????美國證券交易委員會（SEC）行政初審法官卡梅隆?艾略特今天在112頁的意見書中裁定，將四大會計(jì)師事務(wù)所中國成員所的美國執(zhí)業(yè)資格暫時(shí)吊銷6個(gè)月。意見書的部分內(nèi)容作了修改，原因是它們對美國證券交易委員會和中國證監(jiān)會之間互動(dòng)情況的描述比“外交領(lǐng)域通常使用的語言更為直白”。艾略特可能一直對中國證監(jiān)會都很友善，但他對四大一點(diǎn)兒也不手軟。

????大華會計(jì)師事務(wù)所沒有遭禁。這家事務(wù)所已經(jīng)脫離了德豪國際會計(jì)師事務(wù)所（BDO），而且我覺得它已經(jīng)不再為美國上市公司提供服務(wù)。

????這項(xiàng)判決將在SEC公布終裁令后生效。四大可以在21天內(nèi)要求復(fù)議，SEC也可以在任何情況下決定復(fù)議。如果SEC公布上述終裁結(jié)果，四大還可以向聯(lián)邦地區(qū)法院提出上訴，同時(shí)要求暫緩執(zhí)行SEC的決定。這可能導(dǎo)致問題擱置很長一段時(shí)間，但對四大及其客戶來說，這可能不是最理想的結(jié)果。

????這項(xiàng)禁令將產(chǎn)生巨大影響。遭禁期間，四大將無法為美國上市公司提供審計(jì)服務(wù)。最糟糕的情況可能是這項(xiàng)禁令在今后1、2個(gè)月內(nèi)生效。大多數(shù)按自然年經(jīng)營的公司提交的年報(bào)都需要審計(jì)機(jī)構(gòu)出具意見，而提交年報(bào)的截止日期是4月30日。資質(zhì)被暫時(shí)吊銷后，四大的中國成員所就不能再發(fā)布審計(jì)報(bào)告，它們的客戶就無法提交年報(bào)。按照SEC的規(guī)定，這些公司將停牌，原因是投資者沒有獲得交易其股票所需的數(shù)據(jù)。對打算在美國首發(fā)上市的公司來說，如果選擇四大作為審計(jì)機(jī)構(gòu)而四大又失去了資質(zhì)，這些公司就要倒霉了。

????為了避免受到影響，這些公司可以轉(zhuǎn)而選擇其他會計(jì)師事務(wù)所。在美國上市公司會計(jì)監(jiān)管委員會（PCAOB）注冊的中國注會事務(wù)所接近50家，但就規(guī)模和能力而言，能為四大的客戶提供審計(jì)服務(wù)的寥寥無幾，甚至連一家也沒有。的確，鑒于四大方面存在不確定性，我預(yù)計(jì)有些二線事務(wù)所，比如致同、德豪國際、國富浩華和羅申美，將承接一系列IPO工作。

????四大的美國成員所不會出面來填補(bǔ)這些空缺。要到中國開展業(yè)務(wù)，它們就得取得臨時(shí)營業(yè)執(zhí)照；取得執(zhí)照后，它們就得遵守中國法律；而按照中國法律，它們就不能把審計(jì)工作底稿交給SEC。沒有哪家美國成員所會為了幫助中國公司而拿自己在美國的營業(yè)資質(zhì)冒險(xiǎn)。

????對四大來說，如果一定要暫時(shí)吊銷中國成員所的資質(zhì)，那么最理想的方案就是通過協(xié)商讓這項(xiàng)禁令從5月1日起生效。這樣，它們的中國成員所就能完成對2013年年報(bào)的審計(jì)。這種安排依然會給按財(cái)務(wù)年度經(jīng)營的公司帶來問題，需要增資或者首發(fā)上市的公司也是一樣。不過，這些中國成員所可以在11月1日及時(shí)回歸，對2014年的年報(bào)進(jìn)行審計(jì)。

