Accounting network: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:55, 13 March 2017

Revision as of 09:51, 23 June 2017

Line 67:

In the 1990s, the large accounting firms reached another ceiling in the services they made available to their clients. Having reached their natural limit on growth with more than 90% of auditing for public companies, the Big 6 branched out to become multidisciplinary in legal, technology, and employment services. Since the essential infrastructure was in place, it was thought to be relatively simple to incorporate other services into the existing network. As a network, it was natural to create independent entities in these other professions which themselves could be part of the network. The method and structures varied from firm to firm.

When the Big 6 began its expansion to the legal profession, it was met with fierce opposition from law firms and bar associations. Commissions, panels and committees were established by legal and accounting firms to argue their positions. Government agencies were enlisted. For more than five years the debate escalated. This movement ended abruptly with the fall of [[Arthur Andersen]] as a result of its association with [[Enron]]. [[Sarbanes Oxley]] followed, which effectively ended this trend.{{citation needed|date=May 2013}} Some international associations of independent firms, such as [http://www.alliottgroup.net [Alliott Group]], now include law firms within the membership.

== Vicarious liability ==