Worldcom Fraud Essay

LDDS started with about $650,000 in capital but soon accumulated $1.5 million in debt since it

His business of making safety vests lacked safety standards and he did all the unethical business practice selfishly.

Prior to the Tyco scandal, the company was one of America's largest conglomerates, with operating revenues of 38 billion dollars and 240,000 employees, worldwide. Tyco Laboratories began operations in 1960, performing experimental work for the U.S. government. The firm went public in 1964 and quickly expanded, mostly by acquisition, to exploit the commercial applications of its work. Dennis Kozlowski joined the company in 1975 as an assistant controller. The company subsequently shifted its focus from growth to profits within its three primary divisions: fire protection, electronics, and packaging. Kozlowski joined Tyco's board in 1987 and became president and chief operating officer two years later. Kozlowski

Ethically, this is wrong on some many levels. He was dishonest, he stole from the

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.

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

The executives are accountable to the board of directors. Instead of protecting the investors, the board enticed the culture of financial fraud in the company for selfish gains. It failed in its duties in keeping the executives in check.

Charles Tollison was an audit manager for over thirteen years at a large international accounting firm. He was a dedicated worker, very knowledgeable about technical accounting and auditing issues. Whenever called upon Tollison never turned down a difficult engagement, and often worked long hour. He even made several personal sacrifices; his most recent was missing his eight year old daughter’s birthday party. While in the midst of completing a tough audit Tollison met his office managing partner. During their meeting Tollison was informed that he had been passed over for a promotion to audit partner for the second consecutive year. He was disappointed about the decision, however, the manager partner Walker Linton, promised Tollison that he would “call in all favors” from other partners within the firm to win him a promotion for the following year. (Knapp, 2015)

(Farrell, 2005, para 1). Unfortunately for Ebbers, the grand jury wasn’t ignorant to the facts of the case and found Ebbers guilty on nine counts of fraud. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison. Many critics felt that the sentence was too harsh and others not harsh enough. The sentencing of Ebbers did not change the situation of the shareholders and employees who lost more than $100 billion in stock value, 17,000 jobs and their entire retirement savings. Ebbers was allowed to keep one of his homes, $50,000 in cash and a retirement account (Ernst & Young, 2005, para 6). Many supporters of Ebbers still questioned how much of a role he actually played in masterminding the WorldCom scandal. The

For purposes of this question, assume that the excerpts from the Powers Report shown in Exhibit 3 provide accurate descriptions of Andersen’s involvement in Enron’s accounting and financial reporting decisions. Given this assumption, do you believe that Andersen’s involvement in those decisions violated any professional auditing standards? If so, list those standards and briefly explain your rationale.

Stephen Richards’ actions were plain and simply criminal, and therefore very serious. Richards used his position of power as the Global head of sales to compel clients into boosting sales earnings by quarter. And ultimately this led to "overly aggressive accounting practices" to boost their reported earnings. It was well known to CA’s

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

Discussion Questions 1. Evaluate this situation from the view point of David Edmondson’s ethical leadership. What could Radio Shack have done differently? In this world some people want money and power. To gain these two things often people choose the wrong ways. David Edmondson is one of them, because he cheated on his resume. David Edmondson is a fraud that means he is not an ethical leader at all. Because of Edmondson’s cheating his company RadioShack faced losses, so he didn’t do ethical leadership in his workplace. If a manager cheats, lies, steals, manipulates, take advantages of situations, or treat others unfairly that is not an ethical behavior. That is called unethical behavior. We can see

From the time of WorldCom’s inception there always seemed to be a tradition in management as if the company was only 100 or so employees. There was a “good old boys” mentality among the limited few running the company and if you were outside that circle then were told only what they wanted you to hear. An unspoken rule among employees was to do what you were told without questions or risk the consequences. One example of this situation occurred when senior management member Gene Morse told an employee “If you show those damn numbers to the f****ing auditors, I’ll throw you out the window” (Kaplan, R.S., & Kiron, D., 2007, p. 3).WorldCom showed no concern regarding an employee’s need and obligation to voice concerns on matters related

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