Share

Kicking the collusion habit

ON MONDAY it was announced that all investigations and prosecutions relating to a settlement agreement between ArcelorMittal SA and the Competition Commission have now been finalised and ArcelorMittal [JSE:ACL] will pay an administrative penalty of R1.5bn for price fixing.

READ: ArcelorMittal to pay R1.5bn price fix fine

This isn’t the first time collusion has been a theme on the SA business agenda. In the last few years, we have seen multiple companies settling with the Competition Commission, from listed to multi-listed companies across all industries. Construction is the most prevalent among these, particularly if we refer back to the tender process around the 2010 Soccer World Cup - and not forgetting the bread price-fixing saga of Tiger Brands [JSE:TBS].

In the metal industry, an example is ArcelorMittal. “ArcelorMittal SA’s R1.5bn fine for price-fixing sends a strong message of deterrence and is an important milestone in the commission’s enforcement against cartels,” Commissioner Tembinkosi Bonakele said on August 22. The company has agreed to pay the penalty over five years as from 2017 at instalments of no less than R300m per annum, the commission said.

As this continues to be a common theme in SA, the question on most of our minds is: who is next? It almost seems as if collusion in some cases is second nature to companies’ business strategies. South African Airways is also under significant pressure from the commission around the buying/selling of aircraft, as well as collusion around ticket prices in the aviation industry. 

So, what is the possibility that mining companies could collude around resources, in terms of when to sell into the market and at what price? I believe that we will be hearing and seeing more from the Competition Commission on the mining sector soon.

However, as an auditor I can’t help but look at the above stories and wonder what the audit committees, board committees and corporate governance processes were at those companies. Why, after these stories emerge, do we not hear about the replacement or sacking of the decision-makers behind these collusions?

Surely unethical business decisions are not something any organisation wants to be known for and it takes a special kind of personality to be ‘collusion inclined', so where is the change? A fine means nothing when the company has reaped far more in profits from the collusion than the cost of the fine.

The difficulty from an audit point of view is that there isn’t always an audit trail to follow when it comes to collusion, as these discussions usually take place outside normal business discussions. As such, these conspiracies are by nature secret and difficult to detect.  

New rules could help stop the rot

However, there could be a reprieve coming in July 2017 when the final amendments to the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants (IESBA) relating to Responding to Non-Compliance with Laws and Regulations come into effect. This board could possibly reduce potential breaches as these standards will apply to all categories of professional accountants, including auditors, other professional accountants in public practice, and professional accountants in organisations, including those in businesses, government, education, and the not-for-profit sector.

It will address breaches of laws and regulations that deal with matters such as fraud, corruption and bribery, money laundering, tax payments, financial products and services, environmental protection, and public health and safety.

Among other matters, the amended sections of the standard provide a clear pathway for auditors and other professional accountants to disclose potential non-compliance with laws and regulations to appropriate public authorities in certain situations, without being constrained by the ethical duty of confidentiality. It also places renewed emphasis on the role of senior-level accountants in businesses to promote a culture of compliance with laws and regulations, and prevention of non-compliance, within their organisations.

Although IESBA will only apply to certain professionals, these amendments to the existing standard could result in more accountability on management in the future. Only time will tell.

* Servaas Kranhold is the mining audit partner at tax firm BDO South Africa. Views expressed are his own.

Read Fin24's top stories trending on Twitter:
We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
Who we choose to trust can have a profound impact on our lives. Join thousands of devoted South Africans who look to News24 to bring them news they can trust every day. As we celebrate 25 years, become a News24 subscriber as we strive to keep you informed, inspired and empowered.
Join News24 today
heading
description
username
Show Comments ()
Rand - Dollar
18.87
+0.3%
Rand - Pound
23.85
+0.2%
Rand - Euro
20.38
+0.3%
Rand - Aus dollar
12.32
+0.2%
Rand - Yen
0.12
+0.3%
Platinum
908.05
0.0%
Palladium
1,014.94
0.0%
Gold
2,232.75
-0.0%
Silver
24.95
-0.1%
Brent Crude
87.00
+1.8%
Top 40
68,346
0.0%
All Share
74,536
0.0%
Resource 10
57,251
0.0%
Industrial 25
103,936
0.0%
Financial 15
16,502
0.0%
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes Iress logo
Company Snapshot
Editorial feedback and complaints

Contact the public editor with feedback for our journalists, complaints, queries or suggestions about articles on News24.

LEARN MORE
Government tenders

Find public sector tender opportunities in South Africa here.

Government tenders
This portal provides access to information on all tenders made by all public sector organisations in all spheres of government.
Browse tenders