????這已經(jīng)大大加重了中美監(jiān)管爭奪戰(zhàn)的籌碼。去年夏天，PCAOB和中方簽署諒解備忘錄，雙方就共享監(jiān)管調(diào)查涉及的審計(jì)工作底稿達(dá)成了一致。這些審計(jì)工作底稿也開始在中美之間流動(dòng)，許多投資者因此以為這場爭奪戰(zhàn)已經(jīng)結(jié)束。但問題并沒有真正得到解決——PCAOB不能到中國開展調(diào)查，SEC則希望不受限制地接觸到在美國上市的中國公司。這次，SEC似乎是在向中國監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)表明，它愿意動(dòng)用“核打擊”，而且無論如何至少使用6個(gè)月。我想，受這項(xiàng)決定影響， 那些PCAOB不能調(diào)查的公司有可能被這個(gè)委員會注銷資格，從而讓6個(gè)月的暫時(shí)注銷變成永久禁令。說到底，唯一的解決方案只能是中方同意在美國上市的中國公司全面遵守美國證券法規(guī)。如果這對某些公司來說過于敏感，比如部分大型國企，中國政府就應(yīng)該把它們從美國股市拉回去。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：Charlie

????

????Cameron Eliot, Administrative Trial Judge of the SEC, threw the book at the China Big Four today, suspending them from practicing before the SEC for six months in a 112-page opinion, parts of which were redacted because they reported interactions between the SEC and CSRC “more candidly than is customary in diplomatic circles”. While he may have been kind to the CSRC, he took the hide off of the Big Four. The firms, especially PwC, were probably feeling a little raw already from the blistering they received in the ICIJ reportyesterday on how they aided Chinese elites to get money offshore.

????BDO DaHua was censured by not banned. Dahua has pulled out of BDO and I do not believe it has any U.S. listed clients anymore.

????The suspension will not begin until the Commission enters an order of finality. The firms can request review within 21 days or the Commission can decide to review it anyway. If the commission goes ahead and finalizes the decision, the Big Four could appeal to federal district court and ask for a stay of the decision. That could delay the problem for a long time, but that may not be the best outcome for the firms or their clients.

????The suspension will have significant effect. The Big Four cannot audit U.S. listed companies during the suspension. The worst possible time for the suspension to begin would be in the next month or two. Most of the calendar year companies file an annual report on Form 20F that requires an audit opinion. That report is due on April 30. If the firms are suspended, they cannot issue audit reports, so the clients cannot file Form 20-F. Under exchange rules, this should lead to the companies being suspended from trading since investors do not have the data they need to be able to trade. Any company planning to do an IPO using a Big Four firm as auditor is out of luck if the auditors are suspended.

????Companies could switch to non-Big Four firms and avoid any consequences. There are almost 50 Chinese CPA firms registered with the PCAOB, but few, if any, have the scale and skills to audit the Big Four’s clients. I do expect that some of the second-tier firms like Grant Thornton, BDO, and Crowe Horwath/RSM are going to pick up a number of IPOs given the uncertainty surrounding the Big Four.

????The U.S. member firms of the Big Four are unlikely to step in to fill the void. Coming to China to do audits would require them to obtain a temporary practice certificate, which would require them to follow Chinese law, which prohibits them from turning over working papers to the SEC. None of those firms are going to be willing to risk their practice rights in the U.S. to help out in China.

????Possibly the best option for the Big Four if it has to face the suspension is to negotiate to have it start on May 1. That would allow them to complete the 2013 audits. Fiscal year companies would still have a problem, as would any companies that need to raise additional capital or do an IPO. But the firms could return November 1 in time to do the 2014 audits.

????This has significantly upped the ante in the regulatory battle between the U.S. and China. Many investors had thought that this battle was settled last summer when the PCAOB signed a Memorandum of Understanding to share papers in connection with investigations and the working papers starting flowing. But the issues really never were settled – the PCAOB cannot do inspections and the SEC wants unfettered access to U.S. listed Chinese companies. The SEC appears to be signaling to Chinese regulators that it is willing to deploy the “nuclear option”, for six months anyway. I think this decision may empower the PCAOB to begin revoking the registrations of firms it cannot inspect, which would make the six month ban permanent. Ultimately, the only way this gets settled is if China agrees that companies that list in the U.S. are subject to all U.S. securities laws. For those companies that are too sensitive for that, like some large SOEs, China should pull their U.S. listings.