Accounting firm fires Trump

[Zincwarrior]

Not only is Trump a crook, he always has been. But, and he well knows this, the faithful are too dumb to realize it. That's why he loves them so! Bigly!!!

They are his primary revenue stream now.

 

[Synthaholic]

he is in the news because some of you people keep him in the news just like the righties did after hillary lost the election.....egotistical people thrive on attention....ignore them and they will go away....

Who has FoxNews been talking about all this week? Hillary. That she is running in 2024 and controls the Democratic Party. So who is obsessed with who?

 

[Synthaholic]

I would imagine Trump will have some issues in the future obtaining loans after all of this.

He has more pressing concerns - these banks are going to call in all of these loans. But no prob for Donny, right? He's got $10B lying around. Right?

 

[evenflow1969]

He has more pressing concerns - these banks are going to call in all of these loans. But no prob for Donny, right? He's got $10B lying around. Right?

He will con it out of his followers some how.

 

[Independent thinker]

Lol, I guess if you really want adventure badly you go repo a plane. Ya got second s to get to the plane maybe have to pull it out of the hanger and for all you know the damn thing doesn't have any oil in the middle of repair. Not something ya really wanna figure out at 3500 feet. Those boys are crazy

Don't know if you ever watched the show or not but it was quite good and addressed many of the things you brought up. You ought to try the show out sometime if you haven't seen it. Not sure where it is available. Used to be on A&E.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Good Grief Meister>
trump puts his face and name out there on a daily basis, like he ACTUALLY thinks he is still relevant.

Is HE?

Is trump still relevant?

only if you let him be....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Who has FoxNews been talking about all this week? Hillary. That she is running in 2024 and controls the Democratic Party. So who is obsessed with who?

kind of proves what i said dont it?....

 

[g5000]

If you need to resort to tweets, it seems you are the one back on your heels.

That's hilarious considering Trump's main means of communication was tweets.

You tards can't handle more than a tweet. Once something exceeds 280 characters, your eyes glaze over.

You want more than that?

Here you go: Mazars Thumps Trump

Dollars to donuts you don't make it to the end.

 

[g5000]

‘“While we have not concluded that the various financial statements, as a whole, contain material discrepancies, based upon the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to you to no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate,” Mazars General Counsel William J. Kelly wrote to his Trump Organization counterpart, Alan Garten.’ ibid

Translation: Trump is a crook.

Yep. Trump's accountant from Mazars has already testified before a grand jury.

 

[g5000]

Dr Lesh. You believed and encouraged The Russia Hoax

The damage Hillary The Murderer and you did to us with this scam for 5 yrs

Spying on a sitting Prez.........................My God that is treason punishable by death


When are you relinquishing your Google Medical license Dr Lesh. You were 100% Covid wrong on every single thing

Boy, so many red herrings, so little substance.

 

[Mac1958]

Trump is in the news. Should we all ignore that?

That's definitely what the Trumpsters want, hence all the TDS stuff.

They want to pretend that the man they adore, the authoritarian leader of their party and the savior of their country, is irrelevant.

Weak

 

[g5000]

Because they didn't know they were based on lies given to them by the trump Org, genius. Maybe try reading an article once in a while before commenting on it.

It's longer than a tweet. They do not have the intellectual bandwidth to read an article so they attack the source without reading it. It's the only way to preserve their inside out, upside down, backward delusional world they live in.

 

[g5000]

Have you ever made it past a headline?

“While we have not concluded that the various financial statements, as a whole, contain material discrepancies, based upon the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to you to no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate,” Mazars General Counsel William J. Kelly wrote to his Trump Organization counterpart, Alan Garten.

And there’s good reason for Mazars’s refusal to state an opinion, one way or the other, on the accuracy of the Trump Organization’s statements of financial condition: It had never stated such an opinion because it had never performed the procedures that would allow it to do so—an audit conducted under Generally Accepted Auditing Standards.

