KPMG whistleblower launches fundraiser for legal fight with CA ANZ

Last week, KPMG whistleblower Brendan Lyon launched a fundraising campaign to cover legal costs for his case against CA ANZ and the Professional Standards Council (PSC).

The NSW Supreme Court case, due to go to trial in mid-2026, centres around Australia’s Professional Standards Act. Under the Act, the Professional Standards Council (PSC) approves standards schemes that enables approved professions to cap legal liability if they promise to meet high ethical standards.

CA ANZ administers its approved Professional Standards Scheme for its members under this framework.

If successful, Lyon’s case could make big four consultants – those who work for KPMG, EY, PwC and Deloitte – liable for any damages caused by their work. He said this would create stronger incentives for ethical and competent conduct.

A CA ANZ spokesperson said the PSC and CA ANZ were defending the proceedings, which were still at the preliminary stage.

“The claim seeks to challenge the PSC’s approval of our Scheme on 28 February 2025," the spokesperson told Accounting Times.

“It is important to note that the Scheme is in force and operative. Given the matter is before the courts, it is not appropriate to comment any further.”

In 2007, the accounting liability scheme was expanded to include “affiliate members,” which included partners of chartered accounting firms, Lyon said. This enabled non-accountant consultants at Big Four firms to access liability protections designed for chartered accountants.

“The inclusion and protection of anyone who's not a chartered accountant and the provision of any service that's not accounting within a professional scheme that is legitimised on the basis of the professional discipline and standards of the accounting profession is clearly ludicrous,” Lyon told Accounting Times.

Under the expanded scheme, consultants working for Big Four accounting firms were given legal liability caps of up to $20 million, meaning clients could only sue for up to $20 million in damages. After insurance, Lyon estimated that most firms would foot a $1 million bill, or $1,000 per partner for a 1,000-partner firm.

“It's an incredibly powerful protection. It dissuades people from bringing cases where there are large damages because the returns are meagre and the costs are high and it removes the incentive,” he said.

With his legal case, Lyon said he essentially sought to kick non-accountants out of the accounting profession’s legal liability scheme.

“[The case] won't change the legal liability of real accountants doing real accounting. What it will do is get the money changers out of the temple, throw the consultants out, make the Big Four consultants liable for what it is they say and do.”

“And in that way, both taxpayers, shareholders, the public interest at large will be substantially strengthened, as will the reputation of chartered accountants as a profession.”

Lyon said that the professional liability scheme meant that big four firms had not been appropriately penalised for their role in scandals such as Deloitte’s AI-generated report debacle and the PwC tax leaks scandal, which spurred additional compliance obligations for individual tax agents.

“For the professional accountants, this is really an important watershed moment because the profession has been suffering the tarnish of the PwC tax leaks, the Downer EDI audits, all of these scandals that have been happening,” he said.

“And they've been happening because there's no accountability by Chartered Accountants Australia, New Zealand, there's no enforcement and it operates as a protection racket that is there to wrap the Big Four with firmwide liability protection.”