Enron Accounting Scandal

One major scandal revealed in 2001 was Enron, a major energy company located in Houston, Texas (Auerbach, 2010, pp. 6). This organization collapsed because of their deceptive accounting practices and mismanagement. In 2001, Enron fraudulent practices became a public scandal, and because of these practices, shareholders lost $74 billion and thousands of employees (pp. 2). Unfortunately, investors lost their retirement accounts and because they lost many employees, it left many people unemployed. Essentially, Enron kept huge debts off their balance sheets. There were so many businesses and investors that were linked to Enron, and its bankruptcy was a major movement in Congress to make a legislative initiative towards the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Between the years 2000 and 2002 there were over a dozen corporate scandals involving unethical corporate governance practices. The allegations ranged from faulty revenue reporting and falsifying financial records, to the shredding and destruction of financial documents (Patsuris, 2002). Most notably, are the cases involving Enron and Arthur Andersen. The allegations of the Enron scandal went public in October 2001. They included, hiding debt and boosting profits to the tune of more than one billion dollars. They were also accused of bribing foreign governments to win contacts and manipulating both the California and Texas power markets (Patsuris, 2002). Following these allegations, Arthur Andersen was investigated for, allegedly,

On December of 2001, the nation’s seventh largest corporation valued at almost $70 billion dollars filed for bankruptcy. Illegal and fraudulent accounting procedures would led to the demise of the company. Over 20,000 people lost their jobs, and about $2 billion in pensions and retirement funds disappeared. Despite all this, Kenneth Lay, Jeffrey Skilling and Anthony Fastow profited greatly from Enron. These events resulted in the implementation of new legislation on the accuracy of financial reporting for public companies. The fall of Enron became known as the largest corporate bankruptcy in the United States at the time.

This was but one of many accounting scandals, but it was possibly the worst. To help prevent something like this from happened again, the Sarbanes Oxley Act was passed. This act greatly increased the accountability of auditing firms, and it also increased penalties for acts such as defrauding shareholders, as well as faking, destroying, or altering records (Jennings, 2015).

Another corporate accounting scandal that occurred in the United States before the Sarbanes-Oxley Act came into effect was the WorldCom scandal in 2002. Seventeen thousand employees were fired and $3.8 billion dollars in profit were removed from their accounting books after an internal audit discovered improper expense accounting in 2001 and 2002. This improper accounting inflated the cash flow so the company would not report a net loss, only a net gain (Hancock, 2002).

In the summer of 2001, questions began to arise about the integrity of Houston energy company Enron’s financial statements. In December, they filed for bankruptcy as their fraud came to light and the United States government froze all of their assets and began prosecuting their executives and their external auditing firm Arthur Anderson (Franzel 2014). Enron was not the only company using accounting loopholes to mislead stockholders though; Global Crossing, Tyco, Aldephia, WorldCom, and Waste Management all underwent investigation for similar

This event was unprecedented. The seventh largest company in the United States disintegrated from an annually profitable company in business for over sixteen years to a company claiming to be bankrupt over a period of a few months (O’Leary). Ultimately, fraudulent accounting and misstatements of revenues and debt obligations orchestrated by the CEO, CFO, and other senior managers were to blame. These revelations roiled stakeholder trust in public companies' financial reporting, accounting methodology, and overall transparency. In addition to Enron’s admissions, their accountant and auditor, Arthur Andersen LLP, was determined to have conspired to assist in the inflation of stated profits mainly by not disclosing Enron's money-losing partnerships in the financial statements (PBS). Arthur Andersen eventually surrendered the practices’ CPA licenses in the United States after being found guilty of criminal charges relating to the firm's handling of auditing for Enron

In 2001, Enron, the largest energy company in the U.S., collapsed after a vast creative-accounting scandal. Enron practiced a type of accounting called mark-to-market practice which it used to hide losses. Mark-to-market accounting it not illegal on its own but it was used improperly by Enron. The CFO and CEO of Enron were able to write off any losses to an off-the-book balance sheet and made the company appear financially healthy (Seabury, 2008). Investors lost $74 billion while thousands of employees lost their jobs and

The focus of the corporation soon changed direction once it was realized that investing in selling intangible assets on the market could provide easier and higher revenue returns. This type of trading on the open stock market, with little regulations is what allowed the infamous criminal acts to take place and led to one of the world’s worst bankruptcy cases in United States history. An investigation finally occurred when investors found suspicious stock prices increasing exponentially and a whistleblower raised concern that finally revealed the fraudulent operations of Enron’s top executives conspiring with multiple businesses.

