That is not an admission of guilt by the firm, or to be taken as an indicator of guilt by the client.
The firm is question performed compilations for the Trump organization. A compliation involves taking information from the client, putting it in the form of a financial statement, and considering only information that appears obviously wrong, or whether the firm has information that the financial information is incorrect.
A compilation is not an audit, nor even the lesser assurance: a "review". The accountants report on the compilation states that, and also states that the accountant is providing "no assurance" on the accuracy, completeness or validity of the information.
Now, I would mention that the firm may have internal procures to accept engagements based on their perceived ethical standards of the potential client, but in the case of the Trump organizations, I would assume that wouldn't be a problem, unless the service provider had severe TDS.
Now, as a result og the intense AG digging about this matter, the accounting firm firm may have received information from the AG's office about an error on their compilation - for example a company car that was not on the books (happens once and a while: "Wait a minute - the car you use personally is registered in the company name?! We're going to have to put that on the books!") That would be an example of a subsequent discovery of facts. The firm had no initial obligation to search for that car, but learned about it later.
If the accounting firm decided the event or item dicovered was material, they could ask the client to amended the financial statement and reissue, and if the client didn't, the firm would advise 3rd party users to disregard the prior financial statements, by stating the "can't be relied on".
Since the firm had withdrawn for the conflict of interest described above, they wouldn't be able to amend the financial statement, and could only withdraw those statements.
While "accountant withdraws" and "retracts financial statements" and the technical wording "can't rely on" make hysterical headlines, without knowing the facts, they are nothing more than suggestive wording.
So, compare and contrast...
The story of Special Counsel Durham’s charges about Hillary Clinton campaign spying (actual court documents, not “sources”)...
Versus
Trump’s accounting firm withdrawing?
Which story receives more media coverage?
Lame attempt by the PTB to distract attention from the Durham Report.
CPA here.... A Compilation relies solely on client prepared info with no assurance of the numbers. But I have never known a lender who has a client the size of Trump Organization that would not require a full audit. Just my two cents.
And more two cents worth... I have done many Compilations. If I smelled BS I still called them out on it.
Anything to fill up the time and space so they don’t have to report on Hillary and the Democrats spying on Trump throughout the election and during the entire Trump Presidency!
I saw a headline from CNN complaining it was worse than impeachment, lol!
In parallel both parties and the entire state apparatus are actively digging for dirt on Trump and if he gets close to the nomination he will 100% be indicted on some BS. Probably multiple fake indictments.
We have the worst President in at least 50 years right now and the GOP is perfectly fine with him. They've given him everything he asked for, except the Build Back Better bill (but what they did give him was a blank check for $3,000,000,000,000 in new spending on dem wishlist items). This is they guy they are supposed to be opposed to, they line up to make sure he gets his ruinous agenda.
But Trump, who gave us record economic growth, peace in the middle east, historically low unemployment, even diplomatic progress with North Korea ... that guy they will go to any underhanded depths to destroy.
who wants the probably most harassed man in history by the gov’t as a client?
Who prepared the returns? If the firm did not like the returns why raise this years later? More lies to keep the former President from doing his job in line with the Constitution.