Accountancy minnows attack audit regulator Fiona Hotston Moore, senior tax and audit partner at Reeves, said the FRC's proposals "will not increase audit choice or open up the market. It will not address the cosy relationship between the big four audit firms and FTSE companies, which the Competition Commission warned might impact auditor independence. She said she was "disappointed" that the competition regulator had backtracked on earlier proposals to force mandatory rotation of auditors every five years, which "would have opened up the market." She added that smaller firms would continue to push for shared audits, having had personal experience of being involved in such work for Thomson Reuters and the Discovery Channel. "It gives them experience and enhances their credentials," she said. And it gives them potential to do some non-audit work as well. As for the FRC's recommendations, she said: "They give the impression that they are looking after the larger firms." Steve Clark, managing partner at James Cowper, said he was "not that keen on mandatory rotation" because it was up to a company's shareholders to decide whether it should change auditors. However, he said the FRC's proposals merely "showed the power of the Big Four" and threw his weight behind shared audits as a way of breaking into the market. "It's very difficult for smaller firms," he said. That's why shared audits are an important route in. But quite often you come across a situation where you have looked after a subsidiary of a listed group and then you lose that because the audit committee takes a decision to put everything with a big four firm. People need to recognise that there are a lot of very good firms outside the Big Four, which are very capable of doing audits. The FRC pointed out that it had developed the 10-year re-tendering guidelines "following an open consultation with stakeholders."