A series of alleged frauds at Chinese companies listed in the West has spotlighted the role of some of the world's biggest auditors in a fast-growing market where they have expanded quickly and competed aggressively in recent years.

　　中國(guó)赴西方上市公司發(fā)生的一系列涉嫌欺詐行為，令人關(guān)注世界最大幾家審計(jì)公司在一個(gè)迅速增長(zhǎng)的市場(chǎng)里扮演了什么樣的角色。近幾年，它們?cè)谶@個(gè)市場(chǎng)迅猛擴(kuò)張并展開(kāi)了激烈競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。

　　Since February, the so-called Big Four accounting firms have resigned or been dismissed from at least seven Chinese companies listed in the U.S., according to SEC filings.

　　美國(guó)證券交易委員會(huì)(SEC)備案文件顯示，今年2月份以來(lái)，“四大”會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所至少已從七家赴美上市中國(guó)公司辭職或被解聘。

　　In most of those cases, the auditors said they had concerns about the accuracy of information provided by their clients, and in three instances, auditors quit the accounts before completing the auditing of any financial reports.

　　其中多數(shù)情況，都是審計(jì)機(jī)構(gòu)聲稱(chēng)它們擔(dān)心客戶(hù)所提供信息是否準(zhǔn)確。有三例是審計(jì)機(jī)構(gòu)在完成任何財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表的審計(jì)之前就已經(jīng)離職。

　　Dozens of mostly smaller Chinese companies listed outside that country have come under fire in recent months from regulators and investors, as a wave of fraud alleged by short sellers has erased billions of dollars in the Chinese firms' market value and triggered lawsuits and U.S. regulatory probes.

　　數(shù)十家境外上市、多數(shù)規(guī)模較小的中國(guó)公司在近幾個(gè)月受到監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)和投資者的強(qiáng)烈質(zhì)疑。這期間，空頭聲稱(chēng)這些公司存在的一系列欺詐行為，讓它們的市值縮水?dāng)?shù)十億美元，并引發(fā)法律訴訟和美國(guó)監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)的調(diào)查。

　　The companies in question represent just a handful of the hundreds of Chinese companies listed on U.S. exchanges. Still, some of the issues have caught the attention of regulators.

　　在美國(guó)交易所上市的中國(guó)公司有數(shù)百家，嫌疑公司只代表其中一少部分。但部分問(wèn)題已經(jīng)引起監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)注意。

　　This week, officials from the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which oversees audit firms, are meeting with China's Finance Ministry and the China Securities Regulatory Commission to restart talks aimed at allowing U.S. examiners to inspect auditing firms based in China. U.S regulators have been calling for access to China-based accounting firms that audit U.S.-listed companies, arguing that, at present, they don't have oversight of these firms.

　　本周，SEC和和監(jiān)管審計(jì)機(jī)構(gòu)的公眾公司會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)督委員會(huì)(Public Company Accounting Oversight Board，簡(jiǎn)稱(chēng)PCAOB)與中國(guó)財(cái)政部和中國(guó)證券監(jiān)督管理委員會(huì)重啟旨在允許美方調(diào)查中國(guó)審計(jì)公司的對(duì)話(huà)。美國(guó)監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)一直呼吁中國(guó)允許它們調(diào)查審計(jì)美國(guó)上市公司的中國(guó)會(huì)計(jì)公司，說(shuō)目前它們對(duì)這些會(huì)計(jì)公司沒(méi)有管轄權(quán)。

　　Most of the companies in trouble were audited by small accounting firms. But the role of big accounting firms in auditing some of the companies has become a black eye for the firms in the view of some analysts and investors─particularly in cases where they disavowed previous earnings filings they had audited only after 'short sellers,' who bet on a fall in share prices, questioned the accounts.

　　多數(shù)問(wèn)題公司都是由小型會(huì)計(jì)公司審計(jì)的。但在一些分析師和投資者看來(lái)，大型會(huì)計(jì)公司在審計(jì)部分問(wèn)題公司時(shí)扮演的角色，已經(jīng)成為這些會(huì)計(jì)公司身上的一個(gè)污點(diǎn)，特別是在一些情況下，在押注股價(jià)下跌的“空頭”對(duì)上市公司賬目提出質(zhì)疑之后，它們才對(duì)自己以往審計(jì)過(guò)的財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表拒不認(rèn)賬。

　　In May, Glenn Greene, an analyst with Oppenheimer & Co., lowered his investment rating on two Chinese stocks audited by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu after the accounting firm resigned as auditor for Chinese software company Longtop Financial Technologies Ltd.

