It considered his revised stance, including considering his responsibility was "only vicarious and not arising through personal dishonesty", was aimed at securing a favourable parole decision.
The history and manner of the offending, and the near six-year passage through the courts, indicated attitudes of "entitlement", with McKay then doing everything he could to avoid conviction, including attempting to blame one of his staff, after the investigation started and the firm was closed in 2010.
He had in jail even treated prison staff "like receptionists", an assessment noted.
By the time McKay next appears before the board in May he will have been in jail for half the sentence, but the board says in the meantime he must undertake "psychological interventions" to help him reach greater insight into what had happened.