Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 210 / Wednesday, October 31, 2007 / Notices 61713 

the audit, the auditor’s opinion on the 

financial statements, and, if the audited 

company is subject to the SarbanesOxley Act, the effectiveness of internal 

controls. 

3.7.3. Consider whether the auditor 

report should be more descriptive so as 

to improve communication with the 

public and investor community. 

3.7.4. Consider whether and, if so, 

how the auditor report could more 

clearly define the role of the auditor visa ́-vis financial statements. 

3.7.5. Consider the role of the auditor 

in the audit. 

3.7.6. Consider the expectations of 

investors and the marketplace relating 

to the auditor report and the audit. 

Consider whether and, if so, what sort 

of fraud investors and the marketplace 

expect auditors to detect. 

3.7.7. Consider the impact, if any, of 

changes in auditor reports on audit 

quality. 

4. Auditing Profession Structure: 

Competition, Concentration, 

Independence, and Other Professional 

Standards. 

4.1.1. According to a 2004 GAO 

Report, the largest auditingfirms audit 

over 78% of U.S. public companies and 

99% of public company revenues. 

According to a 2004 J.D. Power & 

Associates survey, about one of every 

eight public companies retained three or 

more of the largest auditing firms for 

attest and non-attest work. 

4.1.2. Examine whether there should 

be fundamental changes made in who 

pays the audit fee to the auditor. 

4.1.3. Consider the impact on the 

structure of the public company 

auditing profession of the following: 

4.1.3.1. Auditor independence 

standards. 

4.1.3.1.1. Consider how the auditor 

independence standards impact audit 

quality, audit market competition, and 

the pool of human capital. 

4.1.3.1.2. Consider whether there is an 

‘‘appropriate balance’’ between the 

auditing services and the non-attest 

services that auditing firms are 

providing today. 

4.1.3.1.3. Consider how auditing 

firms’ employee assignment process 

relating to auditing services and nonattest services impacts the pool of 

human capital. 

4.1.3.2. Mandatory partner and firm 

rotation. 

4.1.3.2.1. Consider whether and, if so, 

how mandatory partner rotation impacts 

auditing firms and their ability to ensure 

audit quality. 

4.1.3.2.2. Consider whether 

mandatory partner rotation impacts both 

the larger and smaller auditing firms in 

the same way. 

4.1.3.2.3. Examine the benefits and 

costs of periodic firm rotation. 

4.1.3.3. Other professional standards. 

4.1.3.3.1. Consider whether, and, if so, 

how other professional standards or 

requirements impact the structure of the 

public company auditing profession. 

4.1.3.4. Complexity. 

4.1.3.4.1. Consider whether, and, if so, 

how the complexity of business and 

financial products affects audit quality, 

including the auditing firms’

educational and supervisory roles. 

Consider whether the complexity of 

business and public companies, along 

with the accompanying financial 

reporting, accounting, and auditing 

standards prevents auditing firms with 

fewer resources from entering into the 

larger public company audit space. 

4.1.3.4.2. Consider whether the global 

convergence of accounting standards 

and the global convergence of auditing 

standards encourage more audit market 

competition. 

4.1.3.5. Globalization. 

4.1.3.5.1. Consider the relative 

financial, human resources, and 

geographical capabilities of the largest 

auditing firms, the mid-size auditing 

firms and the smaller auditing firms. 

4.1.3.5.2. Consider and compare the 

capabilities of the different sizes of 

auditing firms with the requirements of 

the large, mid, and small capitalization 

public companies. 

4.1.3.5.3. Consider how the increasing 

globalization of the capital markets 

affects audit market concentration 

among the largest auditing firms who 

have global networks of affiliates. 

4.1.3.5.4. Consider whether larger 

auditing firm resources are necessary for 

a high quality audit for larger, 

international companies. 

4.1.3.5.5. Consider the ability of 

certain firms to carve out niches among 

certain multi-national sectors. 

4.1.3.5.6. Consider how the potential 

acceptance of International Financial 

Reporting Standards and international 

auditing standards will impact audit 

market competition. 

4.1.4. Consider how audit market 

concentration impacts audit quality. 

4.1.4.1. Consider the reasons for 

public companies’ seeking new 

auditors. 