　　今年5月份，在德勤會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所(Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu)辭去審計(jì)中國(guó)軟件企業(yè)東南融通金融技術(shù)有限公司(Longtop Financial Technologies Ltd.)的職務(wù)之后，Oppenheimer & Co.的分析師格林(Glenn Greene)下調(diào)了德勤審計(jì)過(guò)的兩家中國(guó)概念股的投資評(píng)級(jí)。

　　'Given our limited conviction in Deloitte audited financial statements for Chinese IT services companies, at present, we are stepping to the sidelines and reducing our ratings and removing our price targets' for two firms, Mr. Green said in a May 25 report. The two firms─VanceInfo Technologies Inc. and Camelot Information Systems Inc.─weren't accused of any wrongdoing. Neither was Deloitte.

　　格林在5月25日的一份報(bào)告里說(shuō)，考慮到我們對(duì)中國(guó)IT服務(wù)企業(yè)由德勤審計(jì)的財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表不太信任，目前我們退避觀望，下調(diào)評(píng)級(jí)，并撤下對(duì)兩家公司的股價(jià)預(yù)期。這兩家公司分別是文思信息技術(shù)有限公司(VanceInfo Technologies Inc.)和柯萊特信息系統(tǒng)有限公司(Camelot Information Systems Inc.)。這兩家公司沒(méi)有被指控有任何過(guò)錯(cuò)，也沒(méi)人指控德勤有錯(cuò)。

　　Gordon Lau, Camelot's chief financial officer, said the team of Deloitte accountants that audit his company's books is 'totally independent' from the team that audited Longtop. 'With the respect to Oppenheimer, we do not agree with the analyst's action, but we respect their research independence,' he said.

　　柯萊特公司首席財(cái)務(wù)長(zhǎng)劉天頌(Gordon Lau)說(shuō)，德勤審計(jì)柯萊特的會(huì)計(jì)師團(tuán)隊(duì)“完全獨(dú)立”于審計(jì)東南融通的團(tuán)隊(duì)。他說(shuō)，在尊重Oppenheimer公司的前提下，我們不認(rèn)可該分析師的行為，但我們尊重他們研究的獨(dú)立性。

　　A representative for VanceInfo didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Deloitte declined to comment.

　　文思公司一位代表沒(méi)有立即回復(fù)置評(píng)請(qǐng)求。德勤拒絕置評(píng)。

　　Deloitte parted ways with New York Stock Exchange-listed Longtop in Mayfollowing six years as its auditor after Longtop was accused by short sellers of inflating its business revenue. Longtop has denied the allegations.

　　繼有空頭指控稱(chēng)在紐約證券交易所(New York Stock Exchange)上市的東南融通夸大其業(yè)務(wù)收入后，為東南融通服務(wù)了六年的審計(jì)師德勤今年5月與該公司分道揚(yáng)鑣。東南融通否認(rèn)這些指控。

　　In its resignation letter, Deloitte said, 'we decline to be associated' with any of Longtop's financial communications in 2010 and 2011.

　　德勤在辭職信中說(shuō)，我們拒絕被與東南融通2010年和2011年的財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告聯(lián)系在一起。

　　Longtop has said an independent investigation is reviewing Deloitte's concerns and the short sellers' allegations. Longtop declined to comment further.

　　東南融通說(shuō)，目前開(kāi)展的獨(dú)立調(diào)查正在審查德勤的關(guān)切和空頭的指控。東南融通拒絕進(jìn)一步置評(píng)。

　　Along with Deloitte, KPMG, Ernst & Young and PricewaterhouseCoopers─often referred to as the Big Four─declined to comment about their operations in China or the issue of alleged fraud among a few Western-listed Chinese companies.

　　除了德勤，畢馬威(KPMG)、安永會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所(Ernst & Young)和普華永道(PricewaterhouseCoopers)(這四家公司常被合稱(chēng)為四大會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所)也拒絕置評(píng)有關(guān)自己在中國(guó)的經(jīng)營(yíng)狀況或有關(guān)在美國(guó)上市的幾個(gè)中國(guó)企業(yè)的欺詐指控。

　　Accountants say fraud can be difficult for auditors to detect. But in some instances, auditors have alleged fraud by their clients before anyone else has and before any regulatory filings were endorsed.

　　會(huì)計(jì)師說(shuō)，審計(jì)機(jī)構(gòu)要想發(fā)現(xiàn)企業(yè)欺詐可能很難。但在一些案例中，審計(jì)機(jī)構(gòu)曾在任何人發(fā)出指控并在任何監(jiān)管備案文件獲得認(rèn)可之前，首先站出來(lái)指控其客戶(hù)涉嫌欺詐。

　　The Big Four have expanded rapidly in China, a market that has become the biggest source of new international stock listings and mergers.

