FacultyFaculty/Author Profile

Charles A. Riepenhoff, Jr.

Managing Director
Atlanta, GA, USA

Chuck Riepenhoff is a Managing Director in KPMG LLP's Forensic Advisory Services practice. He has more than 40 years of diversified experience in accounting and advisory services dealing with the examination of financial statements and with counseling entities in a variety of industries, both publicly and privately owned, in such areas as acquisitions and divestitures, corporate recovery, and forensic services. 

Chuck has served as an instructor in the Firm's national and local office education training programs dealing with such technical issues as accounting for leases, computer auditing, statistical sampling, litigation services, bankruptcy and other matters. He has been a lecturer for The Institute of Continuing Legal Education of the State Bar of Georgia and the Atlanta Bar Association.

Professional and Industry Experience

Chuck has represented clients in numerous industries such as construction, communications, electronics, technology, healthcare, pharmaceutical, insurance, higher education, state, local and federal government, not-for-profit entities, real estate,  manufacturing and financial services.

He has provided expert testimony in Federal, state and local courts and in arbitration. He has provided services as an arbitrator or assisting counsel in arbitration in various matters dealing with contract disputes, determination of purchase price disputes, determination of EBITDA closing date balance sheet issues such as inventory valuation, inventory obsolescence, spare parts, deferred income taxes, accounts receivable, valuation of long lived assets, asset classifications, FAS 121 long lived assets, earn out provisions, intangibles and goodwill. 

He has been appointed as the Interim Monitor by the Federal Trade Commission in certain matters regarding contract compliance and was appointed as the monitor in a state matter involving a telecommunications corporation.

He has directed investigations of such matters as alleged fraudulent financial statements, earnings management, stock backdating, misappropriation of assets, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act violations, misuse of government funds, violations of Medicare regulations, violation of student loan regulation and general fraud and misconduct.

Clients have included law firms, commercial enterprises, governmental agencies and private families.

Forensic Services
  • Alternative dispute resolution, including serving as the arbiter
  • Analysis of potential fraudulent conveyance
  • Board governance practices evaluation
  • Compliance with governmental regulations
  • Construction claims
  • Damage analysis and lost profits, including expert witness testimony
  • Determining losses resulting from theft of trade secrets
  • Fraud risk assessments
  • Fraudulent financial reporting matters
  • Foreign Corrupt Practices Act analyses
  • GAAP Compliance matters
  • Governmental monitoring and reporting on compliance with agreements
  • Investigation services -  commercial and not-for-profit entities
  • Negotiating agreements with government agencies
  • Records reconstruction

Arbitration Experience - Sample Engagements
  • Aerospace.  Buyer raised objections under the purchase agreement as to costing methodology regarding production costs of certain assets.  As arbiter, this matter involved determining appropriate cost to assign to long-term development cost as contemplated under the agreement.
  • Equipment rental.  Assisted counsel in determining validity of closing date balance sheet objections raised by purchaser under agreement to acquire a business. The process, over a one year period, included the review and rebuttal of buyer's position and the defense of seller's position.
  • Paper and wood products. Buyer objected to the treatment under the terms of the agreement of certain types of inventory.  As arbiter, this matter involved determining the classification of such assets and appropriate treatment under terms of the agreement.
  • Construction. Contractor was removed from the construction site under termination by default. This matter involved determining direct and indirect costs related to costs to complete the project under terms with a new contractor.
  • Manufacturing. Respondent was accused of engaging in predatory pricing practices so as to cause Claimant to lose market share. As arbiter, this matter involved review of pricing structures and activity to determine the existence, if any of predatory pricing practices.
  • Manufacturing. The acquisition price under terms of the agreement contained certain requirements relating to net worth and working capital. As arbiter, this matter involved determining whether the terms of the agreement as to these requirements had been met and, accordingly, determining the amount of stock to be released from escrow.
  • Pharmaceutical. The agreement required the seller's operations to exceed a certain level of EBITDA in a post closing period. As arbiter, the matter involved determining EBITDA under the agreement.
  • Retail. Supplier and retailer had a supply agreement whereby supplier would share in the profits of certain sales of the retailer. As arbiter, this matter involved determining whether retailer had fully identified all relevant sales and supplier had identified all sales to the retailer and the financial remedy related to actions under the agreement.
  • Manufacturing. The acquisition price under terms of the agreement contained certain requirements relating to net worth and working capital. As arbiter, this matter involved determining whether the terms of the agreement as to these requirements had been met and, accordingly, determining the amount of stock to be released from escrow.
  • Wire and Cable. Buyer alleged that seller overstated certain assets, primarily inventory, in determining the acquisition price.  As arbiter, this matter involved assessing industry data and determining appropriate values under the terms of the agreement.
  • Staffing Services. Buyer alleged that seller improperly applied contract provisions to obtain a favorable earnings adjustment.  As arbiter, this matter involved interpreting the working capital adjustment provisions of the contract and applying these provisions to the relevant underlying facts.

Other Engagements - Sample Engagements
  • An engagement to assist outside counsel for a major long distance carrier with litigation against a telecommunications reseller for breach of contract.  In the course of this engagement, we analyzed billing records, bank records and proof of payment.  In order to verify the accuracy of the carrier's billing records, we developed a sampling plan to test records generated by telephone switching equipment.
  • An engagement to assist outside counsel for a major accounting firm with accounting malpractice litigation.  In this matter, the accounting firm had rendered an opinion on a financial forecast used as part of a prospectus for a telecommunications reseller.  In the course of this engagement, we researched costs applicable to the telecommunications industry, tested the assumptions used in the financial forecast and analyzed the procedures performed and conclusions reached by the accounting firm.
  • A seller of phone cards was experiencing substantial losses at the operations level.  In this matter we investigated potential fraud schemes to help identify causes of such losses, reviewed controls for design and implementation, and reviewed billing through computer processing.
  • An engagement with outside counsel to monitor the compliance of a major telecommunications provider with an agreement between the provider and a state attorney general.  In the course of this engagement, we conducted numerous interviews of employees, tested the accuracy of the provider's reporting systems and recommended improvements to those systems.
  • An engagement with outside counsel to investigate claims of earnings management. 

  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2019 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2019 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.