4.1.4.2. Consider whether auditing 

firms are competing for services based 

on audit quality. 

4.1.4.3. Consider the bases on which 

auditing firms compete today in the 

United States and internationally, 

including an assessment of audit fee 

changes when auditors compete for new 

audits. 

4.1.5. Consider the potential 

consequences of a larger auditing firm 

failure. 

4.1.5.1. Consider the sort of risks a 

larger auditing firm failure poses to the 

marketplace and investors. 

4.1.5.2. Consider the causes of major 

audit failures and steps that could be 

taken to prevent their reoccurrence. 

4.1.5.3. Consider whether and, if so, 

how, securities and auditing firm 

regulators should attempt to mitigate the 

risk or the impact of a larger auditing 

firm failure. 

4.1.6. Consider ways to increase audit 

market competition. 

4.1.6.1. Consider the impact of 

auditing firm mergers on industry 

competition and whether a public 

policy change with respect to a lack of 

competition is warranted. 

4.1.6.2. Consider whether regulators 

are now faced with a ‘‘Too Big to Fail’’

public policy, and if so, consider 

whether public policy changes are 

warranted and the nature of those 

changes. 

4.1.6.3. Consider how greater auditor 

choice can be fostered in the 

marketplace by the public and private 

sectors. 

4.1.6.4. Consider whether there are 

public company sectors where audit 

market choice is growing. 

4.1.6.5. Consider the ability of certain 

auditing firms to create niche-markets. 

4.1.6.6. Consider how private sector 

participants, such as underwriters and 

lawyers, impact audit market choice. 

[FR Doc. E7–21402 Filed 10–30–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4811–42–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Fiscal Service 

Surety Companies Acceptable on 

Federal Bonds: Commercial Alliance 

Insurance Company 

AGENCY: Financial Management Service, 

Fiscal Service, Department of the 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This is Supplement No. 2 to 

the Treasury Department Circular 570, 

2007 Revision, published July 2, 2007 at 

72 FR 36192. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874–6850. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A 

Certificate of Authority as an acceptable 

surety on Federal bonds is hereby 

issued under 31 U.S.C. 9305 to the 

following company: Commercial 

Alliance Insurance Company 

(NAIC # 10906). Business Address: 415 

Lockhaven Drive, Houston, Texas 

77073. Phone: (713) 960–1214. 

Underwriting Limitation b/: $840,000. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
61714 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 210 / Wednesday, October 31, 2007 / Notices 

Surety Licenses c/: TX. Incorporated In: 

Texas. 

Federal bond-approving officers 

should annotate their reference copies 

of the Treasury Circular 570 

(‘‘Circular’’), 2007 Revision, to reflect 

this addition. 

Certificates of Authority expire on 

June 30th each year, unless revoked 

prior to that date. The Certificates are 

subject to subsequent annual renewal as 

long as the companies remain qualified 

(see 31 CFR part 223). A list of qualified 

companies is published annually as of 

July 1st in the Circular, which outlines 

details as to underwriting limitations, 

areas in which companies are licensed 

to transact surety business, and other 

information. 

The Circular may be viewed and 

downloaded through the Internet at 

http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570. 

Questions concerning the Notice may 

be directed to the U.S. Department of 

the Treasury, Financial Management 

Service, Financial Accounting and 

Services Division, Surety Bond Branch, 

3700 East-West Highway, Room 6F01, 

Hyattsville, MD 20782. 

Dated: October 19, 2007. 

Vivian L. Cooper, 

Director, Financial Accounting and Services 

Division, Financial Management Service. 

[FR Doc. 07–5414 Filed 10–30–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–35–M 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

Request for Applications for the IRS 

Advisory Committee on Tax Exempt 

and Government Entities 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS); 

Tax Exempt and Government Entities 

Division, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Internal Revenue Service 

(IRS) is requesting applications for 

membership to serve on the Advisory 

Committee on Tax Exempt and 

Government Entities (ACT). 

Applications will be accepted for the 

following vacancies, which will occur 

in June 2008: Two (2) employee plans; 

two (2) exempt organizations; one (1) 

Indian tribal governments; one (1) tax 

exempt bonds, and two (2) federal, state 

and local governments. To ensure 

appropriate balance of membership, 

final selection from qualified candidates 

will be determined based on experience, 

qualifications, and other expertise. 