Mazars performed compilations of the Trump Organization’s statements of financial condition, not audits. A compilation is a completely different animal from an audit. The accounting literature governing compilations, AR-C Section 80A*, makes the distinction clear:

Because a compilation engagement is not an assurance engagement, a compilation engagement does not require the accountant to verify the accuracy or completeness of the information provided by management or otherwise gather evidence to express an opinion or a conclusion on the financial statements.

When accounting firms such as Mazars issue compilation reports stating that management, not the accounting firm, is responsible for the statements, and that they neither audited the financial statements nor performed procedures to verify their accuracy, they are not hiding behind their work. They are making required disclosures designed to alert potential users that the accounting firm isn’t expressing an opinion on the accuracy of the financial statements.

Just as accounting firms are prohibited from stating in a compilation report that the client’s financial statements are in conformity with applicable accounting rules, they are also prohibited from stating that the financial statements are not in conformity with financial reporting requirements. “Such a statement would be tantamount to expressing an adverse opinion on the financial statements as a whole. Such an opinion can be expressed only in the context of an audit engagement.” (AR-C 80A.A38, emphasis added)

In other words, Mazars did not state an opinion that Trump’s financial statements were inaccurate because it could not have made such a statement under the rules that govern the accounting profession. Not having ever performed an audit, Mazars was prohibited from opining on the accuracy of the financial statements, one way or the other. Trump himself acknowledged this point in a statement released last night.

But Mazars could warn off potential users of the financial statements if, after it had issued compilation reports on Trump’s financial statements, it became aware of previously unknown facts that may have existed when it issued its reports that, if known at the time, might have caused it to believe that information supplied by the client was inaccurate. Indeed, if Mazars was aware that persons were likely to be using or relying on the Trump Organization’s inaccurate financial statements, it was required to warn them off.

Mazars Thumps Trump

Why the accounting firm has parted ways with its longtime client and his company.

www.thebulwark.com

 

[Indeependent]

And there’s good reason for Mazars’s refusal to state an opinion, one way or the other, on the accuracy of the Trump Organization’s statements of financial condition: It had never stated such an opinion because it had never performed the procedures that would allow it to do so—an audit conducted under Generally Accepted Auditing Standards.

Mazars performed compilations of the Trump Organization’s statements of financial condition, not audits. A compilation is a completely different animal from an audit. The accounting literature governing compilations, AR-C Section 80A*, makes the distinction clear:


When accounting firms such as Mazars issue compilation reports stating that management, not the accounting firm, is responsible for the statements, and that they neither audited the financial statements nor performed procedures to verify their accuracy, they are not hiding behind their work. They are making required disclosures designed to alert potential users that the accounting firm isn’t expressing an opinion on the accuracy of the financial statements.

Just as accounting firms are prohibited from stating in a compilation report that the client’s financial statements are in conformity with applicable accounting rules, they are also prohibited from stating that the financial statements are not in conformity with financial reporting requirements. “Such a statement would be tantamount to expressing an adverse opinion on the financial statements as a whole. Such an opinion can be expressed only in the context of an audit engagement.” (AR-C 80A.A38, emphasis added)

In other words, Mazars did not state an opinion that Trump’s financial statements were inaccurate because it could not have made such a statement under the rules that govern the accounting profession. Not having ever performed an audit, Mazars was prohibited from opining on the accuracy of the financial statements, one way or the other. Trump himself acknowledged this point in a statement released last night.

But Mazars could warn off potential users of the financial statements if, after it had issued compilation reports on Trump’s financial statements, it became aware of previously unknown facts that may have existed when it issued its reports that, if known at the time, might have caused it to believe that information supplied by the client was inaccurate. Indeed, if Mazars was aware that persons were likely to be using or relying on the Trump Organization’s inaccurate financial statements, it was required to warn them off.

Mazars Thumps Trump

Why the accounting firm has parted ways with its longtime client and his company.

www.thebulwark.com

Have you ever worked for a financial firm that had you write the reports submitted to the Feds and the IRS?
I wrote some of those reports according to spec and the data that fed those reports should land
99% of the Board of Directors in prison.

