Abigail Rockwell
Due Date: February 15, 2014
Jamaica Water Properties Case Study
During a time in our recent history when greed and self promotion was the benchmark that most financial and managerial directors of companies, both public and private, seemed to strive for, David Sokol stands out above the crowd. Instead of looking to further his own self-image, career, or standing, instead of taking what most people would view as the easy road, Mr. Sokol did the right thing. He chose ethics, morals, and a straight compass to guide his career. Was it an easy road? No, but it was the right one. Would I be able to do the same thing? I would hope so. Although we never know with 100% certainty what we would do in a specific situation, I
…show more content…
One way to do that is to reduce the risk of personal relationships between the client personnel and members of the audit engagement team. Close, personal relationships make it easier for the audit team to overlook areas that might need further investigation. Thankfully, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and SEC Provisions have already addressed the issue of an accounting firm/auditor’s independence. As long as the firm adheres to these rules and requirements, their risk is minimized. Some of these measures include:
Partner Rotation: Required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the SEC independence rules require the lead and concurring audit partner to rotate off the audit engagement after five years. Additionally, the SEC also requires that there be a five year “cooling off” period before the partner can return to that audit.
Establishment of an Audit Committee so that there is a buffer between any disagreements between management and the auditor.
Maintaining Auditor independence through the exclusion of those with potential direct and indirect financial interest in the client from working on the audit.
It was the lack of independence between JWP and Ernst & Young that led to many of the issues that were not caught,
During my courses, I frequently remind students that most corporate executives, accountants, and auditors are honest and ethical. This case provides a stark and powerful example of one such individual. When I discuss a case such as this in my courses, I try to provide other examples of positive role models among corporate executives. Granted, most of these examples do not involve accounting or auditing matters, but, nevertheless, they help to blunt the impression that students may receive from studying my cases that most corporate executives are “crooks.”
The auditor must assess the transactions for how much of a risk factor is involved. When reviewing these transactions, auditor must be able to review the internal controls of the company’s accounting personnel. The segregation of duties is associated with the safeguarding of an organization 's assets and the topic known as internal control. An example of the segregation of duties would be a company 's requirement that the bank statement for its checking
5. The audit client should be allowed to "follow" its engagement audit partner to another accounting firm because it obviously breach the independence of the auditor after forging a relationship with the clients. SOX specified the "cooling-off" period for the auditor from entering the client management, this serves the same purpose as well.
Auditor independence and a prohibition on audit firms offering value-added (read "conflict of interest") services
Exceptions can be approved by the Board and are made in cases where the revenue paid for such services contributes less than 5% of revenues paid to the auditing firm. Also, a public accounting firm may provide these non-audit services along with audit services if it is pre-approved by the audit committee of the public company. The audit committee will disclose to investors in periodic reports its decision to approve the performance of non-audit services and audit services by the same accounting firm. This requirement to disclose to investors is likely to inhibit auditing committees from approving the performance of auditing and non-auditing services by the same accounting firm. Other sections outline audit partner rotations, accounting firm reporting procedures, and executive officer independence. Specifically, subsection 206 states that the CEO, Controller, CFO, Chief Accounting Officer or similarly positioned employees cannot have been employed by the company's audit firm for one year prior to the audit.
An auditor’s role in an audit is very important. An auditor must be able to collect enough evidence to supports their finding, and also be on the lookout for fraud. Company’s may or may not know the law, but it is the job to know the law, and be able to educate and report findings properly. Since the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, there have been provisions that have directly affected auditors. This paper will include the details of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, how ethics and independence have affected auditors, as well implementation of new standards based on the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
Title II of Sarbanes-Oxley covers Auditor independence, it contains nine sections all covering different aspects of auditors’ independence. Section 201, Services outside the Scope of Practice of Auditors, details what activities are not allowed to be performed by auditors for a client if they are to be performing an audit for that client. Detailed in section 201 as prohibited in order to maintain auditor independence are legal and expert services unrelated to the audit, any investment advisement, investment banking services, management or human resource functions, internal audit outsourcing services, actuarial services, appraisal or valuation services, financial
For any audit engagement APES 110 section 100.5 sets out five fundamental principles that all audit members must abide by (Gay & Simnett 2012, p. 86). They must act with integrity, objectivity and not allow bias. They need to ensure professional competence, confidentiality and comply with the relevant legislation (Gay & Simnett 2012, p. 86). As such one of the principle requirements for auditors is auditor independence from their clients. In Harris-Scarfe’s case, this was not possible because the deputy chairman used to be a partner at Price Waterhouse, the firm’s auditors (Buchanan 2004, p. 69).
The purpose of an audit is to enhance of confidence in the financial statements. An auditors opinion validates this purpose.
According to ICAEW, auditor independence mainly refers to the independence of the external auditor from parties that have an interest in the financial statements of the business being audited. It requires having both integrity and an objective manner to the auditing process. In order for the concept to be deemed effective the auditor needs to carry out their work freely. One of the main purposes of auditing is to increase credibility of the entity’s’ financial statements, as they have expressed their own professional opinion on the truth and fair view in accordance with the proper accounting standards used. This is only possible if the audit is made with reasonable assurance that it has come from an independent source and has not been influenced by other parties, such as managers, directors or by conflict of interest.
1. After discovering the suspicious items in JWP’s accounting records, should he have taken a different course of action than he did?
3 pillars of effective internal audit services- independence and objectivitiy, proficiency, and due professional care.
Internal auditors cannot effectively provide an analysis on the company’s internal dealings as they are part of the company. External auditors, however, can observe these processes from the outside and then determine where the funds of the company and whether the dealings adhere to the regulations. Using external auditors in a company prevents conflict of interest from happening. Conflict of interest is a situation where an individual or organization has multiple interests and of those multiple interests, one could possible corrupt the motivation for an act on the other when the auditor has any kind of beneficial interest in their client’s performance. In other circumstances, there is also the threat of familiarity where auditors become
An important function of the accounting field is to provide external users of financial statements with assurance that the financial information being presented is both reliable and accurate. This basic function of accounting is so important that there is an entire field of experts, called auditors, dedicated to assuring its proper performance. Throughout history there have been many instances in which the basic equilibrium between an institution and current/potential investor has been threatened due to a lack of accountability and trust between the two parties. This issue has been the catalyst for many discussions regarding the proper procedures a firm should follow in order to provide
The lack of independence for external auditors will lead to the neglect of auditing risks (William R.K., 2003), which are the main reasons for the failure of certified accountants and professional accounting organizations. The consequence of the external auditors deprived of independence would be very serious. And there are many cases, which aroused by the failure of external auditors and most are related to the lack of independence. One famous example is the bankruptcy of Enron and the role played by its external auditor, Arthur Andersen (Todd, S., 2003). Arthur Andersen was once one of the biggest accounting companies in the world, and was canceled for the involvement in the Enron bankruptcy scandal.