Cindy Putman's Case Summary

How do we protect Karen Greenwood of North Carolina? There are many resources that educate on tax fraud available online to Karen and each time we hear “I didn’t know they could do that”. IRS.gov has dedicated an entire site to educate, inform and provide tools to protect from tax fraud. Simple in concept to do the research yet many citizens do not even know these resources exist.

Since we had been doing business with her for over 12 years, we felt that she would receive all the proper training, and we never doubted her skills. Then within the last couple of years, we started detecting our income tax returns would take longer, not knowing why, so we would

U02a1 Case Conceptualization of Cindy Cindy is a 39 year old Hispanic female who has been struggling with numerous symptoms since she was involved in a vehicle accident seven years ago. Cindy is self-referred and seeks professional help as she and her two young daughters face troubling events as a result of Cindy’s symptoms. Cindy divorced her daughters’ father a few years after they married and is currently living with her boyfriend, Jason. Cindy has recently been arrested for domestic violence and claims that she, along with her daughters, struggle with behaviors. Presenting Problem

The AICPA Code of Professional Conduct discusses the need for independence among CPAs. The rule of independence states that members in public practice must remain independent when performing professional services (AICPA, 2014). Not only must they be independent in fact, they must also be independent in appearance such that informed third parties would not consider them to be lacking independence based on all relevant information (AICPA, 2014). The Code even specifically addresses the issue of unpaid fees. According to Rule 1.230.010, unpaid fees related to professional services provided to a client can cause threats to independence due to self-interest, undue influence, and advocacy threats. Specifically, the Code states that unpaid fees outstanding for over one year would impair a CPA’s independence (AICPA, 2014). Therefore, in this situation, the CPA

MILLERSBURG — A Millersburg woman last week denied criminal charges she wrote $150,000 in checks to herself from a business that employed her as a bookkeeper.

1- Jonathan was notified by the IRS that he should appear at the local IRS district office with support for his 2013 travel and entertainment expenses as well as his charitable deductions. It was a really nice day, so Jonathan went skiing rather than to the appointment. On the way to the ski resort Jonathan called his tax preparer, Sue Johnson, CPA, and told her that he wasn’t going to the appointment. What penalty or penalties could Jonathan be subject to? What about the Sue Johnson, CPA?

On June 1, 2016, a face to face interview was conducted with Ms. Hernandez. During the interview, Ms. Hernandez provided copies of her Washington, DC identification card, W-2’s/tax returns for tax years 2012 and 2014, and a written statement. Ms. Hernandez admitted both verbally and in her written statement that she failed to report her employment and earnings to the agency in August 2012. (See Exhibit 12)

From the other point of view, faithfully representing the financial statements is honest and Jill wishes to act with a tremendous amount of integrity and truthfulness. According to the AICPA’s Code of Conduct Section 54, Article III, “Integrity requires a member to be, among other things, honest and candid within the constraints of client confidentiality. Service and the public trust should not be subordinated to personal gain and advantage. Integrity can accommodate the inadvertent error and the honest difference of opinion; it cannot accommodate deceit or subordination of principle” (ET Section 54-Article III). Jill knows that changing estimates is not the right decision, even if it means losing a crucial donator in Ms. Oakes. Charitable organizations have to have some sort of expectation of possibly losing key donators, especially if their business income is significantly declining. Changing the estimates on the budget is a way of curving the law and giving false and misleading information to Ms. Oakes. Also, even though Ms. Oakes has warned Good Works for Women that she would stop her donations if the

In the Leslie Fay case, the fraud triangle was not critically evaluated prior to the issuance of unqualified audit opinions. Kenia had no incentive to commit fraud – he owned no company stock and did not receive a compensation based incentive. Pomerantz and Polishan had both of the aforementioned items included within their compensation package. Further, due to the lavish lifestyle and overbearing personalities of both Pomerantz’s and Polishan, they also clearly would have had rationalizations and justifications for the fraud. Additionally, given the “tight ship” Polishan ran in the Wilkes-Barre accounting office, Kenia would not have had opportunity – but Polishan would have, especially considering his close friendship with Pomerantz (Knapp, 2011).

As I’ve explained to Cindy Lachin earlier today and as a potential solution to your travel concerns regarding our Frederick warehouse location, PSC can temporarily position upon request a pallet or two of your storage assets at our Wilkins site for your access convenience. In essence, service delivery changes to you are minimal with regard to the amount of notification required to prepare for your arrival (e.g., 1-2 days) and handling charges, which are $45.14 per hour per person x 0.5 hours of labor, for a total of

In the case study of Gee Wiz, “Wanda David, a licensed CPA, works for Gee, LLC, a professional accountancy corporation with offices in Wisconsin and Illinois, in the audit department and she also has some small business clients that she provides tax services to in her spare time generally on weekends. Her employer does not know that she does this. Wanda never thought about a conflict of interests because the firm does no tax work. One of Wanda’s small business clients, Wiz Inc., was also an audit client of Gee and had fallen more than 90 days past due on paying bills. In her position with Gee, Wanda was assigned to the audit of Wiz and is responsible for preparing and estimating the Allowance for Doubtful Accounts. During the audit of Wiz’s financial statements during the week ending March 1, 2013, her boss asks her for justification for not including Wiz Inc. in the 90+ day aging report. It seems there are some audit-related questions about the collectible of the Wiz account. Wanda came up with an explanation for not including the Wiz account in the estimated allowance and her boss was satisfied. Within a week of this request, Wanda is given a nice promotion and raise, but she has to transfer to the office of Gee in Chicago for the new job. Wanda accepts the promotion, leaves immediately, and decides to quit doing accounting on the side. In moving, Wanda does not complete the corporate tax return for Wiz on Form 1120, which should be filed with the IRS by March 15. She also

Unfortunately, this hits close to home and is not a pleasant situation to be in. Overall, it is best to remain silent and pay the consequence for one’s action. A taxpayer who has been cheating on their taxes could have a possible audit and face penalties or criminal charges.

Imagine trusting your hard-earned money like your retirement savings to a financial adviser or Certified Public Accountants (CPA) only to lose it all in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme. In today’s world of business many organizations, financial planners and accountants are in the news due to the financial ethical breaches that have affected their customers, employees, and the general public. A CPA has to be responsible for their audits and take any punishments as a result of their mistakes, incompetence or illegal actions. CPAs are expected to have integrity in their work,

S.1043A “prohibits anyone in possession of non-public, price sensitive information from dealing in, or engaging others to deal in, the shares of a company” (text). After Patricia gained non-public, price sensitive information about SEPL’s intentions to buy a large amount of shares in FPPL, she immediately told her sister and engaged her in buying shares in

Main character in this fraud is Mr. Dennis Kozlowski, the CEO of Tyco. He misappropriated around $270 million through unauthorized loans, sale of Tyco securities and undisclosed compensation. In order to conceal these amounts, the compensation was incorrectly offset against unrelated gains. This led to violation of GAAP and misrepresented financial statements. For example, $44.6 million of bonuses were offset against gain from IPO of one of Tyco’s subsidiaries. They have also netted the bonuses with gain on disposal of business and gain on sale of common stock. According to ASC 718 Compensation, these and other bonuses should have been disclosed in operating earnings and should have decreased operating income. However, since they were offset against one-time gains, they did not have any impact on operating income. This “hiding” of compensation occurred on several occasions – the expenses were also netted against gain on sale