kpmg1 - microsoft azurexbrlsite.azurewebsites.net/.../errors/auditors_kpmg1.pdf · 2017-04-07 ·...

1

KPMG1

Generator Auditor CIK EntityRegistrantName Total EntityComments

Workiva KPMG 0001467373 Accenture plc 2 CFE: Reversed value for fact with concept us-gaap:ComprehensiveIncomeNetOfTaxAttributableToNoncontrollingInterest. Multiple noncontroling interest line items issue.

Ez-XBRL KPMG 0000816159 AIR METHODS CORP 1 CFE: Reversed value for concept us-gaap:OtherComprehensiveIncomeLossNetOfTax

Workiva KPMG 0000766421 ALASKA AIR GROUP, INC.

1 CFE: Inappropriate use of concept us-gaap:LiabilitiesNoncurrent, does not include long term debt.

Workiva KPMG 0001325955 Alon USA Energy, Inc. 1 CFE: WHOLE/PART revenues issue. Inappropriate use of concept us-gaap:Revenues with value of 0

Workiva KPMG 0001514991 AMC Networks Inc. 1 CFE: Inappropriate concept for other comprehensive income, us-gaap:OtherComprehensiveIncomeLossNetOfTaxPortionAttributableToParent

RR Donnelley

KPMG 0000864270 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP

1 CUE: Inappropriate extension concept on revenues, ahfc:NetFinancingAndOtherRevenues

Workiva KPMG 0000794619 AMERICAN WOODMARK CORP

1 CFE: Used concept us-gaap:OtherComprehensiveIncomeLossNetOfTax on comprehensive income.

Workiva KPMG 0000910322 ASTORIA FINANCIAL CORP

1 CFE: Provision for loan losses inconsistency/conflict issue.

Workiva KPMG 0001009626 BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS INC

1 CFE: Reversed value for net income from noncontrolling interest, us-gaap:NetIncomeLossAttributableToNoncontrollingInterest

Workiva KPMG 0000010048 BARNWELL INDUSTRIES INC

1 CFE: Inappropriate concept for net cash flow, us-gaap:NetCashProvidedByUsedInContinuingOperations; Need new report frame, reports income before equity method investments.

Workiva KPMG 0001109189 BASIC ENERGY SERVICES INC

1 CFE: Inappropriate use of dimensions on IS, successor/predecessor issue.

Workiva KPMG 0001627014 Black Knight Financial Services, Inc.

1 CFE: Comprehensive income does not foot.

Workiva KPMG 0000821127 BOSTON PRIVATE FINANCIAL HOLDINGS INC

2 CFE: WHOLE/PART issue related to preferred stock dividends and other adjustments..

Workiva KPMG 0000078890 BRINKS CO 1 CFE: Inappropriate extension concept, bco:OtherOperatingIncomeExpense; inconsistent use of us-gaap:OtherOperatingIncome.

Workiva KPMG 0001062449 BUFFALO WILD WINGS INC

1 CFE: Inappropriate concept for net cash flow, us-gaap:NetCashProvidedByUsedInContinuingOperations.

2

Accenture plc http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1467373/000146737317000154/0001467373-17-000154-

index.htm

The fact value for the line item “Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests” was

entered as a NEGATIVE but should have been entered POSITIVE. This can be seen from this testing jig

below. Note that the error is double the value. That shows the value was entered backwards.

Statement of comprehensive income:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1467373/000146737317000154/0001467373-17-000154-index.htmhttp://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1467373/000146737317000154/0001467373-17-000154-index.htm

3

AIR METHODS CORP http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/816159/000157104917001894/0001571049-17-001894-

index.htm

This is very telling. It shows how tricky hooking all the pieces together can be but how clear mistakes are

once you untangle what is going on.

First, my testing jig shows an error. It shows that the value entered for other comprehensive income

(loss) was reversed (entered as POSITIVE, should have been entered as NEGATIVE). You can see that by

the fact that the error amount is DOUBLE the value:

But when you go look at the statement of comprehensive income and you look at that line item, you see

that the fact was correctly entered as a NEGATIVE:


4

Looking more closely you see that the concept in the testing jig above and the statement of

comprehensive income are DIFFERENT. The testing jig used the total concept “us-

gaap:OtherComprehensiveIncomeLossNetOfTax” but the statement of comprehensive income does not

have a total:

If you go to the US GAAP XBRL Taxonomy you see the relationship between those two concepts.

