Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of external auditor independence
Importance of external auditor independence
Ethical issues in accounting scandal
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Importance of external auditor independence
2001. It was the year that every individual; man, woman and children on Earth would remember. There was the September 11 event which was considered the worst terrorist attack that has happened in U.S. history, killing a total of 2, 977 people. And not long after that, in the business world, on December 2, the greatest corporate failure was exposed. The crash of Enron in US, followed by the worldwide collapse of its auditor, Arthur Andersen became one the most popular accounting scandal where it is still being talked about even after a decade has passed. Following this scandal, other massive organizations like WorldCom (2002), AIG (2004), and Satyam Computer Services (2009) shared the same fate. Since then, there have been questions being asked on the issue of the independence of auditors being one of the major contributors to these accounting scandals.
Firstly, it’ll be good to know the definition of auditing. Auditing is the process of evaluation and analysis of business records to determine the accuracy or safety or just to ensure that organizations are maintaining honest financial records and statements. Whereas certain corporations rely on audits conducted by their own employees – whom are called internal auditors – other corporations would utilize the use of external auditors. External auditors are certified audit professions who examine financial records and business transactions in accordance with a fixed set of laws or rules of a company, government corporate, and other legal entity where he/she is independent of the entity being audited. In both cases, typically, auditing is simply the process of accumulating and evaluating evidences about various assertions contained in a financial statement of a company for the purpo...
... middle of paper ...
...uditor’s independence. Independence, in my opinion, is the basis of an auditor’s line of work. Without independence, the opinions of these auditors would lack the impact and also the credibility. Major accounting scandals would have been avoided had they had a proper independent auditor who not only will deter against fraud but also provide protection against casual mistakes arising from failure to follow proper procedures or simply because of honest accounting mistakes. In order to enhance auditor independence, directors are advised to disclose the audit and non-audit services fee to investors and let the investors themselves evaluate the independence of the auditor. Thus in conclusion, external auditors lead to an increased trust between a firm and their clients, an enhanced reputation which could be built by good credibility of the business and fraud prevention.
The audit committee must certify that the company’s auditors are independent. The audit committee must approve all professional services provided to the company by its independent auditors and ensure that auditors do not provide to the company any of the specifically prohibited services identified by SOX, such as bookkeeping services. The audit committee must receive and analyze key items of information from the independent auditors. These items of information include auditors’ analysis of critical accounting policies adopted by the
Consult PCAOB Ethics and Independence Rule 3520. What is the auditor independence, and what is its significance to the audit profession? What is the difference between independence in appearance and independence in fact?
In March 2001, FORTUNE pointed out that Enron's financial statements were nearly impenetrable. That time, all people began to talking and speculation truth of Enron financial statement. Securities and Exchange Commission also starts to investigation of Enron. At the same time, Andersen destroys Enron audit evidence, eventually also destroy their credibility. They stop to destroy after received the letter of Securities and Exchange
On the September 25, 2002 issue of BusinessWeekOnline.com, the Accounting Wars Powerful auditor-consultants are the target of Arthur Levitt’s crusade articles defined “Independence to mean, CPAs cannot audit their own or their partners' work….…..clear and honest information is dependent on the CPAs independence……an auditor must not have any financial stake in the health, or even survival, of a client company.”
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).
The independence of mind or independence in fact means Betty has to have a state of mind that allow her to form an opinion without bias due to influence that compromises professional judgment. By having an independence of mind allowing an individual to perform his or her audit work with integrity, as well as, maintaining her objectivity and professional skepticism behavior. However, in this case, she did not have an independence of mind since she trusted Toby and she enjoyed working with him since he is also a CPA because it is easy for her to work with him compare to her other clients who do not have the accounting background. As a result, because of long-term relationship and trust that Betty has with Toby, it influenced her decision about the audit opinion. Additionally, to be independent in appearance Betty and her audit team must show unbiased professional judgment when she reviews her clients ' financial statements. Betty had Problems with independence in appearance because in the case study shown me that she has become too close to her client, Toby. Therefore, all auditors have to maintain their professional skepticism as well as maintain independence in their mental attitude and also independence in appearance to provide an unbiased opinion on
"This is why the market keeps going down every day - investors don't know who to trust," said Brett Trueman, an accounting professor from the University of California-Berkeley's Haas School of Business. As these things come out, it just continues to build up"(CBS MarketWatch, Hancock). The memories of the Frauds at Enron and WorldCom still haunt many investors. There have been many accounting scandals in the United States history. The Enron and the WorldCom accounting fraud affected thousands of people and it caused many changes in the rules and regulation of the corporate world. There are many similarities and differences between the two scandals and many rules and regulations have been created in order to prevent frauds like these. Enron Scandal occurred before WorldCom and despite the devastating affect of the Enron Scandal, new rules and regulations were not created in time to prevent the WorldCom Scandal. Accounting scandals like these has changed the corporate world in many ways and people are more cautious about investing because their faith had been shaken by the devastating effects of these scandals. People lost everything they had and all their life-savings. When looking at the accounting scandals in depth, it is unbelievable how much to the extent the accounting standards were broken.
