life into the audit report and give investors the information they’ve been asking for from auditors.” By identifying CAMs on the face of the audit report, auditors highlight challenging, subjective or complex matters that also may warrant closer attention from management. For more information about CAMs, contact us.

© 2018

Use pay-ratio disclosures with caution

 

Starting in 2018, certain public companies must disclose the ratio of their CEO’s annual compensation to that of its “median employee.” The rule allows for significant flexibility in calculating these ratios, leading to widely divergent ratios within the same industry. Therefore, public companies and their investors should tread carefully before they rely on these metrics.

Complying with the rule

The pay-ratio disclosure rule applies to all U.S. public companies required to provide Summary Compensation Table disclosures. With limited exceptions, covered companies must disclose pay ratios in annual reports, on Form 10-K, in proxy and information statements, and in registration statements — if these filings require executive compensation disclosures.

The rule doesn’t apply to the following companies:

Smaller reporting companies (SRCs). The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) voted unanimously in June 2018 to increase the public float threshold for SRCs to $250 million.

Emerging growth companies (EGCs). This term generally refers to new public companies with gross revenues under $1 billion in the most recent fiscal year. (The SEC allows a transition period for newly public companies.)

The rule also exempts registered investment companies, foreign private issuers and Canadian companies filing in the United States pursuant to the Multijurisdictional Disclosure System.

Calculating pay ratios

The SEC allows significant leeway in calculating pay ratios to ease the burden of complying with the rule. Companies may choose a process that fits their structure and compensation programs. But they must disclose the methodology used to determine the median employee pay and the estimates used in calculating the pay ratio.

For example, a company could use a statistically representative sample of its workforce rather than the entire population. Or they could compare only base salary or W-2 wages, excluding from their computations bonuses, overtime, stock options and other forms of compensation.

Companies also aren’t required to calculate the exact compensation when identifying the median. Rather, the SEC lets them use “reasonable estimates.” In addition, the rule allows companies to exclude up to 5% of their non-U.S. workers and to adjust foreign pay to account for differences in the cost of living between regions.

As a result, the initial round of pay-ratio disclosures published in early 2018 vary widely. For example, a recent study found that ratios disclosed by companies in the financial services industry ranged from 1:1 to 1:429.

Comparing apples to oranges

Before relying on pay-ratio disclosures to evaluate compensation practices or cost efficiency, it’s important to compare a company’s process for calculating pay ratios to others used in the same industry. Contact us for more information about pay-ratio disclosures and how a company’s compensation practices measure up.

© 2018

It’s important to monitor your SEC filing status

 

As public companies grow, they may move from one filing status or issuer category to another. Recent and proposed changes to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules for some categories could affect your company’s financial reporting and audit procedures.

Categories of public companies

Under existing rules, public companies fall into different filing categories, based on their public “float” (the amount of shares available to the public for trading):

  • Smaller reporting companies (SRCs) are nonaccelerated filers that meet certain other requirements, including annual revenues under $50 million if their public float is zero.
  • Nonaccelerated filers have a public float of less than $75 million and aren’t otherwise required to accelerate their filing deadlines.
  • Accelerated filers have a public float between $75 million and $700 million and meet other requirements.
  • Large accelerated filers have a public float of more than $700 million and meet certain other requirements.

Finally, there’s the emerging growth company (EGC). Generally, an EGC is a new public company that has gross revenues under $1 billion in its most recent fiscal year and meets certain other requirements. EGCs enjoy a variety of benefits during their first five years of existence, including scaled-back disclosures and exemption from the auditor attestation of a company’s internal control over financial reporting as required by Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

A company that ceases to be an EGC must begin complying with Sec. 404(b), except for nonaccelerated filers, which are exempt from that requirement unless they become accelerated or large accelerated filers. (Congress currently is considering legislation that would extend the exemption for certain companies, however.)

Changes to public float thresholds

On June 28, 2018, the SEC voted unanimously to issue the final rule in Release No. 33-10513, Amendments to Smaller Reporting Company Definition. The rule increases the public float threshold for SRCs to $100 million and nonaccelerated filers to $250 million.