Obviously the detailed line item used on the statement of comprehensive income is PART of the WHOLE

that is used on the statement of changes in equity.

http://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~161*v~5016)!con~(id~3555995)!net~(a~3190*l~772)!lang~(code~en-

us)!path~(g~92630*p~0_0_1_3_2_7)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

http://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~161*v~5016)!con~(id~3555995)!net~(a~3190*l~772)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(g~92630*p~0_0_1_3_2_7)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)http://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~161*v~5016)!con~(id~3555995)!net~(a~3190*l~772)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(g~92630*p~0_0_1_3_2_7)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

5

Then that begs the question: what is up on the statement of changes in equity? Well, the value for the

fact on the statement of changes in equity is entered in reverse. And that makes it so the statement of

changes in equity roll forward does not work.

6

ALASKA AIR GROUP, INC. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/766421/000076642117000016/0000766421-17-000016-

index.htm

What is going on is that this company is using contradictory/conflicting revenues facts. These two

revenues facts are reported:

This is the relation between the concepts “us-gaap:Revenues” and “us-gaap:SalesRevenueNet” per the

US GAAP XBRL Taxonomy:


us)!path~(g~92625*p~0_0_1_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_2)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

Clearly one can see that “us-gaap:SalesRevenueNet” is a PART of the WHOLE “us-gaap:Revenues”. And

so, it is impossible for “us-gaap:Revenues” to be LESS THAN “us-gaap:SalesRevenueNet”.

Here is what is going on.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/766421/000076642117000016/0000766421-17-000016-index.htmhttp://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/766421/000076642117000016/0000766421-17-000016-index.htmhttp://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~161*v~5016)!con~(id~3559162)!net~(a~3190*l~772)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(g~92625*p~0_0_1_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_2)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)http://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~161*v~5016)!con~(id~3559162)!net~(a~3190*l~772)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(g~92625*p~0_0_1_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_2)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

7

On the income statement they use “us-gaap:SalesRevenueNet” to represent total revenues.

But then in the operating segment disclosure, they use “us-gaap:Revenues” as PART OF “us-

gaap:SalesRevenueNet”. Thus, the roles of the WHOLE and the PART have been reversed per the

meaning of the US GAAP XBRL Taxonomy. That is not allowed and is therefore an error.

8

Alon USA Energy, Inc. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1325955/000132595517000016/0001325955-17-000016-

index.htm

2404403 - Disclosure - California Renewable Fuels Facility California Renewable Fuels Facility


10

AMC Networks Inc. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1514991/000151499117000006/0001514991-17-000006-

index.htm

This statement of comprehensive income starts with net income (loss) attributable to both the parent

and noncontrolling interest (i.e. the TOTAL); but then the other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes

line item uses a concept associated with the PARENT;

us-gaap:OtherComprehensiveIncomeLossNetOfTaxPortionAttributableToParent

These concepts should be matched sets, not mixtures:


11

AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/864270/000156459017001358/0001564590-17-001358-

index.htm

Creates an inappropriate extension concept for total net revenues. It is a reasonable thing to expect

that such a high-level income statement concept such as this should NOT need an extension concept. It

might be the case that there is a concept missing from the US GAAP Taxonomy which should be added.

Further, it is possible but highly unlikely that all expenses are operating expenses.


12

AMERICAN WOODMARK CORP http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/794619/000079461917000024/0000794619-17-000024-

index.htm

Inappropriate concept related to other comprehensive income was used to represent the line item

“Total Comprehensive Income”:


13

ASTORIA FINANCIAL CORP http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/910322/000091032217000003/0000910322-17-000003-

index.htm

Inconsistent/conflicting facts. WHOLE is less than the PART which is impossible.

Per the US GAAP XBRL Taxonomy, this is the relation between those two concepts. Basically, it is logically IMPOSSIBLE for that second concept to have a value MORE that the first concept because the second concept is PART OF the first concept which is the WHOLE. http://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~162*v~5017)!con~(id~3576951)!net~(a~3214*l~777)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(wc)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

Income statement: SECOND concept.

