← Back to Stories

KPMG scandal: Law firms' reviews and whistleblower allegations under scrutiny

By Updated 3 hours ago2 articles from 2 sources

Consensus Summary

The articles detail how KPMG’s lawyers at Allens and Ashurst conducted limited reviews in 2025 that failed to substantively investigate whistleblower claims of misconduct, despite being commissioned as independent assessments. In August 2025 and February 2025, Ashurst’s reports were criticized for not interviewing key individuals or verifying information, while Allens’ December 12, 2025 review dismissed the need to examine communications based on staff denials. The whistleblower’s allegations were later confirmed by email searches this year, leading to the resignations of KPMG’s CEO Andrew Yates and chairman in March. Both law firms faced scrutiny during a June parliamentary hearing, where they chose not to criticize KPMG despite legal protections, and will appear again at a Friday hearing. The articles highlight the firms’ loyalty to KPMG over thorough investigations, with both sources emphasizing the lack of independent verification in their reviews.

✓ Verified by 2+ sources

Key details reported by multiple sources:

  • In 2023, KPMG CEO Andrew Yates criticized PwC for leaking confidential Australian government tax crackdown details
  • Ashurst delivered a three-page review in August 2025 of KPMG’s internal investigation into whistleblower claims of misuse of confidential information, noting they did not independently verify the information
  • In February 2025, Ashurst reviewed whistleblower bullying claims but did not speak directly to any individuals concerned, stating they lacked direct assessment of credibility
  • Allens concluded in a December 12, 2025 document that it was unnecessary to review mailboxes or communications channels due to senior staff denials of misconduct
  • KPMG’s former CEO Andrew Yates and chairman resigned after the whistleblower scandal emerged publicly in March
  • A parliamentary hearing in June gave Ashurst’s lawyers legal protection to criticize KPMG, but they chose not to
  • The parliamentary committee investigating KPMG has another hearing scheduled for Friday, where Ashurst and Allens are expected to appear
  • Email searches this year confirmed the whistleblower’s claims that confidential documents were printed and shared at KPMG

Points of Difference

Details reported by only one source:

Sydney Morning Herald
  • Lea Constantine, a partner at Ashurst, stated 'It’s not for me' to criticize KPMG during the June parliamentary hearing
  • The article mentions 'numerous partners and executives' have resigned but does not specify names
The Age
  • The article mentions 'numerous partners and executives' have resigned but does not specify names

Contradictions

Conflicting information between sources:

  • Both sources mention unnamed resignations but do not provide specific names or numbers of partners/executives who resigned, making direct comparison impossible

Source Articles

SMH

The humiliation of KPMG’s lawyers is almost complete

If Allens and Ashurst end up going down with the consulting firm’s ship, they will have only themselves to blame.

THEAGE

The humiliation of KPMG’s lawyers is almost complete

If Allens and Ashurst end up going down with the consulting firm’s ship, they will have only themselves to blame.