Wednesday, July 24, 2024

PwC boss faces prospect of parliament privileges committee referral

Angus- KPMG NACC - Watergate story


 PwC boss faces prospect of parliament privileges committee referral


PwC Australia chief Kevin Burrowes risks potential jail time or fines after a Labor senator raised the prospect of ­referring him to the privileges committee for allegedly misleading parliament.

DAVID ROSS
July 24, 2024 




PwC Australia chief executive Kevin Burrowes risks potential jail time or fines after a Labor senator raised the prospect of ­referring the career consultant to the privileges committee over concerns he misled parliament about his pay packet. 
Labor senator Deb O’Neill told The Australian she was “very concerned” about Mr Burrowes’ responses to a Senate committee, failing to reveal ­almost $1.2m from his total remuneration when asked to disclose his salary. 
Mr Burrowes has now revealed he is paid almost $4m a year, more than the $2.8m pay packet the PwC boss disclosed in February. 
The PwC boss told the Senate finance and public administration committee he was paid $2.4m as CEO in February, with the firm later correcting his ­answer to $2.8m. 
However, PwC did not correct its answers on Mr Burrowes’ compensation, running as high as $4m in 2024, until the start of July when faced with questions from Senator O’Neill.
Senator O’Neill said she was very concerned about PwC’s ­response and its failure to correct earlier evidence. 
She said the firm’s failures “further exacerbates concerns I have about the capacity of PwC’s senior leaders to speak anything approximating the truth”.
“Referral to the privileges committee is always a matter for committee members to determine collectively, however the debacle around Mr Burrowes’ declaration of his salary already warrants further consideration,” she said. 
The privileges committee has the power to hand out fines or imprisonment.

The potential referral exposes the anger in parliament over PwC’s engagement with the committee, with the firm having already faced multiple broadsides from an earlier Senate investigation into the use of consultants by government. However, PwC is understood to hold the position that Mr Burrowes answered truthfully to the question from Senator O’Neill about his “salary”. 
In response to the parliament, PwC said the additional $1.2m handed to Mr Burrowes was a top-up payment in recognition that he left a “senior global role with the PwC network” to take the job as well as retiring from the PwC UK partnership. 
“Mr Burrowes had certain relocation costs covered in connection with his move to Australia. Separately, Mr Burrowes entered into an arrangement with the PwC network for additional services to be provided by Mr Burrowes to the network,” PwC said. 
However, senators and PwC staff and partners are furious Mr Burrowes failed to reveal the ­additional pay which came as the firm faced a collapse in revenues as work dried up in the face of a tax scandal. 
PwC has been at the centre of a storm after it was revealed to have relied on confidential government tax information to construct strategies for clients to circumvent new tax laws in Australia. 
The firm’s former head of international tax, Peter Collins, was banned for his role in the scheme, which saw him share confidential briefings from a consulting process with Treasury. 

Mr Burrowes was parachuted in to run PwC Australia, amid the firm’s flailing response to the scandal, which cost former CEO Tom Seymour his job and saw a number of senior leaders leave the firm. Mr Seymour was previously paid $4.8m. 
PwC told The Australian Mr Burrowes declared the $1.2m payments from PwC Global to the firm in July last year when he joined the partnership as part of his conflicts of interest disclosures. This disclosure was also made to PwC’s 10-person governing board, which is responsible for the oversight of the firm and on which Mr Burrowes sits. 
Mr Burrowes only told partners about his $4m pay packet in late June in a 400-person Zoom call. When The Australian sought to put questions to the firm about Mr Burrowes pay packet on June 10, PwC head of media relations Patrick Lane issued “a friendly caution on proceeding with that one”. Senators are keen to call current and former PwC figures along with Mr Burrowes to appear on August 2 for a new round of hearings, amid concerns the firm has frustrated investigations into the tax scandal. 
A review into the international elements of the scandal by law firm Linklaters cleared six staff identified to have received confidential information shared by Mr Collins, noting they “should have raised questions as to whether the information was confidential”. 
However, Senator O’Neill has questioned Mr Burrowes’ claims the firm has been unwilling to share information about the international links with him, noting he has no knowledge of the scandal outside Australia. 
Mr Burrowes claims on LinkedIn he oversaw “all aspects of the firm’s professional services to clients in the UK” between July 2016 and July 2020, noting the firm’s tax division “reported to me as did the head of Market Initiatives and Industries”. This came as PwC attempted to sell tax strategies to global clients to minimise their obligations in Australia.