Enron and Arthur Anderson were both giants in their own industry. Enron, a Texas based company in the energy trading business, was expanding rapidly in both domestic and global markets. Arthur Anderson, LLC. (Anderson), based out of Chicago, was well established as one of the big five accounting firms. But the means by which they achieved this status became questionable and eventually contributed to their demise. Enron used what if often referred to as “creative” accounting methods, this resulted in them posting record breaking earnings. Anderson, who earned substantial audit and consultation fees from Enron, failed to comply with the auditing standards required in their line of work. Investigations and reports have resulted in finger pointing and placing blame, but both companies contributed to one of the most notorious accounting scandals in history. There remains much speculation as to what steps could and should have been taken to protect innocent victims and numerous investors from experiencing the enormous loses that resulted from this scandal.
A month after the twin towers fell in New York City the nation's focus was shifted to the Enron scandal. Kenneth Lay and Jeffery Skilling were names in the press almost every day. Enron filed bankruptcy and thousands lost their jobs and pensions. Another company involved in the scandal was Arthur Andersen, an accounting firm; Enron was their client. Arthur Andersen continued to perform bad audits even after a warning from SEC. If Arthur Andersen employees had been ethical, after the warning, the Enron Scandal would not have had led to the conviction and dissolution of the Arthur Andersen accounting firm.
Enron was on the of the most successful and innovative companies throughout the 1990s. In October of 2001, Enron admitted that its income had been vastly overstated; and its equity value was actually a couple of billion dollars less than was stated on its income statement (The Fall of Enron, 2016). Enron was forced to declare bankruptcy on December 2, 2001. The primary reasons behind the scandal at Enron was the negligence of Enron’s auditing group Arthur Andersen who helped the company to continually perpetrate the fraud (The Fall of Enron, 2016). The Enron collapse had a huge effect on present accounting regulations and rules.
The company concealed huge debts off its balance sheet, which resulted in overstating earnings. Due to an understatement of debts, the company was considered bankrupt in 2001. Shareholders lost $74 billion and a lot of jobs were lost because of the bankruptcy. The share prices of Enron started falling in 2000 and in 2001 the company revealed a huge loss. Even after all this, the company’s executives told the investors that the stock was just undervalued and they wanted their investors to keep on investing. The investors lost trust in the company as stock prices decreased, which led the company to file bankruptcy in December 2001. 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
...e financial reports and statements are correct. This auditing will be conducted by auditing department of the organization, even may be done by an independent auditor who is not part of the organization, and sometimes public officials are elected. In case of unmatched consequences the organization need to give explanation on the misrepresentation of wrong statements. Auditors purpose is then to ensure that the misrepresentations are corrected, then maintain accurate, reliable financial documents and statements.
The evolution of auditing is a complicated history that has always been changing through historical events. Auditing always changed to meet the needs of the business environment of that day. Auditing has been around since the beginning of human civilization, focusing mainly, at first, on finding efraud. As the United States grew, the business world grew, and auditing began to play more important roles. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, people began to invest money into large corporations. The Stock Market crash of 1929 and various scandals made auditors realize that their roles in society were very important. Scandals and stock market crashes made auditors aware of deficiencies in auditing, and the auditing community was always quick to fix those deficiencies. The auditors’ job became more difficult as the accounting principles changed, and became easier with the use of internal controls. These controls introduced the need for testing; not an in-depth detailed audit. Auditing jobs would have to change to meet the changing business world. The invention of computers impacted the auditors’ world by making their job at times easier and at times making their job more difficult. Finally, the auditors’ job of certifying and testing companies’ financial statements is the backbone of the business world.
The complete destruction of companies including Arthur Andersen, HealthSouth, and Enron, revealed a significant weakness in the United States audit system. The significant weakness is the failure to deliver true independence between the auditors and their clients. In each of these companies there was deviation from professional rules of conduct resulting from the pressures of clients placed upon their auditors (Goldman, and Barlev 857-859). Over the years, client and auditor relationships were intertwined tightly putting aside the unbiased function of auditors. Auditor careers depended on the success of their client (Kaplan 363-383). Auditors found themselves in situations that put their profession in a questionable time driving them to compromise their ethics, professionalism, objectivity, and their independence from the company. A vital trust relationship role for independent auditors has been woven in society and this role is essential for the effective functioning of the financial economic system (Guiral, Rogers, Ruiz, and Gonzalo 155-166). However, the financial world has lost confidence in the trustworthiness of auditor firms. There are three potential threats to auditor independence: executives hiring and firing auditors, auditors taking positions the client instead of the unbiased place, and auditors providing non audit services to clients (Moore, Tetlock, Tanlu, and Bazerman 10-29).
The aim of this essay is to study the function of external auditors in order to analyze why it is important to be independent. The primary mission of external auditors is to review and evaluate all the financial records of a company or corporation. They provide an objective opinion on the organization’s financial statement and effectiveness of the accounting polices in order to help management to make decisions. If the independence of the external auditors is impaired, the public will doubt the quality of professional auditing services, and the consequence would be very serious, just like the bankruptcy of Enron led to the disorganization of Arthur Andersen, once a giant accounting company in the world. In order to maintain and increase the independence of external auditors, some activities should be undertake to avoid the overdue market competition in professional accounting industry and enhance the supervising ability of the regulators. .What follow is a detailed analysis of the association between external auditors and companies.