This is already the case, and has been so for at least 15 years.I wonder will this mean that financial oversight work by accountants for charities will be shied away form in future. In the present sparingly regulated Irish charities space it would hardly be worth the risk.
I'm not at liberty to check this out right now but I can't imagine that this concern would normally represent valid grounds for withholding documentary evidence from an auditor?The only issue we had was then they looked for copies of the CDS1 submissions, which I refused to give them. As protected personal information could be derived from the data.
...with your auditor? I very much doubt if that is the case. By their very nature, pretty much all audit files will include sensitive and confidential personal information pertaining to third parties, eg employees.Under GDPR we would have had to contact each donator and looked for permission to share their details.
Under GDPR we would have had to contact each donator and looked for permission to share their details. As it was the nature of the charity would allow data protected under the Data Protection acts be derived.
Ok, I'll take your word for it on that, but I stand by my earlier comments. Full traceability on significant donor receipts and documentation relating thereto would be IMHO a sine qua non of any charity audit.Employees are not a 3rd party and Payroll Data is exempt from the Data Protection Acts.
The only issue we had was then they looked for copies of the CDS1 submissions, which I refused to give them. As protected personal information could be derived from the data.
I'd guess that very few non-charitable clubs, societies etc are audited nowadays. Audit services apart, such organisations can hire whomever they wish for professional and other work.I wonder if this is the case with many other charities, historical societies, clubs, associations and so on. You often used to find a connection - family or friendship - between the professionals hired and at least one prominent member of the board of the charity.
But that's too risky now.
For all work? It would be silly in the extreme for example to rule out engaging the local handyman or plumber just because they happen to be friendly with one or more members of the board. Especially if the organisation is one with a local catchment or function.It all comes down to how the board manage the charity, A competent board should always insist that someones "mate" is not getting the business, that protects everyone.
Surely all the auditor needs to know is that the donations came from legitimate sources. If the names of the donors aren’t being revealed or otherwise used, there’s no breach of gdpr.Under GDPR we would have had to contact each donator and looked for permission to share their details. As it was the nature of the charity would allow data protected under the Data Protection acts be derived.
Fundamental difference between getting someone to fix a pipe and getting someone to provide a legally required service. At the end of the day, it's the board members reputation that is also at stake hereFor all work? It would be silly in the extreme for example to rule out engaging the local handyman or plumber just because they happen to be friendly with one or more members of the board. Especially if the organisation is one with a local catchment or function.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?