Introduction
The financial crisis that began in 2007 greatly undermined the integrity of the financial system. Measures were therefore suggested and some adopted to regulate various player of this industry in the hope that reoccurrence of such events would be prevented. Particularly, the roles of the banks, regulatory institution (such as central bank), rating agencies, and hedges funds, were promptly investigated and recommendation proposed. In contrast an important player, the Audit firms, appeared to have escaped the probing. In September 2011 things turned out to be different when a radical audit reform proposed by a commissioner of the European Commission internal market and services, Michael Barnier, was leaked ( Fielding 2011; European Commission 2011a).
Background of the EU Radical Reforms of Audit Market
Under his proposal Barnier consider Audit firms as the dogs which did not bark during the financial crisis, therefore questioning their effectiveness (Fielding 2011). He argues that Auditors should have played a bigger role in warning about the unhealthy financial position of their clients. Instead they offered commendable audit reports that were followed almost immediately by massive losses reported by the institution specifically from 2007 to 2009 (European Commission 2011a). Considering huge sums of taxpayers’ money amounting to € 4, 5888.9 was used between 2008 to 2009 to support this banks, he considered it to be vital to analyze all components of the financial system and suggest necessary reforms. According ton Barnier, undertaking the reforms will restore confidence especially in the financial sector. Investors and other interested parties will be able to access easily in a cost-effective manner companies...
... middle of paper ...
...s, H. (2011) ‘Big four auditors face massive shake-up.’ Reuters. [online] 27th September.
[Accessed on 10th August 2012] http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/09/27/eu-auditing-idUKL5E7KR2FB20110927
Stokdyk, J. (2011) .Retaliation kicks in early EU audit reforms’. Accounting Web. [online]. 5th
October [Accessed on 10th August 2012] http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/blog-post/retaliation-kicks-early-eu-audit-reforms
The Economist. (2011) ‘Auditor Rotation: Musical Chairs.’ The Economist. [online] 3rd
September [Accessed on 10th August 2012] http://www.economist.com/node/21528279
Thompson, S. (2011) FTSE 100 Audit committee chairs question the rationale of EU audit
reforms. ICAEW [online] [Accessed on 10th August 2012] http://www.icaew.com/en/about-icaew/newsroom/press-releases/2011-press-releases/ftse-100-audit-comittee-chairs-question-rationale-eu-reforms
Individual Article Review Lily Cobian LAW/421 March 31, 2014 Ramon E. Ortiz-Velez Individual Article Review Introduction My article review is based on Sarbanes-Oxley and audit failure, a critical examination why the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was established and why it is not a guarantee to prevent failure of audits. Sarbanes-Oxley Act talks about scandals of Enron which occurred in 2001 and even more appalling the company’s auditor, Arthur Anderson, found guilty of shredding company documents after finding out Enron Company was going to be audited. The exorbitant amounts of money auditors get paid to hide audit discrepancies was also beyond belief. The article went on to explain many companies hire relatives or friends to do their audits, resulting in fraud, money embezzlement, corruption and even the demise of companies. Resulting in the public losing faith in the accounting profession, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act passed in 2002 by congress was designed to restrict what company owners and auditors can and cannot do. From what I gathered in the article, ever since the implementation of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act there has been somewhat of an improvement but questions are still being asked as to why there are still issues that are not being targeted in hopes of preventing more audit failures. The article also talked about four common causes of audit failure: unintentional auditor mistakes, fraud, fatigue and auditor client relationships. The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Code of Professional Conduct clearly states an independent auditor because it produces a credible audit, however, when there is conflict of interest, the relation of a former employer, or a relative or even the fear of getting fire...