Due Date: Written applications or 

nominations must be received on or 

before November 30, 2007. 

Application: Applicants may use the 

ACT Application Form on the IRS Web 

site (IRS.gov) or may send an 

application by letter with the following 

information: Name; Other Name(s) Used 

and Date(s) (required for FBI check); 

Date of Birth (required for FBI check); 

City and State of Birth (required for FBI 

Check); Current Address; Telephone 

and Fax Numbers; and e-mail address, 

if any. Applications should also 

describe and document the proposed 

member’s qualifications for membership 

on the ACT. Applications should also 

specify the vacancy for with they wish 

to be considered. 

ADDRESSES: Send all applications and 

nominations to: Steven J. Pyrek; Director 

TE/GE Communications and Liaison; 

1111 Constitution Ave., NW.,—SE.,:T: 

CL, Penn Bldg; Washington, DC, 20224; 

FAX: (202) 283–9956 (not a toll-free 

number); e-mail: steve.j.pyrek@irs.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Pyrek (202) 283–9966 (not a tollfree number) or by e-mail at 

steve.j.pyrek@irs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Advisory Committee on Tax Exempt 

and Government Entities (ACT), 

governed by the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act, Public Law No. 92–463, 

is an organized public forum for 

discussion of relevant employee plans, 

exempt organizations, tax-exempt 

bonds, and federal, state, local, and 

Indian tribal government issues between 

officials of the IRS and representatives 

of the above communities. The ACT also 

enables the IRS to receive regular input 

with respect to the development and 

implementation of IRS policy 

concerning these communities. ACT 

members present the interested public’s 

observations about current or proposed 

IRS policies, programs, and procedures, 

as well as suggest improvements. ACT 

members shall be appointed by the 

Secretary of the Treasury and shall serve 

for two-year terms. Terms can be 

extended for an additional year. ACT 

members will not be paid for their time 

or services. ACT members will be 

reimbursed for their travel-related 

expenses to attend working sessions and 

public meetings, in accordance with 5 

U.S.C 5703. The Secretary of the 

Treasury invites those individuals, 

organizations, and groups affiliated with 

employee plans, exempt organizations, 

tax-exempt bonds, and federal, state, 

local and Indian tribal governments, to 

nominate individuals for membership 

on the ACT. Nominations should 

describe and document the proposed 

member’s qualifications for membership 

on the ACT. Nominations should also 

specify the vacancy for which they wish 

to be considered. The Secretary seeks a 

diverse group of members representing 

a broad spectrum of persons 

experienced in employee plans, exempt 

organizations, tax-exempt bonds, and 

federal, state, local and Indian tribal 

governments. 

Nominees must go through a 

clearance process before selection by the 

Secretary of the Treasury. In accordance 

with the Department of the Treasury 

Directive 21–03, the clearance process 

includes, among other things, preappointment and annual tax checks, and 

an FBI criminal and subversive name 

check, fingerprint check, and security 

clearance. 

Dated: October 24, 2007. 

Steven J. Pyrek, 

Designated Federal Official, Tax Exempt and 

Government Entities Division, Internal 

Revenue Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–21359 Filed 10–30–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

Advisory Council to the Internal 

Revenue Service; Meeting 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Internal Revenue Service 

Advisory Council (IRSAC) will hold a 

public meeting on Thursday, November 

15, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Jacqueline Tilghman, National Public 

Liaison, CL:NPL, 7559, 1111 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20224. Telephone: 202–927–9833 

(not a toll-free number). E-mail address: 

*public_liaison@irs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 

hereby given pursuant to section 

10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988), a 

public meeting of the IRSAC will be 

held on Thursday, November 15, 2007, 

from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. at IRS 

Headquarters, 1111 Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Room 3313, Washington, 

DC 20224. Issues to be discussed 

include: Earned Income Tax Credit 

(EITC) Communication Strategy, Earned 

Income Tax Credit (EITC) Return 

Preparer Strategy, Allowable Living 

Expense Standards, Information on 

Independent Contractor or Employee 

Determinations, Compliance Assurance 

Program (CAP) Strategy, E-File Issues, 

and the Industry Issue Resolution 

Program. Reports from the four IRSAC 

sub-groups, Large and Mid-size 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES