(IMHO, this was not a matter of unwilling to compl

Quote:

---

(IMHO, this was not a matter of unwilling to comply but a matter of being unable to, due to the current share structure at the time. This opinion is base on the shareholder vote held in October 2021 to increase the AS. Until the share structure was adjusted to meet the company's commitment, the company could not get auditors to sign off on the financials).

---

That's not how it works. The facts are what they are. Auditors won't withhold an opinion over share count so long as the situation is accurately described. At most, they might add a sentence about the need to increase the A/S to the "going concern" paragraph.

An audit opinion reads something like:

Quote:

---

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of [date], and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the fiscal year ended [date], in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

---

Note what it considers, and only what it considers: presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with GAAP. No reason that couldn't have been because of a pending shareholder vote. It's just another footnote.

Think about it - what would have been better for the investing public - verified facts showing the share deficit or silence? You really believe the rules require the latter. Would love to see some GAAP cited to back it up. Obviously there is no exception for it in Rule S-K or S-X of they would still be listed...