Sunday, 15 February 2009

KPMG

There was a time that the financial consultancy KPMG had an impeccable reputation but suddenly they have been mentioned by both Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling as being the paragons of virtue.

Suddenly I am beginning to think that something is wrong. At the time of writing I have no reason to suspect KPMG of any wrongdoing but experience has taught me that any company mentioned by NoLab as being independent usually ends up as being totally biased towards their aims and goals.

Do KPMG also act for any of the banks? As I say I have really no idea but I suspect anything which supports Gordon and Alistair.

2 comments:

Thoreau said...

KPMG KPMG KPMG/Tax Shelter Tax Shelter Tax Shelter. Of course all the banks are insolvent and KPMG audits a disproportionate amount of them. You thought KPMG’s tax shelter shenanigans were disturbing, such activities were nothing compared to the 100s of Billions of fraud contained in the banks financial statements that KPMG audits. Just remember Flynn and his high priced lawyers tried to help put all the tax shelter partners in prison, what do you think Flynn is going to do to all the Audit Partners who have helped the banks engage in massive fraud by signing off on fraudulent bank financial statements? Though it is difficult to muddle through the fraudulent KPMG bank financial statements, it is not impossible and from that you can profit. Many of us made a small fortune shorting Citibank the KPMG audit client just by understanding the fraudulent nature of Citi’s financials. It is like taking candy from a baby, a favorite KPMG saying.

As one small example for all you dopes who somehow think the system is not and has not always been rigged by liars and thieves, Citi’s 10q as of 9/31/08 shows capital of about $126 billion yet its market cap as of today is $19 Billion (though it is likely insolvent). Forget about FAS 157 there are a million ways around it, the more difficult scam to discern is the use of SIVs to offload bad assets from Citi’s balance sheet so it does not have to recognize the losses. To Citi’s credit it does disclose in footnote 15 of its 10q potential exposure of about $130 Billion for part of their SPEs. Of course such amount is in excess of its stated book capital and almost 7 times larger than its current market cap and likely massively understated.

I know no one saw this coming; you can’t know the unknown; and all KPMG did was follow the accounting rules. Then how come a dope like me could figure it out? Further, that is what the tax partners thought before Tim Flynn, Joe Loonan and Swen Holmes tried to get them put in prison. In fact, many beginning as early as 2005 saw this problem coming like Dr. Roubini and used simple math to explain why. If KPMG is so expert at anything, why didn’t KPMG see this coming and warn all the decimated Citi investors. Personally, I am glad KPMG continued to produce the self evident fraudulent financials because me and my kind made a fortune off all the idiots who think any integrity exists within the fraudulent accounting statements or companies (such statements are reflective of).

In fact, Dr. Roubini is suggesting formally nationalizing all the banks (which most of are already 100% owned on a fair market value basis) because the system is insolvent. It may be time to short these fraudulent companies yet again if he is right, any thoughts?

15. SECURITIZATIONS AND VARIABLE INTEREST ENTITIES

The following tables summarize the Company's significant involvement in VIEs in millions of dollars:


As of September 30, 2008
(continued)
Maximum exposure to loss in
significant unconsolidated VIEs
(continued) As of December 31, 2007(1)
Total maximum exposure Consolidated
VIE assets Significant
unconsolidated
VIE assets(2) Maximum exposure to loss in
significant unconsolidated
VIE assets(3)
$ — $ 63 $ — $ —
— 35 — —
— 1,385 — —

$ — $ 1,483 $ — $ —

$ 63,462 $ — $ 72,558 $ 72,558
1,337 — 27,021 2,154
2,501 22,312 51,794 13,979
2,034 1,353 21,874 4,762
37,032 4,468 91,604 34,297
16,560 17,003 22,570 17,843
3,430 53 13,662 2,711
2,124 2,790 9,593 1,643
— 58,543 — —
317 140 11,282 212
1,795 12,809 10,560 1,882

$ 130,592 $ 119,471 $ 332,518 $ 152,041

$ 35 $ 604 $ 52 $ 45

$ 162 $ — $ 23,756 $ 162

$ 130,789 $ 121,558 $ 356,326 $ 152,248


Total stockholders' equity 126,062 126,962 (1 )



http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/drawFiling.asp?docKey=137-000104746908011506-5R9J4HT8PI832K9ORA58RBE2V1&docFormat=HTM&formType=10-Q

bryboy said...

WOW Thoreau! Every now and then I get a real jolt on my insignificant little blog. I must read and reread your post in order to get your gist as I do not have a background in economics. I just KNEW that Gordon and Alistair were using and reusing the name KPMG far too much for them to be kosher.
Tks for your time.