In its recent amendments, the Commission revised the language in Rule 2–01(f)(7)(ii)(B) to be consistent with current auditing standards. As a result, the rule no longer uses the term “concurring partner” and instead uses the terms “Engagement Quality Reviewer” and “Engagement Quality Control Reviewer” to describe the “partner conducting a quality review.” As such, we propose conforming amendments throughout Rule 2–01 to replace references to “concurring partner” with the term “Engagement Quality Reviewer.” 2. Proposed Amendment to Preliminary Note to Rule 2–01 The Commission has long recognized that an audit by an objective, impartial, and skilled professional contributes to both investor protection and investor confidence. [ 2]

The proposed amendments to the ICC definition would potentially affect registered investment companies and unregistered funds. [ 67] The proposed amendment also would help avoid the costs that audit clients could incur to switch auditors. Additionally, the proposed amendment could reduce instances of lost revenues from non-audit services ( The amendments we are proposing do not impose any new “collections of information” within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”), [ 99] management functions) that auditors must give up where an independence impairing relationship or service exists with a sister entity that is not material to the controlling entity. These cost savings could be especially pronounced for entities with complex organizational structures (We anticipate the proposed amendments would benefit audit firms and audit clients in several ways. First, the proposal is likely to reduce compliance costs for both audit firms and their clients by updating certain aspects of the auditor independence requirements that may be unduly burdensome. The proposed amendments may reduce the emphasis in our rules on relationships and services that are less likely to threaten auditor objectivity and impartiality. As a result, the proposed amendments likely would allow auditors and audit clients to focus their resources and attention on those relationships and services that are more likely to pose threats to auditor objectivity and impartiality. In turn, compliance costs likely would decrease for both auditors and audit clients.

Duc Dang, Senior Special Counsel, or Giles T. Cohen, Acting Chief Counsel, Office of the Chief Accountant, at (202) 551–5300; Alexis Cunningham, Assistant Chief Accountant, or Daniel Rooney, Assistant Chief Accountant, Chief Accountant's Office, Division of Investment Management, at (202) 551–6918; or Joel Cavanaugh, Senior Counsel, Investment Company Regulation Office, Division of Investment Management, at (202) 551–6792, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549. End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Hence, the negative pair factors of 210 are (-1, -210), (-2, -105), (-3, -70), (-5, -42), (-6, -35), (-7, -30), (-10, -21) and (-14, -15). Does the proposed amendment sufficiently focus the common control prong of the ICC definition on those relationships and services that are most likely to threaten auditor objectivity and impartiality? Should the analysis focus on the materiality of sister entities to the controlling entity, as proposed? We request comment on whether our proposed amendments would be a “major rule” for purposes of SBREFA. We solicit comment and empirical data on:

The proposed amendments described in this release are being proposed under the authority set forth in Schedule A and Sections 7, 8, 10, and 19 of the Securities Act, Sections 3, 10A, 12, 13, 14, 17, and 23 of the Exchange Act, Sections 8, 30, 31, and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940, and Sections 203 and 211 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Start List of Subjects List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 210 The remainder of the economic analysis presents the baseline, anticipated benefits and costs from the proposed amendments, potential effects of the proposed amendments on efficiency, competition and capital formation, and reasonable alternatives to the proposed amendments. B. Baseline and Affected Parties We propose to add student loans obtained from a financial institution under its normal lending procedures, terms, and requirements for a covered person's educational expenses provided the loan was obtained by the individual prior to becoming a covered person in the firm as defined under Rule 2–01(f)(11). The limitation on the student loan exclusion (

This is the best and most stable stand I've ever used, and I've had many, but it's not perfect and K&M are complacent about their Q.C, hence 2 stars total rating. The proposed transition framework for merger and acquisition transactions includes a provision that in certain situations allows affected auditors and audit clients up to six months following the completion of the transaction to promptly correct the prohibited relationship or service. An alternative approach would be to require correction within six months following the merger or acquisition announcement. A benefit of this alternative approach would be the improved timeliness of auditor compliance following merger and acquisition transactions. Under this alternative, auditors and registrants would assess independence compliance analysis immediately following the Currently, the term “audit and professional engagement period” is defined differently for domestic first time filers and FPI first time filers. [ 85] Respondents are asked to describe the nature of any impact and provide empirical data supporting the extent of the impact. Such comments will be considered in the preparation of the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, if the proposed amendments are adopted, and will be placed in the same public file as comments on the proposed amendments. VI. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

Reduce 210/2 to lowest terms

Procedures and controls that monitor the audit client's merger and acquisition activity to provide timely notice of a merger or acquisition; and Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s, 77z–2, 77z–3, 77aa(25), 77aa(26), 77nn(25), 77nn(26), 78c, 78j–1, 78 l, A mortgage loan collateralized by the borrower's primary residence provided the loan was not obtained while the covered person in the firm was a covered person.