Why Did It Take The Internal Auditors More Than A Year?

Scoping and Evaluation Judgments in the Audit of Internal Control over Financial Reporting 12.1 EyeMax Corporation . . Evaluation of Audit Differences

“Although it was not the internal audit department’s duty, Cooper decided that she and several others in her division would investigate the company’s financials on their own, performing what essentially would be a series of mini audits. She did not mention that task to any of the higher-ups at WorldCom; instead, she and her staff worked long hours, often through the night, as they pored over the books.” (Mead) On one side of things, people could see that Cynthia Cooper acted on two code of ethics principles that internal auditors are expected to apply and to uphold. One being her integrity, which states that “internal auditors establishes

Arthur Andersen (AA) contributed to the Enron disaster when it has failed to the management by failing to have Enron establish and enforce its own internal control. There has been flaws to AA‘s internal control. There has been assumption that AA partners were too motivated by revenue recognition thus, overlooking several criteria when providing their services to Enron. Additionally, AA also recognised the retention of audit clients as vital and a loss of any clients would be disadvantaged to an auditor’s career. In AA internal control, the person who is able to make most of the decisions is the person who is most concerned about the revenue or losses of the client’s company.

The whole board of directors were recouped with an entire new board of directors to assure loyal decisions. Where the scandal happened in Mississippi, finance and accounting firm was closed down. As new employees of Worldcom were being hired, about more than half of the existing employees were layed off. Telecommunications market has dropped in 2002, after the scandal. Though the market dropped the bankruptcy of Worldcom was a downfall, but this made it advantage for Worldcom's competitors to survive. Looking outside of the company many others were affected. However the New York State retirement fund has one of the biggest pension fund, it had many investments through Worldcom and lost over $300 million. Another investment by HGK Asset Management which stands for Harris, Greenhouse, Kutzel, lost it all over $130 million of the debt securities and all in the

The similar circumstance occurred with other companies. As such, the government decided that they must do something about this issue and in 2002 Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Not only this act had an immediate effect on us corporations, but the accounting profession was revolutionized by this new introduction. The act gave more regulatory power to lawyers, analysts, and auditors. WorldCom, who was one of the biggest bankruptcies in history, admitted to overstating profits by billions throughout the years. The

Due to these criminal activities, many top executives were convicted fraud and sentenced to spend time in prison. WorldCom activities did not align with the company's overall mission and goals. The actions taken by management were not in the best interest of the customer instead they were consumed with acquisitions and increasing the value of WorldCom Shares. The management also should have considered general accounting practices during their strategic planning. Furthermore, create procedures that protect all stakeholders within the firm.

Preventative measures could have been instituted to avoid the WorldCom corporate fraud. First, WorldCom should have had an external Board of Governors comprised of businessmen

The audit committee’s responsibility was to look over the accounting and financial reporting process as well as the financial statement audits; appoint, compensate and oversee the external auditor; and to ensure that the company has a whistleblower program. (p. 52) At first glance the committee could notice that something was not right with the company’s financial records. But nothing was done and nothing was said.

Assigned auditors were more than aware of the accounting misrepresentation of financial statements, overstating net income. Still instead of walking away from the client and resign, Andersen in pursuing short-term goals stayed with the company and moreover played by the Giant’s rules. More and more accounting firms at that time started to provide consulting services along with auditing to the same companies which always indicates a conflict of interests. Auditors are the guardians and rules players where consultants are giving advices and showing how to avoid some accounting oversights. Andersen also in order to make good profits stepped on the side of combining two contradicting to each other services. Waste Management had lots of former Arthur Andersen employees which also led to close ties between two companies. That situation undoubtedly led to inability to turn down fraudulent accounting practices Waste Management was exercising at that time for a long period of time.

P., & Coulter, M. K., 2012, p. 152), although it seems none of WorldCom’s executive management team seemed to feel this way. Many steps could have been taken to prevent the collapse of the WorldCom empire, but only a few key managers held the power and none were willing to take action. One control that did not exist in WorldCom’s culture was allowing both internal and external auditors access to all necessary documents and statements. Without full disclosure of these items no one could see how many risks the company was taking by making fraudulent entries against their books. Also the external audit team, Arthur Anderson, held WorldCom as one of its best customers which was a major conflict of interest. This relationship lead to many fundamental mistakes from Anderson not keeping pressure on WorldCom and getting all vital information that would prove how poorly the company was being run. Had they been operating transparently, auditors and employees would have seen the accounting deception and could potentially have stopped it prior to the company’s collapse. In addition, by employing multiple auditing firms many of the mistakes being made may have been caught and discontinued from the beginning.

At the time the fraud existed, internal controls were almost non-existent. The management team employed a number of improper accounting practices that did not comply with GAAP. As stated earlier, CEO Dean Buntrock not only allowed internal controls to be bypassed, he encouraged them to be ignored and shaped accounting policy with the sole purpose of making the targeted earnings numbers every year. The auditing firm, Arthur Andersen, LLP, was also shown to have complicity. The partners at Andersen knew that the company’s policies were not compliant so they provided Waste Management with proposed adjusting entries to their books. Waste Management refused to make the adjustments so Andersen had Waste Management sign off on a list of 32 steps the company must do to change its practices. The document legally constituted an agreement among the two parties and clearly shows that Andersen was aware of fraud that Waste Management had covered up in the past. Furthermore, Andersen did not stand up to the company and continued to

Needed for the Houston office of Andersen, an audit partner that understands the role of being a "public watchdog" with "ultimate allegiance to the creditors and shareholders" . Arthur Anderson abandoned its roles as independent auditor by turning a blind eye to improper accounting, including the failure to consolidate, failure of Enron to make $51million in proposed adjustments in 1997, and failure to adequately disclose the nature of transactions with subsidiaries . Another example is Lord Wakeham joined Enron as a non-executive director in 1994 and also sat on Enron's audit and compliance committee. In addition, Andersen also provides internal audit service to Enron, which in fact impact

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.

There were several people responsible for the WorldCom scandal, as well as, whistleblowers that first discovered the accounting fraud. The former CEO, Bernard Ebbers was found to be the main offender of the fraud. He did it by capitalizing inflated revenues with phony accounting entries and he was eventually sentenced to 25-years for fraud, conspiracy and filing false documents with regulators. Scott Sullivan, the former CFO, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and was sentenced to 5-years after testifying against Bernard Ebbers. The former Director of General Accounting, David Myers, pleaded guilty to

This includes the indirect ability of management to influence the career prospects of internal auditors, as well as the budget and planning of the internal audit function. This is exacerbated by internal auditors themselves using the function as a stepping stone to advance their career objectives. It also can be argued that the independence theory may be lost in such a culture, especially if it is combined with people within the organization perceiving internal auditors as partners, thereby subjecting the internal audit function to pressures threatening its independence, rather than recognizing the internal audit function as an independent assurance function("A Critical Analysis Of The Independence Of The Internal Audit Function: Evidence From Australia: Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal: Vol 22, No