Cash flow statement: FIRST concept.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/910322/000091032217000003/0000910322-17-000003-index.htmhttp://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/910322/000091032217000003/0000910322-17-000003-index.htmhttp://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~162*v~5017)!con~(id~3576951)!net~(a~3214*l~777)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(wc)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)http://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~162*v~5017)!con~(id~3576951)!net~(a~3214*l~777)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(wc)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

15

BARNWELL INDUSTRIES INC http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/10048/000001004817000002/0000010048-17-000002-

index.htm

The problem with this filing is the improper use of the concept “us-

gaap:NetCashProvidedByUsedInContinuingOperations” to represent what amounts to net cash flow.

Per the US GAAP XBRL Taxonomy, exchange rate changes is NOT part of “us-

gaap:NetCashProvidedByUsedInContinuingOperations”:


us)!path~(g~92628*p~0_0_1_0_2)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

But exchange gains are part of “us-gaap:CashAndCashEquivalentsPeriodIncreaseDecrease”:

Cash flow statement:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/10048/000001004817000002/0000010048-17-000002-index.htmhttp://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/10048/000001004817000002/0000010048-17-000002-index.htmhttp://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~161*v~5016)!con~(id~3546475)!net~(a~3190*l~772)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(g~92628*p~0_0_1_0_2)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)http://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~161*v~5016)!con~(id~3546475)!net~(a~3190*l~772)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(g~92628*p~0_0_1_0_2)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

17

BASIC ENERGY SERVICES INC http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1109189/000110918917000029/0001109189-17-000029-

index.htm

Inappropriate application of XBRL Dimensions. The predecessor should be the [Domain].


18

Black Knight Financial Services, Inc. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1627014/000162701417000012/0001627014-17-000012-

index.htm

What appears to be going on is that the TOTAL comprehensive income was used to represent the

PARENT portion. Hard to tell because of labeling and total is not reported (i.e. missing line item for total

comprehensive income).

us-gaap:ComprehensiveIncomeNetOfTaxIncludingPortionAttributableToNoncontrollingInterest


19

BOSTON PRIVATE FINANCIAL HOLDINGS INC http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/821127/000082112717000023/0000821127-17-000023-

index.htm

Conflicting/contradictory noncontrolling interest facts:

Balance sheet:

Noncontrolling interest disclosure:


21

BRINKS CO http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/78890/000007889017000013/0000078890-17-000013-

index.htm

Inappropriate use of concept “us-gaap:OtherOperatingIncome”, inconsistent with income statement.

Inappropriate extension concept “bco:OtherOperatingIncomeExpese” (i.e. that is the PROPER place to

use “us-gaap:OtherOperatingIncome”):

See the US GAAP XBRL Taxonomy:

Income statement:


22

Disclosure of Other Operating Income (expense)

23

BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS INC http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1009626/000100962617000015/0001009626-17-000015-

index.htm

Reversed the value for fact with concept “us-gaap:NetIncomeLossAttributableToNoncontrollingInterest”

entered a positive, should be negative

Income statement:


24

BUFFALO WILD WINGS INC http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1062449/000106244917000013/0001062449-17-000013-

index.htm

The problem with this filing is the improper use of the concept “us-

gaap:NetCashProvidedByUsedInContinuingOperations” to represent what amounts to net cash flow.

Per the US GAAP XBRL Taxonomy, exchange rate changes is NOT part of “us-

gaap:NetCashProvidedByUsedInContinuingOperations”:


us)!path~(g~92628*p~0_0_1_0_2)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

But exchange gains are part of “us-gaap:CashAndCashEquivalentsPeriodIncreaseDecrease”:

Cash flow statement:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1062449/000106244917000013/0001062449-17-000013-index.htmhttp://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1062449/000106244917000013/0001062449-17-000013-index.htmhttp://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~161*v~5016)!con~(id~3546475)!net~(a~3190*l~772)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(g~92628*p~0_0_1_0_2)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)http://xbrlview.fasb.org/yeti/resources/yeti-gwt/Yeti.jsp#tax~(id~161*v~5016)!con~(id~3546475)!net~(a~3190*l~772)!lang~(code~en-us)!path~(g~92628*p~0_0_1_0_2)!rg~(rg~32*p~12)

kpmg1 - microsoft azurexbrlsite.azurewebsites.net/.../errors/auditors_kpmg1.pdf · 2017-04-07 ·...

Documents