A possible flaw of Sarbanes-Oxley is it failed to put up any resistance in thwarting the financial crisis. While the degree to which fraudulent behavior can be traced to the roots of the Great Panic of 2007 will likely be up for eternal debate, it might be telling that Sarbanes-Oxley effectively did nothing. It seems this could indicate that stronger incentives for whistleblowers (such as Dodd-Frank and perhaps other whistleblower protection regimes) are very necessary given the extreme social costs. This conclusion may be hasty, however, given the short time period between the enactment of Sarbanes-Oxley and the crash. Not only is the status of Sarbanes-Oxley still in flux over a decade later, but one has to consider the substantial learning and switching costs associated with a regime with such a substantial ruach. Certainly, this is not to say that additional protections may in fact be necessary given the putative reluctance of lawyers to report fraud, but Sarbanes-Oxley likely needed more time to really crystalize and provide some level of predictability before it can be declared a bust.
Throughout the past several years major corporate scandals have rocked the economy and hurt investor confidence. The largest bankruptcies in history have resulted from greedy executives that “cook the books” to gain the numbers they want. These scandals typically involve complex methods for misusing or misdirecting funds, overstating revenues, understating expenses, overstating the value of assets or underreporting of liabilities, sometimes with the cooperation of officials in other corporations (Medura 1-3). In response to the increasing number of scandals the US government amended the Sarbanes Oxley act of 2002 to mitigate these problems. Sarbanes Oxley has extensive regulations that hold the CEO and top executives responsible for the numbers they report but problems still occur. To ensure proper accounting standards have been used Sarbanes Oxley also requires that public companies be audited by accounting firms (Livingstone). The problem is that the accounting firms are also public companies that also have to look after their bottom line while still remaining objective with the corporations they audit. When an accounting firm is hired the company that hired them has the power in the relationship. When the company has the power they can bully the firm into doing what they tell them to do. The accounting firm then loses its objectivity and independence making their job ineffective and not accomplishing their goal of honest accounting (Gerard). Their have been 379 convictions of fraud to date, and 3 to 6 new cases opening per month. The problem has clearly not been solved (Ulinski).
Disappointment in financial risk management takes various structures, the greater part of which are exemplified in the present emergency. For instance, risk appraisals are regularly taking into account chronicled information, for example, changes in house costs after some time. Yet, fast financial advancement, including securitized subprime contracts, has made such information untrustworthy. Also, a few risks are missed on the grounds that they are covered up in excessively complex reports that leaders cannot get it (Stoian & Stoian, 2016).
The forced liquidation of some $3 trillion in private label structured assets has been deprived from the financial markets and the U.S. economy has obtained a vast amount of liquidity that the banking system simply cannot restore. It is not as easy to just assign blame within these case however it is noted that the credit rating agencies unethical decisions practices helped add onto the financial crisis of 2008 and took into account the company’s well-being before any other stakeholders.
Since the early 1970s, the auditing profession has been under increased pressure and scrutiny by government and users of audit reports. The phrase ‘ Audit Expectations Gap’ was first coined when the AICPA put the Cohen Commission together in 1974 to investigate whether the ‘expectations gap’ existed. However, the history of the expectation gap goes right back to the start of company auditing in the nineteenth century (Humphrey and Turley 1992). Since then, events ranging from the collapse of Arthur Anderson to the ongoing savings and loan problems seemed to have made the gap become more and more apparent.
Corporate governance changed drastically after the case of Andersen Auditors, Enron’s auditing service showed that they contributed to the scandal. Andersen was originally founded in 1913, and by taking tough stands against clients, quickly gained a national reputation as a reliable keeper of the people’s trust (Beasley, 2003). Andersen provided auditing statements with a ‘clean’ approval stamp from 1997 to 2001, but was found guilty of obstructing justice by shredding evidence relating to the Enron scandal on the 15th June 2002. It agrees to cease auditing public companies by 31 August (BBC News, 2002).
