Brutal economic conditions unsurprisingly hit global accounting giant Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu this year.

The firm reports that revenue for fiscal 2009 (which ended May 31) fell 4.9% from the year before, settling at $26.1 billion. A decline in deal flow and the economic downturn around the world are cited as the primary reasons for the performance. Only the consulting business posted a gain. At the same time, Deloitte's workforce grew globally by 40,000 to 169,000, but the net increase masks a turbulent year for the employees.

An independent report commissioned by the Justice Department concluded that the "improper and imprudent practices" of now-bankrupt subprime lender New Century Financial were condoned and enabled by the company's independent auditor, KPMG.

The accounting firm allowed New Century to change its accounting to report strong profits during the housing boom, when a more conservative treatment would have shown losses. The company lowered its reserves for bad loans that investors were forcing it to buy back, even as the number of bad loans increased.

The New York Times reports that this may pave the way for New Century to sue KPMG. Seven years after the collapse of Enron, conflicts of interest involving "independent" auditors and their clients who pay them are still costing shareholders billions. Back in October, I posed 2 ideas for ways that issues of auditor independence might be fixed:

• Shouldn't companies be required to change accounting firms (rather than just employees within the same firm) every few years to avoid entrenchment and cozy relationships. When accountants see colleagues leaving for lucrative gigs at the company they once audited, can that lead to a conflict of interest?

• Should companies be allowed to choose their own auditors, or should the SEC consider implementing a system where auditors are appointed by a third-party? Allowing companies to hire and fire their own independent auditing firms raises questions about whether they are really independent.

With a recent -- and idiotic, I would say -- Supreme Court decision making it tougher for defrauded investors to sue investment banks and auditors who aided and abetted in fraud, auditor independence may be more important than ever.

After being embarrassed by the collapses of Enron and Worldcom, the auditing industry appears to be growing a stronger backbone when it comes to dealing with aggressive clients. According to (subscription required) The Wall Street Journal, "In recent weeks, the accounting firms, operating through a new industry group, have taken views at odds with at least some of their clients about the use of market prices for hard-to-trade securities and over how banks should deal with their exposure to losses in off-balance-sheet lending vehicles."

This is certainly good news. Strong, independent accountants are an absolute necessity in preserving the integrity of the financial system. But more needs to be done. Investors and regulators need to be asking the following questions:

• Shouldn't companies be required to change accounting firms (rather than just employees within the same firm) every few years to avoid entrenchment and cozy relationships. When accountants see colleagues leaving for lucrative gigs at the company they once audited, can that lead to a conflict of interest?
• Should companies be allowed to choose their own auditors, or should the SEC consider implementing a system where auditors are appointed by a third-party? Allowing companies to hire and fire their own independent auditing firms raises questions about whether they are really independent.