Report on Corporate Frauds in Bangladesh

With different industry definitions and viewpoints, fraud can be a tough issue for audit committee members to grasp for oversight purposes. The legal obligations of audit committee members have intensified because their standard duty of care and loyalty to the entity has increased in light of management fraud activities.

Fraudulent financial reporting is one form of corporate corruption and may involve the manipulation of the documents used to record accounting transactions, the misrepresentation of accounting events or transactions, or the intentional misapplication of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) (Crumbley, Heitger, and Smith, 2013). Examples of fraudulent schemes befitting of this category abound and usually involve financial statement items that have been misclassified, omitted, overstated, undervalued, or prematurely recognized. One case involving CEO Bill Smith of Moonstay

2 Managing fraud risk: The audit committee perspective Fraud in a fi nancial statement audit

Legitimacy in accounting practices is ensured by the check and balance of having independent auditors from registered public accountant firms reviewing financial practices. The report features eleven sections and these sections pertain to accounting overview, independence of auditors to reduce interest conflicts, corporate responsibility, financial disclosures, tax returns, criminal fraud and various elements of white collar criminal activity (107th Congress

Accounting and management are the major pillars of an organization that contributes to the country’s economy. Introduction of AICPA Code of Professional Conduct helps in controlling the business operation especially in the accounting and management departments. Accounting and management fraud have been experienced whereby through corruption or other means, entrusted managers and accountants tend to be selfish in undertaking their duties. These factors are well addressed by the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct principles. Therefore, the study seeks to introduce two case studies whereby the management fraud have been experienced. Furthermore, the study will incorporate the use of AICPA Code of Professional Conduct in controlling the situation to ensure harmonious business operation in the management.

In October 2001, Enron Corporation which was one of the world major energy, commodities and service companies with claimed revenues of nearly 111 billion dollars during 2000 collapsed under the weight of massive fraud in that it has become largest bankruptcy recognition in the US economy. Enron’s earning report was extremely skewed that losses were not represented in their entirety, prompting more and more wishing to participate in what seemed like a profitable company. After collapse of Enron, Auditor independence has become a social issue that weather auditor has to be independent or not. In addition, while auditing must consider matters objectively with dispassion, there were still doubts whether it implemented well. Further, there has been much speculation about the need for the mandatory rotation of auditors or audit firm rotation to warn false accounting between audit firm and client. By examining Enron case, this essay will discuss about advantages and drawbacks of the mandatory rotation of

The Phar Mor case is an example of a fraud that was collusive effort of multiple individuals within the upper management who continually worked to hide evidence from the auditors. With the signs of covering losses, creating fictitious inventory, misstating financial statements, and misappropriating the company’s dwindling assets; the fraud was significant but the oversight inept procedures by the auditors extended this fraud for nearly five-years Currently, accounting firms, with the leverage provided by Statement on Auditing Standard No. 99 are shifting from the cost-pressured audit situation of the past to more quality audits and fulfilling the responsibility to plan and perform.

Hogan, Rezaee, Riley, and Velury (2008) noted the development of the auditing standards created due to the financial scandals that have occurred over the years. However, the authors note even with the development of SOX and SAS No. 99 there still does not appear to be a decline in financial statement fraud (232).

There were 347 alleged cases of fraud involving public company according to Fraudulent Financial Reporting: 1998-2007 sponsored by Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO, 2010) that were investigated by Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on May 2010, which is showing 53 increased in the number of fraud when compared to the 1987-1997 study (p.5). COSO’s result is a sad number in a 10 year period, which averaging close to 35 accounting frauds a year (p.5). COSO’S study shows out of the nearly 350 financial frauds investigated 60% were identified to involved improper revenue recognition and 89% were recognized the CEOs and/or CFOs involvement (p.5). COSO’s research

Auditors should look out that the company may have the opportunity to carry out the fraud. There have certain conditions that will occur this opportunity

The auditing firm has been in engagement with the company throughout the period when the fraud was being committed. One of the common and clear indicators of possible fraud was the company’s cash flow statement. The company experienced positive growth in its profits from the year 1996 through to the year 1998. However, a close analysis of the cash flow statement shows that the company had experienced negative figures of cash flow from both operating and investing activities and positive cash flow from financing activities which would not sufficiently offset the negative cash flows from operating and investing. It is therefore evident

Fraudulent, erroneous, and illegal acts committed by a public company, usually at a managerial or executive level, have been a very serious problem for many years and have prompted development of strict and updated regulations, such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, in an attempt to prevent these occurrences. Unfortunately, these new or updated regulations are not enough to prevent these acts from happening, thus not alleviating the auditors of their responsibility to detect fraud. Some methods that management and auditors can employ to prevent and detect fraud, errors, and illegal acts are: improving knowledge, improving skills,

With the avalanche of accounting scandals that have rocked the public, people tend to have increasingly high expectation that auditors are accountable for detecting all frauds, while the standards require auditors to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance. The purpose of the report is to discuss the accountability of auditors in detecting fraud by analysing a $16.9 million fraud of Otago District Health Board (ODHB) perpetrated by Swann and Harford from 2000 to 2006. The report will explain the event, the fraud, the stakeholders, the role of auditors and the current situation.

Lindberg and Beck (2002) claim that auditor independence is hailed as the “cornerstone” in the accounting profession as it is the core reason as to why the public trusts their professional opinion. However, since 2000, many accounting fraud scandals have negatively impacted public opinion on the legitimacy of the audit profession and, if in fact, its independence is uninfluenced by other parties. One of the scandals being the sudden collapse of Enron, given that a few months prior its bankruptcy its auditors Arthur Andersen, which was one of the five largest audit and accounting firms, claimed that Enron was financially healthy, but in fact they were paid off

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.