《财会通讯》1996年第7期刊登的程秀纯同志《隐名合伙与会计师事务所体制改革》一文《以下简称程文》认为,隐名合伙制可使“官办”会计师事务所与挂靠单位顺利脱钩,在保证会计师事务所独立性的同时,解决国有资产的经营权与所有权相分离的难题。对此,笔者不敢苟同。 1、隐名合伙制不能保证会计师事务所的独立性。会计师事务所的独立性主要体现在组织独立、经济独立、承接业务独立三个方面。程文所设想的隐名合伙制中的隐名合伙人虽然不直接参与经营,但却具有监督权和收益分配权。因此,不能保证会计师事务所这三个方面的独立性。第一,组织不独立。作为隐名合伙人的国有资产投资部门为了实现其具有的监督权,难免会动用行政权 The article entitled Cheng Wenjun’s “Institutional Reform of Insured Partnerships and Certified Public Accountants” published by No. 7 of the “Accounting Newsletter” published in the seventh issue of 1996, hereinafter referred to as Cheng Wen, held that the anonymous partnership could smooth the decoupling between the “official” CPAs and the affiliated units , While guaranteeing the independence of accounting firms, it also solved the problem of separating the management rights and ownership of state-owned assets. In this regard, I do not agree. 1, anonymous partnership can not guarantee the independence of accounting firms. The independence of accounting firms is mainly reflected in the three aspects of organizational independence, economic independence and undertaking business independence. Cheng Wen envisions the anonymous partner in the anonymous partnership, although not directly involved in the operation, but it has the right to supervise and distribution of proceeds. Therefore, we can not guarantee the independence of the three accounting firms. First, the organization is not independent. As an anonymous partner of state-owned assets investment department in order to achieve its supervisory authority, will inevitably take the executive power