North Face

In this case, there are several conspirators who is involved in the fraud receiving punishment from either SEC or federal government. Robert Levin, the AMRE executive and major stockholder, and Dennie D.Brown, the company’s chief accounting officer, were subject to the punishment in the form of a huge amount of fine by the SEC and the federal government. This punishment came from reasons. After AMRE going public, the company have the obligation to publish its financial reports but its performance did not meet expectation. The investigation by SEC shows that Robert took the first step of this scam, fearing the sharp drop of AMRE’s stock price because of the poor performance of company. He abetted Brown, to practice three main schemes to present a false appearance of profitable and pleasant financial reports. Firstly, they instructed Walter W.Richardson, the company’s vice president of data processing, to enter fictitious unset leads in the lead bank and they originally deferred the advertising cost mutiplying “cost per lead” and “unset leads” amount, so that they deferred a portion of its advertising costs in an asset account. The capitalizing of advertising expenses allowed them to inflate the net income for the first quarter of fiscal 1988. Secondly, at the end of the third and fourth quarters of fiscal 1988, they added fictitious inventory to AMRE’s ending inventory records, and prepared bogus inventory count sheets for the auditors. Thirdly, they overstated the percentage

An implicit theme of this case that I want students to recognize is the contrast between the persistent and vigorous efforts of David Sokol to “get to the bottom” of the suspicious items he uncovered in JWP’s accounting records versus what Judge William Conner referred to as the “spinelessness” of JWP’s auditors. The JWP audits were similar to most problem audits in that the auditors encountered numerous red flags and questionable entries in the client’s accounting records but, for whatever reason, apparently failed to thoroughly investigate those items. On the other hand, Sokol refused to be deterred in his investigation of the troubling accounting issues that he discovered. The relationships that existed between members of JWP’s accounting staff and the Ernst & Young audit team apparently influenced the outcome of the JWP audits. Of course, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Stephen Richards’s actions were extremely serious; manipulating Computer Associates’ quarter end cutoff to align CA’s reported financial results with market expectations by violating the generally accepted accounting principles and their financial reporting responsibilities. According to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Richards with other CA executives extended CA’s fiscal quarter, “ instructed and allowed subordinates to negotiate and obtain contracts after quarter end while knowing, or recklessly disregarding the fact that, CA would improperly recognize the revenue from those contracts, and failed to alert CA’s Finance or Sales Accounting Department that CA salespersons

The Enron and WorldCom scandals were arguably the incidents that permanently changed the procedures for accounting controls. In response to these incidents, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) of 2002 was passed. Once the knowledge of these scandals was made public, a number of subsequent accounting scandals were discovered in public companies such as Tyco International, HealthSouth, and American Insurance Group. In addition, a then-employee-owned company, Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. (dba PBS&J, now known as “Atkins North America, Inc.”), was also hit by a similar accounting scandal. Henceforth, a case study of PBS&J is presented where we will examine the fraudulent transactions that

This paper will address the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rationale for charging Cardillo executives with the violations outlined in the case study and identify who was in violation or compliance with the AICPA’s Code of Professional Conduct and the reasons they were or were not complying. This paper will also analyze the actions taken by Cardillo’s outside auditors, evaluate the level of efficiency of the audit risk management, determine whether or not the five components of internal controls were being properly followed and argue for or against whether auditors have a responsibility to assess the judgment of the decisions made by Cardillo’s management.

This case established that an auditor could be sued by a primary beneficiary for damages from negligence. A primary beneficiary is a party that has a direct benefit from the audit. Non-privity parties could also sue for gross negligence. This increased the auditor’s legal exposure to third parties. The SEC of 1934 reflected these changes and many others; one significant change was that auditor’s had a much higher litigation risk due to their new responsibility to third parties.

