Commencement and the retrospective exception
Made on 31 May 2023 and gazetted on 1 June, the rules generally start on 1 July 2023. Rule 11 alone, changing a Part VI reference to Part 6, is deemed effective from 31 December 2021. This exception does not backdate the new fees or principal restrictions. The document amends the Public Accountants Rules rather than restating all requirements for registration or professional conduct.
Definitions align with quality-management oversight
Audit-quality-review roles now include PMP or similar Singapore professional-body inspections and ACRA or similar quality-control-standards reviews. Engagement partner, team, quality review and reviewer definitions refer to the Fourth Schedule glossary of S327/2023. Hot-review authority becomes 38(1)(b) or 38(2)(b)(iii), restriction authority 38(2)(b)(i), and suspension references expand across 38,38A and 38J. The rules add statutory PMP and quality-control definitions and define SSQM1 for designing, implementing and operating quality management and SSQM2 for reviewer appointment, eligibility, performance and documentation. These reference changes should not be mistaken for the complete substantive standards.
Audit-principal consent and written disqualification notice
An audit principal must consent and cannot be the pupil’s parent, adoptive parent, sibling, spouse or child, subject to existing eligibility rules and the new 2E restriction. A PA must not become or must cease as principal when both conditions hold: a review assessment is partially satisfactory or not satisfactory for any professional standard, and the Oversight Committee gives written notice prohibiting the role for a specified period. The effective date is the notice’s date of effect, not automatically the review date. Related provisions replace quality-standard references and remove an old order reference subject to the savings below.
Publication and prescribed quality-control references
Parts IV andV and the old Fourth Schedule are deleted. Replaced rule 14 permits decisions or orders under 38,38H,38I,38J,52or 53 and their grounds to be published in the Gazette, an official Oversight Committee publication or ACRA’s website. The specified-accounting-entity definition requires implemented applicable SSQC1, SSQM1 andSSQM2 controls reviewed to ACRA or Committee satisfaction. Second Schedule 3(5)/(6) are removed and 3A’s wording changes to prescribed Singapore quality-control standards. Deletion does not erase proceedings expressly saved by rule 12.
Entity-review hourly charges and conditional cap
An entity reviewer’s initial 38G(1)(a) report work is charged at$200 an hour. A$15,000 maximum applies if the entity has not audited a listed entity during the twelve months immediately before service of the review notice. Reasonably incurred printing, stationery, transport and other review expenses are separately chargeable. Reconsideration requested by the accounting entity is$200 an hour capped at$6,000. The conditional initial cap must not be applied automatically to entities with listed audits, and the text does not say the hourly cap includes all reasonable expenses.
First reviews and the first post-July review caps
The first ever PMP review of a specified PA is capped at$6,000. For the first review conducted on or after 1 July 2023, the previous pass gives$6,000; a previous failure gives$12,000; two consecutive prior failures also give$12,000; and three consecutive prior failures give$18,000. The two-failure band is not an escalation to$18,000. These are category-specific maximum fees, not an assertion every review costs the maximum.
Second or subsequent post-July reviews
For the second or subsequent review conducted on or after 1 July 2023, the immediately preceding professional-standard assessment determines the cap: satisfactory$6,000, partially satisfactory in any standard$10,000, or not satisfactory in any standard$15,000. This framework differs from the pass/fail history used for the first post-reform review. The Schedule cross-refers to rule 4(3) for specified public accountant and the listed-entity meaning; the amendment does not reproduce those definitions.
Older orders and complaints continue in specified cases
Audit-principal provisions retain old hot-review, restriction and suspension orders. Old-definition hot-review treatment also survives for 6B applications pending on 1 July or whose application period had not expired. Unexpired former 38(1)(a)(iv) orders remain relevant despite deletion of that reference. If a code-breach complaint under 40(1) or information referral under 41(2) was made before 1 July, related Part 6 proceedings may start or continue as though Part IV had not been deleted. These provisions prevent treating reform as a blanket cancellation of prior regulatory matters.
Pending-review savings also preserve old fees
If a pre-1 July 2023 practice review had begun and remained unfinished, a 37(2) subcommittee decision or 38(1)/(3) Committee decision was pending, or a 38(1)(b) decision had not taken effect, old rule 10 continues for that PMP and the old Fifth Schedule fees continue. Rule 12 defines unamended Rules as those immediately before 1 July. A pending case should therefore be checked against these four states before replacing its charges with the new table. A later invoice date alone does not establish that new caps govern.
Official source
This article independently explains the substantive contents of the official PDF, including the relevant conditions, procedures and annexes. The linked document remains the authoritative source for its original wording, and later changes should be checked separately.
Read the official PDF ↗