The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) said that its new chairman, Demetrios Logothetis, along with newly appointed board members Mark Calabria and Steven Laughton, were sworn in on February 10, 2026, during a ceremony held at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
This comes as the SEC, which oversees the PCAOB, named the new members on January 30.
The new PCAOB chairman, Logothetis, is a retired Ernst & Young LLP partner. Calabria joins from the Office of Management and Budget while Laughton was previously a counsel to PCAOB member Christina Ho, who decided last year not to seek reappointment.
The SEC also appointed Kyle Hauptman, chairman of the National Credit Union Administration, who has yet to be sworn in, and retained George Botic as a board member, who was named by the previous SEC leadership, most likely for continuity at the PCAOB.
“Independent oversight of auditors is a critical pillar of the investor confidence that powers the U.S. capital markets, and I look forward to partnering with the SEC, my fellow Board Members, and the PCAOB’s dedicated staff to fulfill our organization’s statutory responsibilities efficiently and effectively,” Logothetis said in a statement.
The appointments by the SEC on January 30 mark the start of a significant new chapter for the audit regulator as it undergoes leadership transition, budget tightening, and a recalibrated regulatory approach.
While previous PCAOB leaders pursued ambitious, sometimes aggressive rulemaking and enforcement activities, the new leaders are expected to adopt a more moderate regulatory agenda, reflecting more of the views of the auditing profession.
Historic Pay Cuts
The new appointees come at a moment of dramatic change as board chair and members will receive steep salary reductions—a 52% cut for the chair and 42% for the other board members, effective calendar year 2026.
The SEC, under Chairman Paul Atkins, pressed the PCAOB to cut its budget and board member pays. While the board’s entire budget did not see a dramatic cut—reduced by 9.4%–it still represented a significant reduction.
The board had not seen any salary change since 2009, a period during which the chair earned $672,676 and other board members earned $546,891 annually. The new compensation levels are expected to drop to roughly $323,000 for the chair and $317,000 for board members.
Atkins justified the cuts that demonstrate “a clear commitment to aligning PCAOB Board pay more closely with the ethos of public service that reinforces trust, demonstrates fiscal responsibility, and affirms the honor of stewardship over the capital markets.”
What Pay Cuts Mean for Board Members
The previously unusually high compensation had been a factor in attracting senior leaders with deep accounting, regulatory, and financial market expertise. These roles typically drew candidates with decades of high-level audit practice, economic policy experience, or backgrounds in complex securities laws.
Now the new compensation structure shifts the role’s appeal toward mission-driven public service. Candidates motivated chiefly by compensation may be less likely to apply in future cycles.
Before the appointment was announced, Daniel Goelzer, a former PCAOB founding member, said that reducing board members’ salaries would likely affect the candidate pool.
“It should discourage applicants who are primarily attracted by a high salary but lack any special interest in advancing the public interest in public company auditing and financial reporting. That would be a positive,” he said. “On the other hand, lower salaries may make it difficult for some qualified people who are sincerely interested in this type of public service to accept a board position, especially if they are, as is likely, currently more highly compensated in a private sector job.”
At least on the surface, the new board members appear to possess the necessary qualifications for the roles.
It is worth noting, however, that the willingness of the current members to serve at a lower pay may also reflect their career stage. For example, the new PCAOB chairman has been retired from EY for some time.
“I would agree,” said Richard Chambers, a senior adviser for risk and audit at AuditBoard. “It is not unusual for successful executives and other professionals to accept positions in public service later in their careers. We have seen this in cabinet positions and other senior government posts. The newly appointed PCAOB board members are likely motivated by the desire to serve rather than the remuneration.”
Senior Staff Pay Cut May be More Problematic
In the meantime, Goelzer said that cutting senior staff pay is a more delicate question because so much daytoday effectiveness depends on those positions.
“In the long run, lower senior staff salaries are likely to increase turnover,” he said.
This, too, has both pros and cons.
Traditionally, the PCAOB’s senior staff has experienced a low level of voluntary turnover.
“This has helped to build and maintain institutional knowledge and experience,” Goelzer explained. “In some cases, however, it has also resulted in fewer opportunities to bring in new people with current expertise.”
He said that Congress originally envisioned the PCAOB as an organization managed and staffed by people with extensive experience and expertise in auditing and public company financial reporting.
“In that context, it made sense to pay board and staff salaries that would attract senior professionals,” Goelzer said. “Based on this philosophy, board member salaries were originally set at the same level as FASB members. However, when the Supreme Court held that PCAOB board members were removable at will by the SEC, it became customary to replace the board when political control of the SEC changes.”
“In this context, it’s harder to view the board members as purely technical experts, selected and retained based solely on their expertise and experience,” he added. “I don’t mean this as a criticism of any past or present board members; it’s just a different model than the one that Congress originally envisioned. Lower salaries are a corollary of that new model. Once board service became more closely aligned with political cycles, it became easier to justify treating compensation more like other politically appointed roles than like apolitical standard-setting bodies.”
Take your tax and accounting research to the next level with Checkpoint Edge and CoCounsel. Get instant access to AI-assisted research, expert-approved answers, and cutting-edge tools like Advisory Maps and State Charts. Try it today and transform the way you work! Subscribe now and discover a smarter way to find answers.
