The Aadit Report and Internal Control Evaluation Essay

1. The SEC is often called the “watchdog” of corporate America. How does it assist in preventing fraud?

Also in section 301 of The SOX Act, internal reporting of potential financial misappropriation of funds via anonymous whistleblowers is mandated. SOX 301 requires that audit committees of issuers listed on U.S. exchanges “establish procedures” for (i) receipt, retention, and treatment of complaints regarding accounting, internal accounting controls, or auditing matters; and (ii) confidential, anonymous submission by employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters.  SOX 301 was codified as

As stated on the official SEC website, “The mission of the SEC is to protect investors; maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and facilitate capital formation. The SEC strives to promote a market environment that is worthy of the public’s trust.” You gain a relatively good idea of their ultimate purpose through this mission statement, but a look at the SEC’s 2014-2018 strategic plan (which is only up for draft at the moment) will gives us better insight into exactly what they are aiming to achieve. In this report, the SEC identifies primary strategic goals that it will work to reach.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the SEC’s influence on auditing a private company and the essential activities involved in the initial planning of an audit. Next the discussion will delve into four stages of the audit and tasks performed by the auditors as well as internal control findings and various aspects of the audit.

Per management’s request this document has been prepared to assist in determining if a full financial status review of the recent job bid is necessary. Fully understanding and preparing for possible issues is vital to our organization’s success. Several key points and issues should be reviewed prior to entering into any contracts. The following information will be discussed in this memo: 1.) The impact of occupational fraud and abuse on the company, 2.)

However, the application of SOX has brought on regulations that public companies must put in place and follow to prohibit these unethical occurrences. One major advantage for associated with SOX is that more thorough audits are being conducted by auditing firms. Audits being conducted more thoroughly will provide accuracy and an increased reliability of financial data. This will affect taxes in a positive way and provide firms with an advantage. Causholli, Chambers, and Payne (2014) suggest that prior to the implementation of SOX in 2002, “an auditor’s opportunity to sell additional non-audit services in the subsequent year, coupled with the client’s willingness to buy services, intensified the economic bond between auditor and client, in turn reducing auditor independence and the quality of financial reporting” (p.681). The regulation of auditor provided non-audit tax services has increased the reliability of tax and financial reporting within companies. Seetharaman, Sun, and Wang (2011) explain that “in a post-Sarbanes-Oxley environment, the benefits of auditor-provided non-audit tax services (NATS) seem to manifest themselves in higher quality tax-related financial statement management assertions” (p. 677).

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

As a result of SOX, top management must individually certify the accuracy of financial information. In addition, penalties for fraudulent financial activity are much more severe. Also, SOX increased the oversight role of boards of directors and the independence of the outside auditors who review the accuracy of corporate financial statements.[1]

There used to be a time in the United States when there were no regulations in place to protect the public from corporate greed and deceit. Publically traded companies used the auditors they had on retainer to audit their financial statements. There was no reason to believe that such large corporations would allow their share holders to fall. That fairytale came to an end with the discovery of the Enron and WorldCom scandals. These nightmares made the public “wake up” and realize that nothing was required of these companies to prove their statements or protect their shareholders. Regulation was

B) According to SOX external auditors are prohibited from providing certain services to clients: book keeping or other things related to the accounting records or financial statements of the audit client, they are not allowed to design and implement financial information, appraisal or evaluation services, internal audit outsourcing services, investment banking services, legal services and expert services unrelated to the audit.

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,

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was enacted in July 30, 2002, by Congress to protect shareholders and the general public from fraudulent corporate practices and accounting errors and to maintain auditor independence.   In protecting the shareholders and the general public the SOX Act is intended to improve the transparency of the financial reporting.   Financial reports are to be certified by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) creating increased responsibility and independence with auditing by independent audit firms. In discussing the SOX Act, we will focus on how this act affects the CEOs; CFOs; outside independent audit firms; the advantages and a

The final responsibility for the integrity of an SEC registrant’s internal controls lies on the management team. U.S. companies need to refer to a comprehensive framework of internal control when assessing the quality of financial reporting to determine that financial statements are being presented under General Accepted Accounting Principles, GAAP. The widely used framework is referred as COSO, Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, sponsored by the following organizations American Accounting Association, the American Institute of CPA’s, Financial Executives International, the Institute of Internal Auditors, and the Institute of Management Accountants. COSO’s defines internal control as:

The key to the article “Cooking the Books” is to cover the business ethics of an accounting manager ordering one of his accountants to falsifying a company’s accounting ledger. The Generally Accepted Accounting Principle of expense recognition was not followed. The accounting manager was attempting to commit fraud for personal gain, he does this by manipulating the books to show higher revenue in order to meet the volume for management bonus. The accounting manager also created a hostile working environment by threating his accountant’s job security if he didn’t comply with his orders. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act will also be explored to see if there was a violation due to the unethical behavior of the

These changes were outlined in the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). SOX completely revolutionized financial reporting, requiring senior management of firms to sign off on each financial statement that the company issues. It also stipulated that wrongful doing can result in not only termination but also imprisonment. SOX amplified the requirement for companies, requiring firms to maintain proper levels of internal controls when it comes to operating activities. SOX also established the creation of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) which implemented stricter auditing standards for public accounting firms. Not only were accounting firms required to consider internal controls, but they were also required report any significant deficiency directly to the board of directors. SOX stressed the importance of internal controls, and within internal controls it established the need for segregation of duties. Since this time, there have been many additions to accounting policies regards segregations of duties, and many functions of the business process dedicated to it.