We're Open
+44 7340 9595 39
+44 20 3239 6980

Discuss whether or not public accounting firms can successfully manupulate audit work papers and records of clients engaged in fra

Information



  • Post Date 2018-11-07T11:26:12+00:00
  • Post Category Essays

No Plagiarism Guarantee - 100% Custom Written

Order Details

Discuss whether or not public accounting firms can successfully manupulate audit work papers and records of clients engaged in fraudulent activity.

Nextcard Inc.

INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Discuss whether or not public accounting firms can successfully manupulate audit work papers and records of clients engaged in fraudulent activity. 2. Analyze the fraud risk factors presented during the 2000 Nextcard audot and how each should have impacted the audit procedures. 3. Discuss how Ernst & Young`s motivation to destroy the audit work papers reconciles with its obligation to provide assurances to financial investors. 4. Identify the actions you would have taken when Robert Trauger asked you to help him alter the 2000 Nextcard audit papers. 5. Identify and evaluate the severity of punishment a public accounting receieved for a professional code of conduct violation.
CONTENT:
NEXTCARD AUDIT MANIPULATION Name Institution Affiliation Course Date of Submission Introduction The central function of that is served by auditors is independence, but managers may be having interest in exaggerating, misrepresenting, and falsifying reports with respect to the performance of a firm. It is thus, imperative for an independent audit report to provide credible and unbiased appraisal regarding a firm`s financial status. Numerous legal decisions have reinforced the code of professional ethics to reflect the significance of independence of auditors. The issue of auditor independence is analyzed sometimes explicitly or implicitly that the auditor`s bias is a matter of choice, as they are assumed to have the ability to conduct high quality and unbiased audits (Antle, 1984). Biasness is perceived to be a deliberate response to incentives due to conflict of interests that become impossible for auditors to avoid. The evaluation of evidence is in a selective manner when auditors have a stake to reach a particular conclusion, which makes them to focus on evidence that supports their conclusion evaluating the evidence in uncritical manner. The presentation of conflict by the evidence present and the desired conclusion, results to either auditors ignoring it or subjecting the conflict to a particular critical scrutiny (Antle, 1984). The processing of information is strong to the people exposed to the information as it holds their position. Accountability y influences people to evaluate information showing concerns regarding how their decisions will be received. The failure of auditors to understand their audience preference results to a systematic cognitive processing coupled with a thorough justification of their conclusion (Diekmann, 1997). There is little doubt with respect to audience preference of the client firm to get unqualified audi...
 

Price: £ 99

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions