MEDIA STATEMENT

This communication builds on this statement, issued on Friday, 2 October: CA ANZ completes first CEO-directed review of major Australian firms.

Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand (CA ANZ)’s independent Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) currently has 20 investigations underway in relation to the KPMG matter, including into senior leaders of the organisation. These are in addition to investigations underway by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and the Tax Practitioners Board (TPB).

At the same time, CA ANZ CEO Ainslie van Onselen has used powers available under the CA ANZ By-Laws to direct Quality Practice Reviews for eight firms including KPMG, with the intention of checking that in the wake of the KPMG scandal, they have appropriate systems and processes in place to handle confidential audit client information and promote an ethical culture, looking forward. These reviews are undertaken and provided on a confidential basis and in line with our powers as a professional body.

The first Quality Practice Review completed was a point-in-time assessment of KPMG’s systems and processes as at July 2026. While CA ANZ expected an established firm such as KPMG, which had been subject to months of scrutiny, would now have adequate systems and processes in place, CA ANZ made nine recommendations for improvement, aimed at strengthening these systems and processes further. These recommendations included establishing a Chief Integrity Officer function and independent processes for investigating whistleblower reports.

The Quality Practice Review does not replace in any way CA ANZ’s investigations into the conduct of individuals involved, nor revisit the firm’s admissions regarding the handling of the 2024 whistleblower reports.

Separately and significantly, CA ANZ’s 20 independent PCC investigations are assessing individuals’ compliance with systems, processes, rules and regulations. We note that in August, following an application by the Professional Conduct Committee, the independent Disciplinary Tribunal imposed significant interim restrictions on two members, Eileen Hoggett and Paul Rogers. The restrictions include their undertaking not to provide audit services or act as Registered Company Auditors and cancelling their Certificates of Public Practice.

Context when considering the Quality Practice Review

It was KPMG’s decision to release the findings of the confidential Quality Practice Review, before other investigations and reviews concerning these matters had been completed. Its findings and recommendations should ultimately be considered alongside the outcomes of the individual investigations.

Findings about KPMG Australia’s current systems and processes from the initial Quality Practice Review do not determine, constrain or prejudge the outcome of the separate investigations. For that reason, this Review should not be interpreted or characterised as an exoneration of any individual, or as CA ANZ’s final assessment of the broader matters concerning KPMG Australia.

KPMG’s publication of the review

It has been incorrectly suggested that KPMG Australia pressed CA ANZ to publicly release the findings of the Quality Practice Review. This is inaccurate.

Importantly, that confidentiality does not prevent accountability. Findings from practice reviews may be referred to the independent PCC, and review reports can be released where required by law.

KPMG Australia chose to make this review public before the other investigations and reviews concerning these matters had been completed.

Holding the profession to account

CA ANZ recognises the concern these matters have caused members, the profession and the wider community. Trust in the accounting and audit profession depends on strong professional standards, effective regulatory oversight and meaningful consequences when those standards are not met.

CA ANZ will use all mechanisms available to it to hold members accountable under its By-Laws and independent professional conduct framework. We also recognise that professional bodies form only one part of the regulatory system.

We understand investigations by ASIC and the Tax Practitioners Board remain ongoing alongside CA ANZ’s own professional conduct investigations. This may affect the timing and progress of CA ANZ's investigations as it is appropriate that these higher order regulatory processes are given the time required to play out.

CA ANZ supports reforms that address regulatory gaps and strengthen accountability, independence and audit quality. We are engaging constructively with Treasury and ASIC on those reforms.

The Quality Practice Review is one part of CA ANZ’s response to the KPMG matter. It is not the conclusion of it.

Our separate conduct processes remain ongoing, and we will continue to pursue them independently and in accordance with our role.