Tax firm Mazars fires Trump Organization as client, says former president’s financial statements are unreliable

[MaryP]

No question, but once you are entangled, you are entangled. They are merely coming clean on their lies and deceit and capping their liability, as there was likely was no real mea culpa here. Unless these guys were idiots, they had to know they were enabling Trump cooking his books by looking the other way. They likely were paid quite handsomely for it, which makes it organized crime. Mazars US will be out of business in reasonable short order. Arthur Andersen could not survive its entanglement with Enron, Mazars US will not survive this.

Wow.

 

[Top Cat]

And not one mention of the original Fake Noos. Imagine that?

 

[Chomsky]

I'll get off your case. You tried.

Thanks, Mom!

 

[Chomsky]

A company like Dotard's has its own accounting department, which than provides the data to the accounting firm. It is not the job of such firm to audit such data.
That's when you have a company and use a accounting firm you always get this ars covering letter with what ever they do for you.

What is really damaging to Dotard's companies is the sentence that the data of the last 10 years can not be trusted.

How is Trump org ever going to borrow, for their needs?

This is an insanely bad thing for the org.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

Accounting firms and lawyers fire their clients all of the time. There is this matter of honesty and trust that is often condition precedent for the business relationship.

As a former CPA myself, I am a bit struck by how Mazar's can suddenly wash their hands of 10 years of work, which I have not yet fully wrapped my head around. I don't think they can. My guess is they know they have allowed themselves to get caught in Trump's web of lies and they are merely cutting their losses, but they are admitting through this action a degree of culpability. This follows the old adage, when was the best time to plant a tree (walk away from Trump)? 10 years ago. When is the second best time to plant a tree (walk away from Trump)? Today!

This is why I think there's more to it than just that they're worried about it being in the news. Accounting firms don't disown the work they've previously done on a whim. They've exposed themselves to litigation through the statements being misrepresentations and are cutting ties to limit legal exposure.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

How is Trump org ever going to borrow, for their needs?

This is an insanely bad thing for the org.

They'll be defaulting on their debt now that they don't have audited statements.

 

[Paradoxical]

Tax firm Mazars fires Trump Organization as client, says former president's financial statements are unreliable

N.Y. Attorney General Letitia James' office for several years has been investigating Trump's company, the Trump Organization.

www.cnbc.com

--





--

Wow! I believe this has the potential to be a big deal.

Trump's long-time accounting firm has dumped him, refusing to file his taxes this year, citing a decade's worth of Trump tax documents are - 'unreliable'.

This comes as allegations grow over Trump misrepresenting the value of assets, valuing them higher to borrow against them, and valuing them lower to the IRS for tax purposes.

This, to my mind, might leave exposure to mortgage or tax fraud; 'No'?

Congress, due to GOP protection, couldn't get to Trump. But, it's looking like civil & criminal mortgage & tax cases may possibly have better luck.

<yawn>

Meantime, Hillary could be indicted along with Perkins Coie and possibly Comey, Strzok

 

[Chomsky]

They'll be defaulting on their debt now that they don't have audited statements.

I don't see how they can function.

If someone wanted to put them out of business, this might be the way to do it.

The work involved for a new firm to reprocess & correct the last 10 years of their books is going to be enormous. And until that happens, they'll never get financing.

Then there's the problem of getting a new firm, when DA's are breathing down your back. And who knows, possibly the IRS looking at you too.

This is a much huger deal for the org, than Trump. Trump is likely insulated by those in the org doing his dirty work. But besides that, just keeping the org functioning, at least for the near term, will be horrendous IMO. The org is in much worse shape here, than Trump is personally (IMO).

 

[Threegoofs]

I don't see how they can function.

If someone wanted to put them out of business, this might be the way to do it.

The work involved for a new firm to reprocess & correct the last 10 years of their books is going to be enormous. And until that happens, they'll never get financing.

Then there's the problem of getting a new firm, when DA's are breathing down your back. And who knows, possibly the IRS looking at you too.

This is a much huger deal for the org, than Trump. Trump is likely insulated by those in the org doing his dirty work. But besides that, just keeping the org functioning, at least for the near term, will be horrendous IMO.

Poor Eric.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

I don't see how they can function.

If someone wanted to put them out of business, this might be the way to do it.

The work involved for a new firm to reprocess & correct the last 10 years of their books is going to be enormous. And until that happens, they'll never get financing.

Then there's the problem of getting a new firm, when DA's are breathing down your back. And who knows, possibly the IRS looking at you too.

This is a much huger deal for the org, than Trump. Trump is likely insulated by those in the org doing his dirty work. But besides that, just keeping the org functioning, at least for the near term, will be horrendous IMO.

I read into it a bit more and Mazars wasn't doing audit, so it's not as immediately dire as I thought, but whoever has done their audits is definitely going to be looking back at them, and they'll have a hard time getting a new auditor. And whoever they went to after Mazars is in a pretty rough spot lmao

 

[Chomsky]

Poor Eric.

Actually, besides the civil & legal ramifications, that is the business entity that Trump expects to carry-on for his kids when he's gone. I'm wondering if it's in existential jeopardy?

 

[Threegoofs]

Actually, besides the civil & legal ramifications, that is the business entity that Trump expects to carry-on for his kids when he's gone. I'm wondering if it's in existential jeopardy?

