WorldCom: internal audit lessons to be learnt
On June 9 2003, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court of New York issued a report on the WorldCom accounting fraud that expands on the court's earlier findings of mismanagement, lack of corporate governance, and concern regarding the integrity of the company's accounting and financial reporting functions.
Supervised by former U.S. Attorney General Richard Thornburgh, the study was commissioned by the court to investigate allegations including fraud, mismanagement, and irregularities within the company. One section of the more than 200-page report, "Accounting and Related Internal Controls," details WorldCom's weaknesses in internal and external audit processes. It also expands on the failings within
…show more content…
In spite of the dual reporting line to the audit committee, the internal audit group reported and answered to senior management, including the chief financial officer and chief executive officer, who were both implicated in the fraud. Thornburgh indicated that the viability of the internal audit department was dependent on the "whim" of senior management. For years, internal audit leadership sought to gain company acceptance by focusing on value-added audits and projects rather than monitoring the sufficiency of internal controls. Management would assign special, non-audit projects using unscheduled resources, and the internal audit department did not meet its audit plan objectives, in part, because of the time and resources devoted to these projects.
Lack of budgetary resources seriously Internal audit resources were insufficient in comparison to impacted the internal audit function peer companies. The audit committee failed to follow through on discussions with internal auditing about the adequacy of staff. WorldCom's internal audit department was half the size of internal audit departments in peer telecommunication companies, according to the 2002 Global Auditing Information Network study, conducted by The Institute of Internal Auditors. The Thornburgh report concluded that internal auditing's limited resources were inappropriate
Deception, whether intentional or not, did occur. The shareholders had a right to know the financial state of WorldCom. In Ebber’s defense, he had unscrupulous bed fellows on this board. Their intentions are also at question especially regarding their eagerness to grant Mr. Ebbers a breathtaking loan for $341 million dollar at an interest rate of 2% to shield the instability of the company’s financial situation from shareholders. There were also some concerns whether such loans were ethical from the Security Exchange Commission Enforcement official Seth Taube. He stated that large loans to senior executives are commonly sweetheart deals involving interest rates that constitute a poor return on company assets. Federal prosecutors in New York cited Ebbers 's expensive lifestyle, and his overspending, as a motive to hide WorldCom 's mounting financial troubles. The impropriety associated with the largest loan any publicly traded company has lent to one of its officers in recent memory is evident. Unfortunately, if Ebbers had pressed the matter and sold his stock, he would have escaped the bankruptcy financially whole, but Ebbers honestly thought WorldCom would recover.”
Scoping and Evaluation Judgments in the Audit of Internal Control over Financial Reporting 12.1 EyeMax Corporation . . Evaluation of Audit Differences
External auditors at the time failed to expose the fraudulent financial practices taking place at WorldCom. Although internal auditors expressed concern about the classification of operating expenses as capital expenditures, their efforts were purposely neglected by top level financial executives allowing the fraud to continue (Lyke,2002) WorldCom's financial standing was manipulated to show that the company was profitable when in reality was on the brink of bankruptcy; on top of that, WorldCom's CEO got a $400 million personal loan with lack of oversight from the board of directors (green 2004, p37 paper). The Sarbanes–Oxley Act brought about a series of financial regulations that could have prevented WorldCom's fraudulent practices. Sarbanes–Oxley requires principal executive and financial officers to certify the accuracy of financial statements and the effectiveness of internal controls for the compilation and disclosure of these statements with enforcement provisions such as fines or imprisonment. The Act prohibits the boards of directors from granting loans to executives. The Sarbanes–Oxley Act also established the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to oversee the audits of publicly traded companies and regulate accounting practices. If all
The applicants are morally correct as long as their action promotes their long term interest. If their action produces or will produce for them a greater outcome of good, versus evil in the long hall than any other alternative, than that action is the right one to act on, and the individual should take that to be a moral act. An Assessment of Morality by Ethicsinbusiness.net
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.
“Audit committee members or their agents may proactively examine areas, functions, and personnel where collusive fraud risk is reasonably likely to be perpetrated,” (Zmags). The search for fraud, even if performed in the same location multiple times, may continue until the audit committee feels confident that they have ruled out the probability that fraud is prevalent. One of the biggest risks of fraud is management override of controls, requiring the extensive search for risk in, “journal entries and other adjustments and reviewing accounting estimates for possible biases that could result in material misstatements,” (Nysscpa).
On March 15, 2005 former CEO of WorldCom, Bernard Ebbers sat in a federal courtroom waiting for the verdict. As the former CEO of WorldCom, Ebbers was accused of being personally responsible for the financial destruction of the communications giant. An internal investigation had uncovered $11 billion dollars in fraudulent accounting practices. Later a second report in 2003 found that during Ebber’s 2001 tenure as CEO, the company had over-reported earnings and understated expenses by an astonishing $74.5 billion dollars (Martin, 2005, para 3). This report included the mismanagement of funds, unethical lending practices among its top executives, and false bookkeeping which led to loss of tens of thousands of its employees.
WorldCom was the ultimate success story among telecommunications companies. Bernard Ebbers took the reigns as CEO in 1985 and turned the company into a highly profitable one, at least on the outside. In 2002, Ebbers resigned, WorldCom admitted fraud and the company declared bankruptcy (Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart, &Wright 2007). The company was at the heart of one of the biggest accounting frauds seen in the United States. The demise of this telecommunications monster can be accredited to many factors including their aggressive-defensive organizational culture based on power and the bullying tactics that they employed. However, this fiasco could have been prevented if WorldCom had designed a system of checks and balances that would have
The stakeholders in this fraudulent case of WorldCom consist of Bernie Ebbers, Scott Sullivan, Buford Yates, David Myers, Cynthia Cooper, and Betty Vinson belong to the company. While the other stakeholders would consist of the creditors, Andersen (accounting firm), investors, and the public. This fraudulent act committed within WorldCom impacted every single stakeholder in a way. Either in a negative or positive way, most of the impact was caused with harm to everyone. The main individuals such as Ebbers, Sullivan, and Vinson all had major consequences as resulting with the fraud. Criminal trials were a major result with their fraudulent acts within WorldCom. Cooper was a lifesaver by most of the community. Aside from these individuals, the rest also got affected by the fraud. Investments conducted by the investors were all lost within the fraud process. The impact towards much of the image for Andersen was ruined. Many of the public lost their trust on the honesty and professionalism of Andersen and other certified public accounting firms. The entire employees from the top management to the smaller group of workers stayed unemployed and some with criminal punishment.
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.
“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
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
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
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.