Skip to content

Invest1 publisher3 min readPublished

Hill and Cotton revive their 2018 bid to exempt brokerages under 150 staff from PCAOB audits

French Hill and Tom Cotton want broker-dealers with fewer than 150 employees and no custody of client assets out of the PCAOB audit regime that Dodd-Frank extended to every registered dealer in 2010.

The Investor · Invest desk

Illustration accompanying Hill and Cotton revive their 2018 bid to exempt brokerages under 150 staff from PCAOB audits

What happened

  • The Hill-Cotton bill would free qualifying small broker-dealers from hiring a PCAOB-registered audit firm for annual inspections of their financial statements, regulatory compliance and capital.
  • Eligibility is limited to privately held firms with fewer than 150 employees that do not hold clients' assets.
  • Dodd-Frank extended the Sarbanes-Oxley audit rule in 2010 to every broker-dealer registered with the SEC, public or private, after Bernard Madoff's $65 billion fraud.
  • Lieblong & Associates, a four-person Little Rock brokerage, took the issue to Cotton in 2017 and its owner reported compliance costs of about $40,000 a year.
  • The bill has no Democratic co-sponsors and, according to a senior Senate aide, is probably unlikely to move during a lame duck session after the elections.

Compiled by The InvestorSomething wrong?How this is made

Why it matters

  • decision For any firm under the headcount line, the PCAOB-registered audit fee becomes the standing cost of holding client assets, so giving up custody is the cheaper configuration.
  • cost The public case rests on one firm's $10,000 per employee, and without a count of qualifying firms the industry-wide saving from the exemption cannot be sized.
  • exposure The bill's route runs through a committee that may change hands in November, when past opponents would be positioned to reclaim the majority that decides whether it advances.
  • precedent Passage would carry Hill's size-and-risk tailoring argument out of bank supervision and into the audit rules governing securities firms.

The second eligibility test is custody, and that is what decides who qualifies: a three-person shop holding customer assets keeps its PCAOB-registered auditor, while a 149-person firm holding none is exempt [3]. Dodd-Frank's extension answered an investor fraud [6], and the carve-out is drawn to leave the requirement wherever client money sits. The bill unwinds that 2010 extension. The 2002 statute applied PCAOB audits to publicly traded firms [5]. There is a second objection the custody test does not settle, and it is capital: the annual inspection the bill would make optional covers regulatory compliance and capital as well as the financial statements [4], and a firm with no custody can still fall short of its capital requirement.

Lieblong's roughly $40,000 works out to $10,000 for each of the four people in the shop [7][1]. The headcount ceiling written into the bill is 37.5 times that firm's size [2]. Small brokers have complained for years that PCAOB audits cost significantly more than the generally accepted auditing standards work they replaced [8], and that the audits run to tens of thousands of dollars a year [9].

"Currently, a 3-person, non-public small business is held to the same standards as Merrill Lynch; this is not right, fair or reasonable," some 300 small broker-dealers wrote to Senate Banking Committee leaders in 2018 [10]. Regulators "wrote this rule for Wall Street and then applied it to small firms on Main Street," Cotton said in a statement [13].

Hill introduced the latest House version on Sept. 17, eight years after the first one, with Cotton set to follow with the Senate companion [1][2][3]. In between, the measure got practically nowhere save a successful House Financial Services markup in 2018 [15]. Four committee Democrats voted for it then and two have since left Congress [18][4], with Vicente Gonzalez, a longtime co-sponsor, and Jim Himes among those still in place [19].

Hill chairs the committee [23] and came out of the business, having founded and run Delta Trust & Banking Corp., a broker-dealer and community bank, before selling it in 2014 after winning his seat [20]. Several of his other bills this year would tailor community bank rules to a lender's size and business risk instead of applying big-bank rules [21]. "Small, privately held broker-dealers deserve that same attention," Hill said in a statement [12]. A senior Senate aide said the two Arkansans keep hearing from broker-dealers "fed up with accounting fees" [22].

Two paths are live: the exemption attaches to something larger this session, or it starts again in a new Congress. I would expect the second, because a bill that has drawn one markup in eight years [15][3] needs someone else's vehicle to move. And the case for it is sized off the smallest example available: if most firms under the 150-employee ceiling are nothing like a four-person shop paying $10,000 a head [1][2], the relief is priced on the wrong firm.

What to watch

  • Whether any Democrat signs on to Cotton's Senate companion, which would be the first bipartisan cover the bill has had since 2018.
  • Whether the exemption is attached to a larger capital-formation package before the session ends or gets a standalone markup.
  • Control of the House Financial Services Committee after November, and whether Gonzalez and Himes stay on the bill.
Loading claim ledger
Loading source directory links
Loading share composer
Loading topic controls
Loading related stories