 

[g5000]

There's really no way of knowing how significant this will end up being.

Trump has criminal consequences to worry about, as well as serious financial consequences:

Trump Will Have $900 Million Of Loans Coming Due In His Second Term If He’s Reelected

The president would likely have to engage in a series of high-stakes transactions that could produce unfathomable conflicts of interest.

www.forbes.com

Whether or not Donald Trump wins the election, lenders will expect his businesses to pay back an estimated $900 million in the next four years, an alarmingly accelerated timetable that involves more than twice as much debt as the president previously indicated. In order to emerge unscathed, Trump will likely have to engage in a series of high-stakes, big-money transactions—deals that could produce arguably the biggest conflicts of interest that an American president has ever had to face.

About half of the debt coming due from the start of 2021 to the end of 2024 is secured against assets that the president and his children own outright. He will have to pay back loans against his hotel in Washington, D.C., his golf resort in Miami and his tower in Chicago. He’ll also have to sort out the debt against Trump Tower and Trump Plaza in New York City.


Mazars just announced any disclosures Trump makes about his wealth is pure horseshit. So good luck getting a bank to roll over his debts.

This could literally bankrupt Trump. Again.

 

[Mac1958]

Trump has criminal consequences to worry about, as well as serious financial consequences:

Trump Will Have $900 Million Of Loans Coming Due In His Second Term If He’s Reelected

The president would likely have to engage in a series of high-stakes transactions that could produce unfathomable conflicts of interest.

www.forbes.com

Whether or not Donald Trump wins the election, lenders will expect his businesses to pay back an estimated $900 million in the next four years, an alarmingly accelerated timetable that involves more than twice as much debt as the president previously indicated. In order to emerge unscathed, Trump will likely have to engage in a series of high-stakes, big-money transactions—deals that could produce arguably the biggest conflicts of interest that an American president has ever had to face.

About half of the debt coming due from the start of 2021 to the end of 2024 is secured against assets that the president and his children own outright. He will have to pay back loans against his hotel in Washington, D.C., his golf resort in Miami and his tower in Chicago. He’ll also have to sort out the debt against Trump Tower and Trump Plaza in New York City.


Mazars just announced any disclosures Trump makes about his wealth is pure horseshit. So good luck getting a bank to roll over his debts.

This could literally bankrupt Trump. Again.

Very possible. Yet he'd just play the victim, as always, and the rubes would buy it, as always.

 

[g5000]

At what point will angry lefties realize that the Trump corporation built things, met a payroll and offered good paying jobs? What did the current president ever do except live on confiscated taxpayer funds?

Trump has not built anything in decades. All he's done is sell his name to real estate other better people built.

 

[g5000]

Accompanying firms don't do audits? Wow! Who told you that AOC or Krugman?

Read this, genius: Mazars Thumps Trump

And there’s good reason for Mazars’s refusal to state an opinion, one way or the other, on the accuracy of the Trump Organization’s statements of financial condition: It had never stated such an opinion because it had never performed the procedures that would allow it to do so—an audit conducted under Generally Accepted Auditing Standards.

Mazars performed compilations of the Trump Organization’s statements of financial condition, not audits. A compilation is a completely different animal from an audit. The accounting literature governing compilations, AR-C Section 80A*, makes the distinction clear:

Because a compilation engagement is not an assurance engagement, a compilation engagement does not require the accountant to verify the accuracy or completeness of the information provided by management or otherwise gather evidence to express an opinion or a conclusion on the financial statements.

When accounting firms such as Mazars issue compilation reports stating that management, not the accounting firm, is responsible for the statements, and that they neither audited the financial statements nor performed procedures to verify their accuracy, they are not hiding behind their work. They are making required disclosures designed to alert potential users that the accounting firm isn’t expressing an opinion on the accuracy of the financial statements.

