ASIC Charges Disqualified SMSF Auditor Who Kept Signing Off on 56 Entities
Australia's corporate regulator has charged a Melbourne-based auditor with continuing to conduct SMSF audits after being permanently disqualified, and with creating a series of fabricated audit documents. For accounting firms and their clients, the case is a direct prompt to verify auditor registration status before relying on any SMSF audit sign-off.
What ASIC Alleges
ASIC alleges that Kristian John Convery of Melbourne was permanently disqualified as an SMSF auditor under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act), effective 15 May 2024. Despite that disqualification, ASIC contends he continued to act as an SMSF auditor for four tax agents and 56 entities across a period running from June 2024 to January 2025.
The Document Fabrication Allegations
The conduct alleged goes beyond simply continuing to practise. ASIC claims that between July 2024 and January 2025, Convery created a letter and 47 SMSF audit reports that were false documents, either for the purpose of having them accepted as genuine by other parties or for obtaining a financial gain. The combination of unlicensed practice and alleged document fabrication is what elevates this from a registration breach to a serious criminal matter.
Charges, Penalties, and Court Proceedings
Three distinct categories of alleged offending carry separate maximum penalties under Australian law.
Penalty Exposure by Charge
| Alleged Conduct | Maximum Penalty |
|---|---|
| Acting as SMSF auditor while knowingly disqualified under s130F of the SIS Act | 2 years imprisonment |
| Making a false document with intent it be accepted as genuine | 10 years imprisonment |
| Falsifying documents with intent to obtain a gain | 7 years imprisonment |
The matter first appeared in the Melbourne Magistrates Court on 26 November 2025. Since then it has been adjourned on multiple occasions, with a committal mention listed for 13 July 2026 following an adjournment on 30 June 2026. The prosecution is being conducted by the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) after a referral from ASIC.
Why This Matters for Accounting Firms and CFOs
The case highlights a gap that professional firms can close without difficulty: auditor registration status is publicly verifiable through the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's register of approved SMSF auditors. That check takes minutes. Relying on an auditor whose registration has lapsed, or who has been disqualified, can expose a fund trustee, a tax agent, and ultimately the firm that referred the engagement to regulatory and legal consequences that are entirely avoidable.
Third-Party Auditor Due Diligence
Accounting firms that outsource SMSF audit work, or that refer clients to external auditors, should treat registration verification as a standing workflow step rather than a one-off check. A disqualification imposed in May 2024 did not stop the alleged conduct from continuing through to January 2025, across four tax agents and dozens of entities. That spread suggests the verification gap was not isolated to a single firm.
Firms using crypto accounting software or digital asset accounting software to manage self-managed fund portfolios that include digital assets face an additional layer of complexity: the audit trail for on-chain holdings must be accurate before it reaches an auditor, because fabricated or inaccurate underlying records compound any auditor misconduct. Robust crypto bookkeeping software that maintains a verifiable, timestamped transaction history reduces the surface area for disputes about what the auditor actually reviewed.
This case also fits within a broader pattern of ASIC enforcement activity in the superannuation and financial services space. The regulator's action here, following its referral to the CDPP, is consistent with its willingness to escalate professional misconduct to criminal prosecution when the alleged conduct involves deception. For context on how ASIC has approached other enforcement matters involving financial intermediaries, see ASIC's appointment of receivers over Cotton and First Mutual Private Equity. The broader regulatory climate in which these enforcement actions are taking place is also reflected in how enforcement patterns are emerging across AML and sanctions frameworks globally.
Practical Steps for Firms Right Now
The actionable response to this case is straightforward, even if the underlying misconduct is not.
Verification and Documentation Checklist
Before relying on any SMSF audit report, firms should confirm the following:
- Search the ASIC register of approved SMSF auditors to confirm the auditor holds a current, active registration and has not been disqualified or suspended.
- Record the date and result of that search in the client file. A screenshot with a timestamp is sufficient.
- Repeat the check at the start of each engagement year, not just at onboarding.
- Where the engagement covers a fund with digital asset holdings, confirm that the transaction data provided to the auditor is drawn from a reliable source and reconciles to on-chain records.
- If an auditor's reports seem unusually fast to arrive, or if documentation looks inconsistent in formatting across multiple engagements, treat that as a prompt for further inquiry.
The 47 allegedly fabricated audit reports in this matter span a period of roughly six months. That volume, across four tax agents, points to a situation where routine verification checks were either not performed or not recorded. Firms that make the check a documented, recurring step in their engagement workflow close this risk almost entirely.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does it mean for an SMSF auditor to be disqualified under the SIS Act?
ASIC has the power under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 to disqualify a person from acting as an approved SMSF auditor. A disqualified individual cannot lawfully audit superannuation funds. Continuing to do so is a criminal offence carrying up to two years imprisonment under section 130F of the SIS Act.
How can an accounting firm verify that an SMSF auditor is currently registered?
ASIC maintains a publicly searchable register of approved SMSF auditors on its website. Firms can search by name or auditor number. The register shows current registration status and any conditions or disqualifications. This check should be performed and documented at the start of each audit engagement.
What are the consequences for a tax agent or accounting firm that relied on a disqualified auditor's reports?
ASIC's media release focuses on the auditor's alleged conduct. However, relying on a report from a disqualified auditor can expose trustees to compliance breaches, ATO scrutiny, and potential penalties under the SIS Act. Professional liability for the referring firm may also arise depending on the facts. Legal advice specific to the firm's circumstances is appropriate where this risk has materialised.
Is this case concluded?
No. As of the most recent update in the ASIC media release, the matter was adjourned on 30 June 2026 and listed for a further committal mention on 13 July 2026. Charges have been laid; no finding of guilt has been made. The matter remains before the Melbourne Magistrates Court.
Why does auditor registration matter for SMSFs that hold digital assets?
SMSF trustees who hold cryptocurrency or other digital assets are required to have those assets properly valued and included in the fund's financial statements, which are then subject to audit. If the audit is conducted by a disqualified or fraudulent auditor, the entire compliance chain is compromised. Accurate, software-generated transaction records are a necessary input, but they cannot substitute for a legitimate audit sign-off from a currently registered and active SMSF auditor.
Source: Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)