The auditing company Ecovis is responsible for the “audit” that has given material to the current government to criticize the construction of the Antel Arena. In this document, it was allegedly found that the cost of the complex would have cost US $ 118,065,064.
There have been questions about what was reported by Ecovis, for example from the Frente Amplio director in Antel, Daniel Larrosa, who has assured that it is false that it cost those US $ 118 million but that the real value of the final construction is US $ 65,000.
The consulting firm had defended its “audit” saying that they prepared it in compliance with a specification with very specific conditions established by the government. In the statement, “we were asked to explain the variation in cost between the announced $ 40 million” and what was actually spent. The possibility of detailing the three scenarios to which Larrosa alludes was not established. In other words, it was established that the lowest scenario should be taken, “they said in a statement at the beginning of December.
“It was requested that all the expenses and investments made in relation to the Antel Arena be included, that is, to add all the resources allocated to construction and operation, regardless of whether they were expenses or investments, for which the criterion followed was precisely that”, the statement added.
The consultant was asked to “calculate” the cost of man-hours as well as other resources that would have been allocated both by Antel and by companies linked to Antel for the construction of the complex.
«We emphasize that the VAT included in the purchase invoices was not considered in our calculation. The expense sheets that arise from Antel’s own purchasing system do include the tax, but it was effectively eliminated from the total cost, ”Ecovis defended about his numbers.
They admit it is not an audit
Now, the company has admitted that they did not actually present an audit but were a couple of reports with “a reasonable or moderate level of assurance.”
The original document presented in December 2020, it does include the word “audit” in its title, because it is called “LA J101600 Professional Audit Services for the Antel Arena Multifunctional Complex”, but on the first page it says that it is a “report”.
“In accordance with our professional services proposal regarding Abbreviated Tender J101600, presented on December 21, 2020, we are pleased to present our first report,” reads said sheet, signed by Marcelo caiafa, partner of Ecovis, incidentally He is a member of the National Party, something that has also been criticized at the time.
Then, in April 2021, Ecovis presented a document entitled “Independent Assurance Report”, which indicates that it should be read in conjunction with the December 2020 report. M24, the original report did not have its corresponding opinion, and it was declared to the Antel director that the work carried out is framed “within the assurance work contracted in the Abbreviated Tender J101600”, and that it was prepared “in accordance with the International Standard for Engagements of Assurance 3000 issued by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC for its acronym in English) ”.
The so-called “assurance engagements” are not audits, but have different nature and scope; It is a job for which a practicing professional seeks to obtain sufficient and adequate evidence that allows him to express a conclusion whose purpose is to increase the degree of confidence of the people to whom the report is directed. Sources within Antel consulted by the aforementioned media say that “none of this was observed or even commented on by the recipients of the Ecovis reports, since the scope of the contracted work, in at least two of the items, was not fulfilled. An audit was not carried out on the costs of the Complex since the audit opinion is not available, only a preliminary report. Nor is there an audit opinion on the hiring of third parties on their behalf ”.