　　四大會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所在中國(guó)的業(yè)務(wù)迅速擴(kuò)大，中國(guó)已成為海外上市和并購(gòu)的最大新興來(lái)源地。

　　The auditors are 'guilty of taking bad clients,' not of doing bad audits, said Paul Gillis, a visiting professor of accounting at Peking University's Guanghua School of Management. But, he said, 'given the Big Four's pace of expansion, it's no surprise that they have a shortage of what you can call gray-hair or no-hair partners.'

　　北京大學(xué)光華管理學(xué)院會(huì)計(jì)學(xué)客座教授吉利斯(Paul Gillis)說(shuō)，審計(jì)機(jī)構(gòu)在接到壞客戶(hù)時(shí)會(huì)產(chǎn)生負(fù)罪感，但在做不良審計(jì)時(shí)卻沒(méi)有這種感覺(jué)。不過(guò)他說(shuō)，考慮到“四大”的擴(kuò)張速度，它們?nèi)鄙倌切┵Y歷深厚且可靠的合伙人就不足為奇了。

　　In China, the Big Four operate through joint ventures with local affiliates to comply with domestic rules. All of the Big Four accounting firms have international umbrella organizations and member firms in each country in which they do business. The member firms are separate entities that legally have no relationship to one another.

　　四大會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所在中國(guó)經(jīng)營(yíng)時(shí)，是通過(guò)與中國(guó)本土企業(yè)成立合資公司來(lái)遵守中國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)規(guī)定。所有四大會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所都有國(guó)際保護(hù)組織，在自己建立業(yè)務(wù)的每個(gè)國(guó)家也都有成員公司。這些成員公司互為獨(dú)立實(shí)體，彼此間沒(méi)有任何法律關(guān)系。

　　In 2004, Deloitte announced an aggressive bid to expand its China business, declaring the country 'an area of virtually unlimited potential' and earmarking $150 million for investment here over the next five years. In 2006, a senior Ernst & Young executive told the state-run China Daily newspaper his firm planned to invest $200 million in China.

　　2004年，德勤宣布了一項(xiàng)雄心勃勃的計(jì)劃，打算擴(kuò)大自己在中國(guó)的業(yè)務(wù)，說(shuō)中國(guó)是一個(gè)有著幾乎無(wú)限可能的地方，準(zhǔn)備撥付1.5億美元在未來(lái)五年進(jìn)行在華投資。2006年，安永一位高管對(duì)中國(guó)官方英文報(bào)紙《中國(guó)日?qǐng)?bào)》的記者說(shuō)，安永計(jì)劃在華投資2億美元。

　　KPMG took on a 'reverse takeover' company, fuel retailer and distributer China Integrated Energy Inc., as a client in December and signed off on its 2010 earnings filing dated March 16. A reverse takeover is a quicker and cheaper way of going public, but one that avoids the scrutiny of a traditional initial offering. Shortly after KPMG took the account, a short seller published a report saying long-term surveillance of the company's factories had revealed 'no meaningful production activity.' In late April, KPMG resigned, citing lack of cooperation in an independent investigation of China Integrated's accounting that was initiated in response to the short seller's report. KPMG said its audit report should no longer be relied on.

　　去年12月，畢馬威承接了一個(gè)“反向收購(gòu)”公司客戶(hù)──燃油零售商兼分銷(xiāo)商中國(guó)綜合能源公司（China Integrated Energy Inc.），并在該公司標(biāo)注著2011年3月16日的2010年收益?zhèn)浒肝募虾灹俗帧７聪蚴召?gòu)是一種更快捷、成本更低的企業(yè)上市方式，無(wú)需像傳統(tǒng)的首次公開(kāi)募股那樣經(jīng)過(guò)嚴(yán)格審查。在畢馬威接到這個(gè)客戶(hù)后不久，就有一家空頭發(fā)布報(bào)告稱(chēng)，對(duì)中國(guó)綜合能源公司所設(shè)工廠進(jìn)行長(zhǎng)期監(jiān)測(cè)后發(fā)現(xiàn)，那里并未開(kāi)展任何有意義的生產(chǎn)活動(dòng)。今年4月晚些時(shí)候，畢馬威辭去了中國(guó)綜合能源公司審計(jì)師職位，理由是對(duì)該公司財(cái)務(wù)狀況展開(kāi)獨(dú)立調(diào)查時(shí)它缺乏合作，當(dāng)時(shí)之所以發(fā)起調(diào)查是為了回應(yīng)那家空頭的報(bào)告。畢馬威說(shuō)，其審計(jì)報(bào)告不應(yīng)再被作為依據(jù)。

　　A representative for China Integrated declined to comment.

　　中國(guó)綜合能源公司代表拒絕置評(píng)。