Dupont Decomposition DCF Assumptions WACC Calculation DCF Results Multiples EBO Valuation Dupont Decomposition 12 12 12 13 13 13 14 14

E&Y auditors violated their responsibility to the public and to their profession. The auditing standards that were violated were AU 15 responsibility of the auditor to obtain sufficient evidence to provide a reasonable basis for his opinion, AU section 339 preparation and maintenance of working papers, AU 339.01 Principle record of work contains information and conclusions the auditors have reached concerning significant matters in the working papers, AU 339.08 the auditor is required to “adopt reasonable procedures for safe custody of his working papers and retain them for a period, AU 15 was violated when Trauger requested revisions to the workpapers. AU 339, AU 339.01 and AU 339.08 were violated with the

During the performance of this integrated audit, require numerous judgments about the internal control and overall financial reporting and how well it addresses risks of material misstatements within the financial statements (AICPA, 2014). After re-evaluating the previous errors found from the previous audit, the audit team found the corrective actions to be appropriate and justified in elimination of human error by implementing additional checks and balances within the manual process. No additional misstatements have been found and all internal controls off the financial reporting seem appropriate and just.

On August 29, 2016, The Securities and Exchange Commission found that Dulek had engaged in improper professional conduct by engaging in repeated instances of unreasonable conduct indicating a lack of competence to practice before the Commission. Consequently, the Commission deemed it appropriate to deny Dulek the privilege of practicing as an accountant for three consecutive years. Upon the completion of his third year, Dulek may request that the Commission consider his application to resume practicing as a preparer or reviewer of any public company’s financial statements, which are filed with the Commission. In addition, the public accounting firm, which Dulek is associated, must be both registered with the PCAOB in accordance with the Sarbanes-Oxley

In conducting this report, it became clear that significant flaws were present with the old regulations regarding statutory reform. These issues created audited financial statements which investors were never fully confident with trusting, as well as creating many opportunities for the independence of auditors to be compromised.

Cable provider Adelphia was one of the major accounting scandals of the early 2000s that led to the creation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. A key provision of the Act was to create a stronger ethical climate in the auditing profession, a consequence of the apparent role that auditors played in some of the scandals. SOX mandated that auditors cannot audit the same companies for which they provide consulting services, as this link was perceived to result in audit teams being pressured to perform lax audits in order to secure more consulting business from the clients. There were other provisions in SOX that increased the regulatory burden on the auditing profession in response to lax auditing practices in scandals like Adelphia (McConnell & Banks, 2003). This paper will address the Adelphia scandal as it relates to the auditors, and the deontological ethics of the situation.

The concept of materiality provides a topic for continuing educational discussion that many firms across the country find essential to the development of their audit staff. Measuring and using materiality to obtain desired results during an audit becomes the responsibility of the staff member of a CPA firm. Partners and managers of a firm typically allow the staff member to use his/her judgment when applying this concept during the fieldwork of an audit. The overall success of an audit relies at least in part on the materiality concept; therefore, staff members’ continuing education on the concept becomes important and necessary. This report will define the term materiality, determine how to measure materiality, and

WorldCom acquired Arthur Andersen as the independent external auditing for the company. As WorldCom grew after the merger with MCI, Andersen began to invoice less than they should have. The charges were defended as an opportunity to prolong business with WorldCom. (Kaplan and Kiron, 2007). This is an immediate red flag for a company. Where were the ethical practices of the independent auditor? If the auditor has no ethics, how can one possibly be assured that the company is performing its intended function appropriately? The board of directors should have immediately been informed of Andersen’s practices and made a decision to confront Andersen’s practices and possibly obtain new independent auditors.

A company prepares financial statement to provide information about its financial position and performance. This information is in turn used by a wide range of stakeholders (such as investors, banks, customers, suppliers etc) in making economic decisions with respect to respective economic interest in the company. Typically, in terms of ownership by investment in shares of the company, shareholders though own the company but do not manage it. Therefore, the shareholder and other such stakeholders to get comfort in taking sound decision need independent assurance from the auditors that the financial statements reflect true and fair view of the company affairs in all material respects. Hence, in order to enhance the level of