Just as accounting firms are prohibited from stating in a compilation report that the client’s financial statements are in conformity with applicable accounting rules, they are also prohibited from stating that the financial statements are not in conformity with financial reporting requirements. “Such a statement would be tantamount to expressing an adverse opinion on the financial statements as a whole. Such an opinion can be expressed only in the context of an audit engagement.” (AR-C 80A.A38, emphasis added)

In other words, Mazars did not state an opinion that Trump’s financial statements were inaccurate because it could not have made such a statement under the rules that govern the accounting profession. Not having ever performed an audit, Mazars was prohibited from opining on the accuracy of the financial statements, one way or the other. Trump himself acknowledged this point in a statement released last night.

But Mazars could warn off potential users of the financial statements if, after it had issued compilation reports on Trump’s financial statements, it became aware of previously unknown facts that may have existed when it issued its reports that, if known at the time, might have caused it to believe that information supplied by the client was inaccurate. Indeed, if Mazars was aware that persons were likely to be using or relying on the Trump Organization’s inaccurate financial statements, it was required to warn them off.

 

[g5000]

You have no clue what you’re talking about.

hi Fudgepacker: you are pitifully ignorant.

Why do you suppose businesses go to accountants for? “Hi. Please run my numbers for no reason?” You dipshit. They do it so that there is a third party reviewing their representations and the audit report from a CPA is supposed to be reliable to avoid things like fraud. That’s why the accountant not only has to do the ledger work math correctly according to standard principles of accounting but ALSO has to certify that they have examined the representations themselves. Due fucking diligence, Fudgy.

When you post, it would help if you weren’t just making up horseshit.

Read this, genius: Mazars Thumps Trump

And there’s good reason for Mazars’s refusal to state an opinion, one way or the other, on the accuracy of the Trump Organization’s statements of financial condition: It had never stated such an opinion because it had never performed the procedures that would allow it to do so—an audit conducted under Generally Accepted Auditing Standards.

Mazars performed compilations of the Trump Organization’s statements of financial condition, not audits. A compilation is a completely different animal from an audit. The accounting literature governing compilations, AR-C Section 80A*, makes the distinction clear:

Because a compilation engagement is not an assurance engagement, a compilation engagement does not require the accountant to verify the accuracy or completeness of the information provided by management or otherwise gather evidence to express an opinion or a conclusion on the financial statements.

When accounting firms such as Mazars issue compilation reports stating that management, not the accounting firm, is responsible for the statements, and that they neither audited the financial statements nor performed procedures to verify their accuracy, they are not hiding behind their work. They are making required disclosures designed to alert potential users that the accounting firm isn’t expressing an opinion on the accuracy of the financial statements.

Just as accounting firms are prohibited from stating in a compilation report that the client’s financial statements are in conformity with applicable accounting rules, they are also prohibited from stating that the financial statements are not in conformity with financial reporting requirements. “Such a statement would be tantamount to expressing an adverse opinion on the financial statements as a whole. Such an opinion can be expressed only in the context of an audit engagement.” (AR-C 80A.A38, emphasis added)

In other words, Mazars did not state an opinion that Trump’s financial statements were inaccurate because it could not have made such a statement under the rules that govern the accounting profession. Not having ever performed an audit, Mazars was prohibited from opining on the accuracy of the financial statements, one way or the other. Trump himself acknowledged this point in a statement released last night.

But Mazars could warn off potential users of the financial statements if, after it had issued compilation reports on Trump’s financial statements, it became aware of previously unknown facts that may have existed when it issued its reports that, if known at the time, might have caused it to believe that information supplied by the client was inaccurate. Indeed, if Mazars was aware that persons were likely to be using or relying on the Trump Organization’s inaccurate financial statements, it was required to warn them off.

 

[g5000]

Yeah. I wonder if they've been approached by the DOY or NY and are trying to get ahead of it.

Trump's Mazars accountant has already testified to the grand jury.