To complicate matters, the SEC did not make conforming changes to the definition of an accelerated filer. Rather, it eliminated the automatic exclusion of SRCs in the definitions of accelerated and large accelerated filers. As a result, a registrant could be both an SRC and an accelerated filer. As an accelerated filer, a company would still be required to comply with Sec. 404(b).

The new SEC rule will be effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register, which normally occurs a few weeks after a rule is posted on the SEC’s website. The SEC said 966 additional companies will be eligible for smaller company status in the first year of the new threshold.

Annual assessment

Changes in filing status affect the form, content and timing of financial reports, as well as the extent of external audit procedures. So, it’s a good idea to re-evaluate your company’s status well before the end of each fiscal year. We can help you evaluate your filing status based on the SEC’s evolving guidelines. If a change is anticipated, we can help you prepare for new filing, disclosure and audit requirements.

© 2018

Consider these financial reporting issues before going private

 

Issuing stock on the public markets isn’t right for every business. Some public companies decide to delist — or “go private” — often due to the high costs of complying with the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). But going private can be nearly as complex as going public, so it’s important to dot your i’s and cross your t’s.

SEC requirements

The SEC scrutinizes going-private transactions to ensure that unaffiliated shareholders are treated fairly. A company that’s going private — together with its controlling shareholders and other affiliates — must, among other requirements, file detailed disclosures pursuant to SEC Rule 13e-3.

The SEC allows a public company to deregister its equity securities when they’re held by fewer than 300 shareholders of record, or fewer than 500 shareholders of record if the company doesn’t have significant assets. Depending on the facts and circumstances, a company may no longer be required to file periodic reports with the SEC once the number of shareholders of record drops below the above thresholds.

Detailed disclosures

To comply with SEC Rule 13e-3 and Schedule 13E-3, companies executing a going-private transaction must disclose:

  • The purposes of the transaction, including any alternatives considered and the reasons they were rejected,
  • The fairness of the transaction, both substantive (price) and procedural, and
  • Any reports, opinions and appraisals “materially related” to the transaction.

The SEC’s rules are intended to protect shareholders, and some states even have takeover statutes to provide shareholders with dissenters’ rights. Such a transition results in a limited trading market to be able to sell the stock.

Failure to act with the utmost fairness and transparency can bring harsh consequences. SEC scrutiny can lead to costly damages awards and penalties if your company is guilty of treating minority shareholders unfairly or making misleading disclosures.

Handle with care

Companies that pursue going-private transactions should exercise extreme caution. To withstand SEC scrutiny and avoid lawsuits, it’s critical to structure these transactions in a manner that ensures transparency, procedural fairness and a fair price.

In addition to helping you comply with the SEC rules, we can evaluate whether going private can help your company reduce its compliance costs or allow it to focus on long-term goals rather than satisfying Wall Street’s demand for short-term profits.

© 2018

Options for SEC Delinquent Filers

With the downturn in the economy several years ago, many smaller public companies found themselves unable to attract equity investment. Even with the reduced filing requirements the SEC allowed for smaller reporting companies (SRC’s) many were unable to maintain their current filing status. With the continuing turn around of the economy some of that equity investment capital is returning, and now those SRC’s want to begin trading again, but to do so they have to become current in their filings. Some have not been current for many years and the prospect of having to do a ‘catch-up’ is daunting to say the least if not completely cost prohibitive. The SEC has a Delinquent Filers Program with three options, and upon filing the delinquent reports the Company will satisfy the current information requirement of Rule 144 and the ‘filed all reports’ requirement for use of Form S-8

1. Option A. – File all past due reports. These reports should be updated to the date of filing. Correspondingly, each report will be very similar which simplifies the process. The MD&A should also include a section discussing the financial statements for that specific period.

2. Option B – Request permission from the office of the Chief Accountant at Corp Fin to file a Multi-year Comprehensive Form 10K. The difficulty here lies in the detailed information required to be filed with Corp Fin when requesting to file the Comprehensive Form 10K

3. Option C – File Form 16 terminating your registration and immediately file a Form 10 Registration Statement. To do so the Company must have less than $10mm in assets and fewer than 300 shareholders. Two years of audited financials will be required with the Form 10. (This is an attractive solution for Companys that have been delinquent for more than 2 years.)

Finally, and most importantly – retain great securities counsel to assist in your analysis and walk you through. Good luck!!!