It’s hard to run an empire from federal prison.

 

[Chomsky]

I read into it a bit more and Mazars wasn't doing audit, so it's not as immediately dire as I thought, but whoever has done their audits is definitely going to be looking back at them, and they'll have a hard time getting a new auditor. And whoever they went to after Mazars is in a pretty rough spot lmao

Until they get a good audit, 'bye bye' financing. And Trump needs to refi his large debts coming due.

This guy's going to be hustling cash like nobody's business. He's lucky he found politics, otherwise I fear he'd be looking at another bankruptcy.

 

[TomFitz]

Accounting firms and lawyers fire their clients all of the time. There is this matter of honesty and trust that is often condition precedent for the business relationship.

As a former CPA myself, I am a bit struck by how Mazar's can suddenly wash their hands of 10 years of work, which I have not yet fully wrapped my head around. I don't think they can. My guess is they know they have allowed themselves to get caught in Trump's web of lies and they are merely cutting their losses, but they are admitting through this action a degree of culpability. This follows the old adage, when was the best time to plant a tree (walk away from Trump)? 10 years ago. When is the second best time to plant a tree (walk away from Trump)? Today!

Yes, I has very similar thoughts.

I have little doubt that Mazars knew full well what a schmuck their client was. And, I suspect that they overcharged their client enough to make it OK.

Can you imagine a reputable firm representing Trump?????

I suspect this move is to forstall additional liability, and mitigate damage to their professional standing.

Of course, we don’t know that, but investigations will tell us eventually.

There may be a deal, too.

 

[Plasmaball]

Sounds like CYA to me.

““While we have not concluded that the various financial statements, as a whole, contain material discrepancies, based on the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate,” Mazars said in its letter to Garten.”

But it’s completely understandable.

If he ignored advice from Mazar then that's criminal.

 

[Plasmaball]

I’m not sure I see the logic in what they’re doing. They’re on the hook for what they attested to. There’s no legal benefit to cutting ship, (imo)

Politically this creates a news cycled focused on Mazars accounting. If and when Trump gets taken down we’ll be taking about that, not his crooked accounting firm. So that seems like an own goal.

The mistake was doing business with Trump in the first place. Calling attention to that just makes a bad situation worse.

Nope. If they have letters stating trump should do x and trump did Y then they are off the hook and trump isn't.

 

[Plasmaball]

Making up stuff again? Trump would have nothing to do with Mazars. His accounting people would.
They have done his taxes for 10 years....... Mazars is trying to CYA. But after 10 years it's a bit late if there is a problem.

Lol no

 

[Rawley]

Actually, besides the civil & legal ramifications, that is the business entity that Trump expects to carry-on for his kids when he's gone. I'm wondering if it's in existential jeopardy?

For what?

 

[Mithros]

NO a tax preparation company is only responcable for how the information is used to prepare the tax return NOT it's reliability.
They can't stop you from giving them bad numbers that is what YOU gave them to use it is not up to them to double check them and make sure they are true
have a nice night

I’m not arguing their legal liability. I’m saying dumping Trump doesn’t make them any more or less liable. If they weren’t criminally liable they’re still not liable. If they were, they still are.

So I don’t see what this gets them except bad publicity.

 

[RAMOSS]

Until they get a good audit, 'bye bye' financing. And Trump needs to refi his large debts coming due.

This guy's going to be hustling cash like nobody's business. He's lucky he found politics, otherwise I fear he'd be looking at another bankruptcy.

Don't worry, the superpacs will take care of it.

 

[exoplanet]

And not one mention of the original Fake Noos. Imagine that?

Well, now we have a "but Hillary Clinton!!!1". So there's that.

 

[Chomsky]

For what?

Not, 'what'. But, 'why'.

https://debatepolitics.com/threads/tax-firm-mazars-fires-trump-organization-as-client-says-former-president’s-financial-statements-are-unreliable.472790/page-3#post-1075433030

--

Hm. no idea why the link won't become clickable.

Anyway, it's post #67 - above.

 

[Rawley]

Not, 'what'. But, 'why'.

https://debatepolitics.com/threads/tax-firm-mazars-fires-trump-organization-as-client-says-former-president’s-financial-statements-are-unreliable.472790/page-3#post-1075433030

Link didn't work. You think this hyperpartisan Jihad by a power hungry politician is going to bring down the entire corporation? Really?

 

[exoplanet]

I’m not arguing their legal liability. I’m saying dumping Trump doesn’t make them any more or less liable. If they weren’t criminally liable they’re still not liable. If they were, they still are.

So I don’t see what this gets them except bad publicity.

I suspect their line of defense involves having good faith in their client, but once they became aware of the nature of the investigation, it becomes harder to justify that. Now they need to apply greater scrutiny towards their client and instead of incurring the risk of being responsible for verifying the honesty of Trump et al's documentation they are just washing their hands of it.

 

[Chomsky]

Link didn't work. You think this hyperpartisan Jihad by a power hungry politician is going to bring down the entire corporation? Really?

Yeah, i just edited my post; it's my post #67, above.

My rationale for my post is there.

Edit:

Bah! it's #67 in this thread:

https://debatepolitics.com/threads/tax-firm-mazars-fires-trump-organization-as-client-says-former-president’s-financial-statements-are-unreliable.472790/

Edit2:

Alright, I give up with this link!