Pages

Tuesday, August 27, 2024

PwC Australia cites confidentiality to withhold CEO data from inquiry

 Is this a bad time to talk about Qantas, PwC or the big banks? Some people would argue that calling for corporates to face the same treatment that has been meted out to the CFMEU is a clear-cut case of “whataboutism” and a defence of (alleged) union corruption.  

I ask the question in light of the CFMEU’s alleged “rife infiltration by bikies and organised criminals, intimidation and allegations of corruption”, uncovered by Nine reporters Nick McKenzie, David Marin-Guzman and Ben Schneiders and published in July. 

The union has now been put into administration for at least three years and hundreds of officials have been fired, following legislation passed with Coalition support, which may still face legal challenges.

Is Labor treating the CFMEU as it did Qantas or PwC? Is it a WTF situation or whataboutism to even ask?


PwC Australia cites confidentiality to withhold CEO data from inquiry


Edmund TadrosProfessional services editor

Aug 27, 2024 

PwC Australia has refused to give a parliamentary inquiry the service agreement between local CEO Kevin Burrowes and PwC International, citing “confidentiality arrangements”.


The firm also refused to supply minutes detailing discussions by its governance board about Mr Burrowes’ role, and again said it could not provide the report into actions by overseas partners concerning the firm’s tax leaks scandal.


But PwC Australia confirmed that PwC International was first told the Tax Practitioners Board was investigating a potential confidentiality breach at the firm in May 2021, a full year before the local governance board was given its own “substantive update” on the investigation.

The new information is contained in 17 responses to questions on notice for PwC stemming from the ongoing joint parliamentary inquiry into the structure of the big four consulting firms.

The responses show that while the local firm has made sweeping reforms to its governance structure, it is still refusing to answer what the inquiry says are critical questions about the tax leaks matter and its operations.

The scandal involved a former partner leaking secret government tax policy information to other personnel in PwC, which was then used to market the firm’s services. PwC then separately designed and sold a tax structure that side-stepped new tax laws it was helping the government design.

Payment to reform PwC Australia

Mr Burrowes did not disclose to partners in Australia that he was being paid $1.2 million a year by PwC International – in addition to his PwC Australia pay of $3.2 million – for more than a year, when he was asked about his income in February by parliament.

He said the additional payment was for helping to reform how PwC Australia operates, and denied it was a conflict to be paid by both the local and international branches of the firm.

Labor senator Deborah O’Neill, who chairs the inquiry, said PwC continued to “obstruct the work of the parliament by failing to provide information requested both in parliamentary hearings and in questions on notice”.

Related

With friends like PwC, who needs enemies?

Related

Sayers, Seymour round on Burrowes’ global role

Find out the inside scoop about Accenture, Deloitte, EY, KPMG, PwC and McKinsey. Sign up to our weekly Professional Life newsletter.

Edmund Tadros leads our coverage of the professional services sector. He is based in our Sydney newsroom. Connect with Edmund on Twitter. Email Edmund at edmundtadros@afr.com.au

\