The oversight responsibilities of the board, the CAE lacking of expertise or broad understanding of financial controls and responsibilities, and the understaffed internal audit functions lacking of independence and direct access to the board of directors contributed to the absence of internal controls. To begin with, the board should be retrained to achieve financial literacy to review financial reporting. Other than attending formal meetings, the board of directors should be more involved with the management. For the Audit Committee, the two members who were recruited as acquaintances to Brennahan need be replaced with experts who are more sufficiently knowledgeable about accounting rules beyond merely “financially literate”. Furthermore, the internal audit functions need to expand with different expertise commensurate with the expanded activities of the organization, testing financial reporting rather than internal controls from an operational perspective. The CAE should be more independent and proactive to execute audit plans, instead of following orders from the CFO, and initiate a direct and efficient communication between internal audit and audit
This shows how a lack of transparency in reporting of financial statements leads to the destruction of a company. This all happened under the watchful eye of an auditor, Arthur Andersen. After this scandal, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was changed to keep into account the role of the auditors and how they can help in preventing such
4) . One of the largest bankruptcies in history was enabled by accountants hiding debt and destroying the evidence to avoid implication (Buckstein, part 2 pgs. 1, 2, and 3). These unfortunate events led to the need for increased scrutiny and regulations, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (Buckstein, part 3 pg 1). This legislation inspired the creation of the Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB) (Buckstein, part 3 pg 1). These changes have led to an increased awareness of the need for auditor independence as well as higher standards for accounting and business in general (Buckstein, part 3 pg 1). While these measures have helped to reassure the public, there is still the question of why Accountancy is not a protected
Auditing has been the backbone of the complicated business world and has always changed with the times. As the business world grew strong, auditors’ roles grew more important. The auditors’ job became more difficult as the accounting principles changed. It also became easier with the use of internal controls, which introduced the need for testing, not a complete audit. Scandals and stock market crashes made auditors aware of deficiencies in auditing, and the auditing community was always quick to fix those deficiencies. Computers played an important role of changing the way audits were performed and also brought along some difficulties.
The failure of adequate board accountability has indicated strong adverse effects on corporate performance including, the bankruptcy of various public companies, thereby casting serious doubt on the credibility and efficacy of board accountability. For example, Lehman Brothers scandal, the largest bankruptcy in U.S history, Northern Rock was a large failure of a financial institution in the United Kingdom (Hull 2015:16). In Ireland, the Anglo-Irish Bank created a huge bubble that plunged the state into economic recession. In September 28, 2008, the Irish Government signed into law, the “bank guarantee” which provided with immediate effect a guarantee arrangement to safeguard all deposits in retail, commercial, institutional and interbank transactions, covered bonds, senior debt and dated subordinated debt (Lenihan 2008). Banks in Ireland clearly needed yet more capital from the State (Irish Times 19 November 2011) and this underscores the need for the government’s bailout
Threats to Auditor Independence: The Impact of Relationship and Economic Bonds. By: Ping Ye; Carson, Elizabeth; Simnett, Roger. Auditing, Feb2011, Vol. 30 Issue 1, p121-148, 28p, 1 Diagram, 6 Charts; DOI: 10.2308/aud.2011.30.1.121
The major characters of the tradition audit are all information what is needed by auditors are on the paper and the manual calculators and without high communication technology. Auditors usually were limited by the place in the paper time. When a several people are working on the same auditing project for a client with offices in cities across the country, even worldwide, it takes a lots all time those auditors get the information which they need from the client, even there is risk paper information disappear for many reasons. on the another hand, mail paper information increase the auditing cost. The mistake caused by the manual calculators inevitably, no matter how fixed auditors concentrate on recalculate is, after all auditors are human. The global business become major in the modern business world, some example, several auditors who are in different locations are working a same auditing project, or auditors are in different city even country with the client, when there is issue among these auditors or between auditors and client, they only can communicate with each other by phone or be together and have meeting. Phone call can not make sure information been watched in the same time when the voice is talking about the issue, but having a meeting takes time and money make all people together, it increases auditing cost.
The success of a company is very dependent upon its financial accounting. In accounting there are numerous Regulatory bodies that govern the accounting world. These companies are extremely important to a company because they set the standards when it comes to the language and decision making of a company. These regulatory bodies can be structured as agencies, associations, commissions, and boards. Without companies like the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC), The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB), Internal Accounting Standards Board (IASB), Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and other regulatory bodies a company could not make well informed decisions. In this paper the author will look at only four of them.