If the expression “for all the” (R.6) were replaced by despite the, the text would still be correct and the meaning of t...

Every financial meltdown prompts a hunt for scapegoats. In the wake of the most recent one, calls to reform accounting have grown particularly loud, and action is on the way. In the coming months both America and the European Union are expected to introduce new rules aimed at enhancing auditors’ independence. But for all the heated debate over the changes, any improvement is likely to be modest. America’s bean-counters were effectively self-regulating until 2002. That year, following a wave of accounting scandals, Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley act to reform corporate governance. It limited the consulting work firms could do for their audit clients and set up a new regulator, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. At a meeting on December 4th it outlined three policies it expects to implement by the end of 2014. One aims to make audit reports more useful by requiring a section highlighting “critical audit matters” — the high-stakes judgment calls that keep accountants up at night, such as how the business being audited has valued its intangible assets. Another would cut the share of an audit that accounting firms can outsource without disclosure from 20% to 5%. Such information is valuable in emerging markets, where local accountants vary widely in quality. The most controversial reform would identify by name the lead partner responsible for each audit. Although identifying partners does not increase their legal liability, it does put their reputation on the line. This seems to make accountants more cautious.