From the 1980s to the present there have been multiple accounting scandals that were widely reported on by the media and resulted in fraud charges, bankruptcy protection requests, and the closure of companies and accounting firms. The scandals were the result of creative accounting, misleading financial analysis, as well as bribery. For example, various companies had issues with fraudulent accounting practices, including Enron, WorldCom and AIG. One

Enron, though not the largest scandal, could be one of the most talked about and blown up by the media. Enron was caused by a couple of reasons, though the main underlying factor behind these is a conflict of interest that has evolved in our companies. First, I think that one of the obvious causes of the Enron scandal is our legal and regulatory structure (Reid). Current laws and SEC regulations allow firms like Arthur Andersen (Enron auditor) to provide consulting services to a company and then turn around and provide the audited report about the financial results of these consulting activities (Sorkin). This is an obvious conflict of interest that is built into our legal structure and must be addressed. Second, a private company like Enron currently hires and pays its own auditors. This again is a conflict of interest built into our legal system because the auditor has an incentive not to issue an unfavorable report on the company that is paying him or her. Third, most large companies like Enron are allowed to manage their own employee pension funds. Again, this is a conflict of interest built into our

Enron was a company that was ranked as seventh out of the five hundred leading companies in the United States and is the largest U.S. energy company that went bankrupt leaving debts amounting to nearly U.S. $ 31.2 billion. In instance with the case of Enron known occurrence of moral threat behavior such as manipulation of financial statements with a record 600 million dollar profit when the company

OneTel and Enron were huge technology companies, dominating the competition that they faced although - everything changed. Both of these companies operated in the same era, coincedently both suffering financial collapse. The reasons were mainly because of the failure to follow major accounting principles, lacking morals and lacking strong work ethics. If even a major corporation can fall into this “trap”, then avoiding doesn’t sound easy, although accountants can easily avoid scandals by following a precise set of given rules and ethics. OneTel and Enron are prime examples which demonstrate the danger when a business is faced with an accounting scandal - which in turn could have been avoided.

As competition increased and the economy started to plunge in the early 2000s, Enron struggled to maintain their profit margins. Executives determined that in order to keep their debt ratio low, they would need to transfer debt from their balance sheet. “Reducing hard assets while earning increasing paper profits served to increase Enron’s return on assets (ROA) and reduce its debt-to-total-assets ratio, making the company more attractive to credit rating agencies and investors” (Thomas, 2002). Executives developed Structured Financing and Special Purpose Entities (SPE), which they used to transfer the majority of Enron’s debt to the SPEs. Enron also failed to appropriately disclose information regarding the related party transactions in the notes to the financial statements.Andersen performed audit work for Enron and rendered an unqualified opinion of their financial statements while this activity occurred. The seriousness and amount of misstatement has led some to believe that Andersen must have known what was going on inside Enron, but decided to overlook it. Assets and equities were overstated by over $1.2 billion, which can clearly be considered a material amount (Cunningham & Harris, 2006). These are a few of several practices that spiraled out of control in an effort to meet forecasted quarterly earnings. As competition grew against the energy giant and their

Enron's entire scandal was based on a foundation of lies characterized by the most brazen and most unethical accounting and business practices that will forever have a place in the hall of scandals that have shamed American history. To the outside, Enron looked like a well run, innovative company. This was largely a result of self-created businesses or ventures that were made "off the balance sheet." These side businesses would sell stock, reporting profits, but not reporting losses. "Treating these businesses "off the balance sheet" meant that Enron pretended that these businesses were autonomous, separate firms. But, if the new business made money, Enron would report it as income. If the new business lost money or borrowed money, the losses and debt were not reported by Enron" (mgmtguru.com). As the Management Guru website explains, these tactics were alls designed to make Enron look like a more profitable company and to give it a higher stock price.