本报记者 吴晓璐 近日，财政部、证监会双双发布公告，注销永拓会计师事务所（特殊普通合伙）（以下简称"永拓所"）从事证券服务业务 备案。此次永拓所被注销备案，是因为被江苏证监局依法禁止从事证券服务业务。 这是今年4月份，财政部、中国证监会修订印发《会计师事务所从事证券服务业务备案管理办法》（以下简称《管理办 法》）后，首家被强制注销备案的会计师事务所。在市场人士看来，此次永拓所被强制注销备案，给市场敲响警钟，也是审计 机构"洗牌"的一个标志性事件。目前，监管部门正在重塑证券审计机构执业生态，压实资本市场财务信息披露"看门人"责任。 近日，因在3家企业年报审计及其他鉴证执业项目中，存在配合造假、审计程序存在重大缺陷、审计独立性严重缺失等问 题，出具的审计报告、募集资金年度存放与使用情况鉴证报告存在虚假记载，最终，永拓所被江苏证监局没收业务收入811.32 万元，罚款5716.98万元，合计罚没6528.3万元，还被禁止从事证券服务业务。另外9名相关责任人被罚款20万元至400万元不 等。 《管理办法》加强会计师事务所从事证券服务业务备案事前、事中、事后全链条监管，增加注销、整改等管理流程，实现 进出有序。 此后， ...

Core Viewpoint - The case of Nanwei Co., Ltd. highlights the increasing regulatory scrutiny and the critical role of auditing firms in preventing insider trading and financial misconduct, emphasizing a "zero tolerance" approach in the capital market [1][5][7]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions and Consequences - Nanwei's chairman Li Ping and CFO Xiang Qinhua were fined nearly 50 million yuan for insider trading, marking a significant regulatory action following a two-year investigation [1][5]. - The investigation was triggered by Tianheng Accounting Firm's discovery of suspicious fund usage in the "construction in progress" account, leading to a denial opinion report that resulted in Nanwei's stock being marked as ST (special treatment) [1][4][5]. - Li Ping sold 8.184 million shares, avoiding losses of approximately 11.77 million yuan, while Xiang Qinhua also sold shares during the sensitive period [3][5][6]. Group 2: Auditing Firm's Role - Tianheng's audit team identified irregularities and maintained a firm stance against Nanwei's management, ultimately leading to the issuance of a negative audit opinion [2][3][4]. - The audit firm’s refusal to compromise and its insistence on professional integrity played a crucial role in uncovering the insider trading activities [5][10]. - The case illustrates that auditing firms are no longer mere rubber stamps but are essential in enforcing compliance and protecting investor interests [5][10]. Group 3: Industry Implications - The case reflects a broader trend in regulatory practices, emphasizing the importance of strict oversight and accountability for both companies and their executives [7][8]. - The regulatory environment has shifted towards a dual penalty system, where both the company and responsible individuals face consequences for violations, increasing the cost of non-compliance [8][9]. - The industry is undergoing a transformation, with auditing firms enhancing their internal controls and risk management practices to adapt to the stringent regulatory landscape [9][10].

Group 1 - A total of 38 accounting firms have received regulatory penalties since the beginning of 2025, amounting to 146 penalties, with some firms receiving more than 10 penalties each [1] - The penalties include various regulatory measures such as warning letters, corrective orders, and fines, with one firm, X Accounting Firm, facing fines totaling 14 million yuan due to multiple violations [1] - X Accounting Firm's violations during the audit of a listed company's financial statements included inadequate execution of key audit procedures and failure to perform necessary audit tests, leading to false representations in their audit report [1][2] Group 2 - The issues of "inadequate procedures" and "deficiencies" in audit work are fundamental reasons for significant omissions and false representations in annual audit reports, which have resulted in penalties for firms [2] - The increase in financial fraud among listed companies has negatively impacted audit firms, with almost every fraudulent company being associated with an incompetent audit firm [2] - Audit firms must possess professional competence, ethics, and diligence; any deficiency in these areas can significantly affect audit outcomes [2] Group 3 - The requirements for audit firms conducting regular reports for listed companies are high, necessitating specific qualifications recognized by the regulatory authority [3] - The shift from a "qualification system" to a "filing system" under the new securities law has allowed previously unqualified firms to engage in audit work, leading to a mixed quality of audit firms [3] - The emergence of issues such as unfair competition and frequent changes in audit firms highlights the need for enhanced regulatory oversight, particularly for firms that frequently receive penalties [3]