E-Waste Systems Inc. (fka EWSI)

[ecorunner]

did you read this post by PhredGarvin? how do you feel about that situation after reading his post below?

about the accounting issue in china

I'm still working out the details of the accounting changes. In my estimation, EWSI has contracts with Chinese companies that Malone had issues with certifying. The 8K shows that clearly.
Every company doing business in China at this point has the same issues. It will be resolved, and it isn't a run to the hills issue. It is high enough to be a joint State Department issue though.
EWSI is in the middle of international accounting war that came to head in Federal Courts this spring and right now.
The contracts are likely legitimate, but due to differences in China and PCAOB methodology, EWSI is stuck in the middle. IMO the contracts and revenue are likely legitimate, but the difference in back paper reporting is causing issues.
The Chinese government funds a lot of businesses in China, and nearly every startup. The disparity comes when the paperwork stops, as China lists the funding of these businesses as a "State Secret," so the paperwork required by Sarbanes-Oxley cannot be released by a Chinese business due to it being a matter of Chinese national security. Totally fucked up, but that is the current issue.
So we have a contract with a Chinese company, as we have to to do business in China, and the paper trail stops due to the Chinese government. Malone can't get what they need, so they don't want to put their seal of approval on it.
So EWSI is stuck in an international pissing contest at an inopportune time.

http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2014/02/18/the-us-and-china-square-off-over-cross-border-listings/

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act required auditors to cooperate with the SEC, and the SEC requested that they turn over the working papers that were created as part of the audit process. The auditors refused, citing Chinese regulations they said forbid them from sharing working papers with foreign regulators. The restrictions on sharing working papers with foreign regulators were rooted in China’s vague — but expansive — restrictions on disclosure of state secrets. In December 2012, the SEC brought administrative charges against the Chinese members of the Big Four firms, together with a local member firm of BDO. In a strongly worded 112-page decision, the judge imposed a six-month ban on the Big Four practicing before the SEC. BDO’s member firm was only admonished, mainly because it has withdrawn from the market.