Welcome to Insights

June 2023 Newsletter

The monthly newsletter from the team at Insight Training

We’re recruiting!

We’re very excited to be recruiting a full or part time technical trainer and audit file reviewer to our team. Please get in touch if you know of anyone who might be interested. Click here for the job spec.

In this month’s vlog, Peter Herbert discusses common questions on AML due diligence.

Ethics is a hot topic with upcoming changes to CPD requirements. Our  blog covers some common ethics FAQs.

Upcoming courses

Our full schedule of public CPD courses can be browsed in our 2023 brochure and our booking form is available to download.

Date – Time – Course – Presenter

13th June – 9.30-12.30 – Academies Update – James Charlton

14th June – 9.30-12.30 – AML Update and Refresher – Peter Herbert

20th June – 9.30-11.30 – How to Become an Effective Audit Manager – Richard Hemmings

20th June – 12.30-1.30 – Auditing Creditors – Richard Hemmings

23rd June – 9.30-12.30 – Family Tax Planning – Malcolm Greenbaum

28th June – 9.30-12.30 – ISQM 1 – 6 months in – Peter Herbert & guests

27th Sept – 9.30 – 12.30 – Autumn Tax Update – Malcolm Greenbaum

3rd Oct – 9.30-11.30 – How to Audit a Charity – Richard Hemmings

3rd Oct – 12.30-1.30 – Analytical Review – Richard Hemmings

4th Oct – 9.30-11.00 – IFRS Update – Clare Jones

Our 2023 AML E-Learning Programme is available to buy now.

“Excellent delivery, easily understood with some good points raised. Delegate, Autumn series

FAQs from recent courses

Financial Reporting

How do you get Companies House to remove wrong accounts?

Although a process exists for the correction or removal of ‘unnecessary material’, in reality the removal of such material is not always easy to achieve. The powers that the Registrar has to remove material from the register contain very little elements of discretion, and it is often the case that a cautious approach is taken whereby material will not be removed without a court order. This will all change with the forthcoming introduction of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act.


I’ve heard that it is possible to limit my firm’s liability in respect of corporate audits. Is this true and, if so, what protocols should we follow?

This is true, though we find that it is rare in practice. Where liability is limited, specific legislative procedures need to be followed. The liability limitation agreement must be approved by an ordinary resolution of the members of the company that has agreed to it (section 536 Companies Act 2006) and the resolution must be passed annually before the beginning of the financial year to which the agreement relates. Section 538 Companies Act 2006 also requires disclosure of the liability limitation agreement by the company in a note to the accounts or in the directorsʹ report.

We have come across a number of signed engagement letters recently which have referred to such a limitation of liability clause in error. We urge firms to check that, if such a clause is included, it is intentional – and that the necessary steps have been followed. Professional bodies are likely to take a dim view if this is not the case.

Financial Reporting

A group exceeded the limits for consolidation for the first time at its year end 31 May 2022. The subsidiary that caused it to exceed the limit was sold in February 2023. Do group accounts have to be prepared for year ended 31 May 2023?

Notwithstanding the mid-year disposal, the group would need to consider group turnover and employee numbers for the year (including figures for the subsidiary disposed of up until the date of sale) and total year end group assets in determining whether it was medium-sized for the year ended 31 May 2023, in which case group accounts would be needed.

However, if the entity concerned was the parent’s only subsidiary, group accounts would not be needed. S399 of Companies Act states that it is only where, at the end of a financial year, an entity is a parent entity that group accounts are required.


We are struggling to get the right balance with ‘hybrid working’ – we thought it would be the best of both worlds, sometimes it feels the worst.

We are hearing this from a number of firms.  They report that a mix of working remotely and days in the office isn’t going as smoothly as expected, and that morale is suffering.

An issue here is the lack of shared experience.  Before the pandemic, people had the shared experience of working together in the office or at a client’s premises.  Then during lockdowns, we all had to work remotely and so lots of effort was put into connecting and to make virtual working effective  Now many firms have adopted hybrid working, but may not have implemented guidance as to what is expected and there is often a lack of consistency, resulting in confusion. There may be resentment that some people are ‘allowed’ to work from home more than others. 

A key factor here is the importance of building trust.  This means strengthening connection, getting to know others and being comfortable with each other.  To do that we need some opportunities to interact with each other – this can be in person or virtually – the danger is with hybrid working that we don’t put the effort into either and the opportunity to connect is lost.  We spotted that was an issue when we were all forced to work from home; it’s an area that still needs to be addressed as we move to another new normal.

In a recent poll

Having to file a P&L account for small and micro companies:

June pie - Insight Training

It is rare to have a little as 50% of an audience set against the removal of filleted accounts, but this is something that will happen as a result of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act. The only real question we are seeking an answer to is exactly when will the new rule take effect?

Recent posts