How Adobe’s PwC taxstrategy came unstuck

Neil ChenowethSenior writer

Jul 24, 2024 

If the PwC tax leaks scandal demonstrated one thing about PwC International, it’s how introverted it is – these people really don’t like sharing.

They don’t want anyone to see the international report they commissioned; they don’t like naming international partners; and they really don’t want to share the names of the “dirty 34” US tech giants they targeted using confidential Treasury information with fixes for the Multinational Anti Avoidance Law (MAAL) before it came into effect in January 2016.

Adobe’s president of International, Paul Robson, was one of three senior executives appointed to Adobe Trading Systems in the days before the MAAL came into effect in January 2016. Alex Ellinghausen

The most colourful of the internal PwC emails obtained by Senator Deborah O’Neill last year is the herogram of January 6, 2016, where a PwC partner crows about scoring $2.5 million in fees from just the first stage of “assisting 14 clients with their efforts to comply with the MAAL”.

Protecting the redacted names of the tech clients was said to be one of the major reasons PwC International took over the Australian firm last year.

We do know PwC’s clients included Uber, Google and Facebook. It turns out one clue to PwC’s client list is ASIC company records, which show tech companies were scrambling in December 2015 to incorporate new Australian entities before the MAAL came into effect the following month.

These new operating companies would deploy PwC’s wizard wheeze tax strategies.

On December 1, 2015, Uber incorporated Uber Pacific Holdings Pty Ltd, which had a 10 per cent interest in three Netherlands partnerships. It would be business here as usual, except that the profits would go offshore.

PwC shared the scheme with an irate Australian Taxation Office deputy commissioner Mark Konza on August 29, 2016. The ATO’s first preference was to deploy a tactical nuclear device on top of PwC, but instead, it settled for a long-running process which ultimately unmasked the firm’s breaches of confidentiality.

Why was the ATO so cross? Perhaps because just three weeks earlier it had released a second Taxpayer Alert about questionable schemes to avoid the MAAL, this time involving GST. And yes, it was by PwC.

A US tech company would set up a new Australian entity to become the distributor for its products, but then another foreign subsidiary – perhaps in Ireland, say – would become the Australian distributor’s agent. So, the profits would still go overseas, with minimal GST paid.

PwC sources say the client was Adobe.

ASIC filings show on December 9, 2015 – eight days after Uber set up its new entity – Adobe incorporated a new operating business here, Adobe Trading Systems Pty Ltd (ATS), with its parent in the Netherlands. The three directors were Adobe’s US vice president of tax, Barry Slivinsky, global chief accounting officer Rich Rowley, and the president of Adobe Asia Pacific, Paul Robson.

The downside was that when a deeply unhappy ATO discovered the new set-up, the major legal battle it promised had the potential to drag in senior Adobe management.

ATS reported $220 million in revenue in 2016, but by March 2017 the group had settled with the Tax Office and gone back to reporting through the old operating company, Adobe Systems Pty Ltd (ASPL).

Interestingly, in a seven-month period in 2017, besides Adobe, the ATO settled audits with Uber, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple.

“Adobe complies with local tax rules, and tax rules in all countries that we do business,” an Adobe spokesman said.

ASPL went from reporting $80.8 million in Australian sales in 2015, to $2.9 billion in total in the five years from 2018 to 2022, while franking credits show it paid $43.3 million tax.

Adobe Systems Software Ireland did a little better, ending up with $1.9 billion of the Australian sales revenue to pay those ruinous Irish running costs and taxes.





Posted by at