Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on good corporate governance
Essay on good corporate governance
Essay on good corporate governance
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Freddie Mac is in the home mortgage business. It is their jobs to help low income families find affordable housing. Freddie Mac has been in business since 1970. They were created in order to get more American families in to their own homes. Their mission statement says, “Our statutory mission is to provide liquidity, stability and affordability to the U.S. housing market” (FreddieMac.com, 2014). Despite this honorable mission statement, Freddie Mac was involved in a case of accounting fraud that went on from 1998 to 2002. The lack of ethics at this company started with top brass setting the tone, and the rest of the company following suit. Rather than being sticklers for following GAAP accounting principles and internal controls, this company took unethical behavior to a whole new level. They lied when the truth would have been easier to tell. It is almost as if they had no comprehension that the meaning of the word ethics is “the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group (professional ethics); the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation”, (Mirriam-Webster, 2011). To be ethical all one has to do is follow laws, rules, regulations and your own internal moral compass, all things this company seemed to know nothing about. Freddie Mac was accused of either lying or misrepresenting the facts in order to make the amount of risk they were taking appear smaller. Investigators believed that this was done in order to comfort investors. The mortgages they were talking about, the ones that were considered risky were sub-prime loans, and they were prone to failure. A lot of these people should never have been given loans with interest rates that high. It was the job of Freddie Mac to hel... ... middle of paper ... ...he Special Examination of Freddie Mac. OFHEO. (2003). Report of the Special Examination of Freddie Mac. The Associated Press. (2007). Freddie Mac pays $50M to settle fraud charges. Washington: USA TODAY. REFERENCES: http://www.freddiemac.com/corporate/company_profile/ http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=3664473 http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-execs-accused-fraud-15175308 http://www.nbcnews.com/id/21027918/ns/business-us_business/t/freddie-mac-settles-accounting-fraud-charges/#.UyyxlvldWyU http://www.foxbusiness.com/2011/12/16/fannie-freddie-former-execs-could-lose-bubble-era-pay/ http://www.foxbusiness.com/topics/business/finance/CEOs/richard-syron.htm http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=5028 http://www.freddiemac.com/investors/infostat/pdf/supplement_082503.pdf http://www.huduser.org/publications/pdf/gse.pdf
It all started during 2006 when the US Justice Department came up with discovery of meeting of JP Morgan Executives where despite of red flag signals from US department, the officials continued selling shoody mortgage securities. JP Morgan- one of the largets banks in US, came to mutual agreement with US Government Officials to pay $13 billion as part of civil settlement against charges over JP Morgan. (Barrett, 2013). The record penalty was the result of investigation held by Securities and Exchange Council and US Justice Department where they found that the big national banks were responsible for fueling the financial crisis. As for JP Morgan, where they acknowledged that indeed it told its investors about the mortgage loans in securities it packaged and sold although they were told by its employees of its loan quality, this gives a valid proof that national banks were indeed responsible for mortgage meltdown. However, these criminal charges on JP Morgan had both pros and cons in its own sense for the financial world and big banks.
It's difficult not to be cynical about how “big business” treats the subject of ethics in today's world. In many corporations, where the only important value is the bottom line, most executives merely give lip service to living and operating their corporations ethically.
After news of the scandal of Enron, one of the hottest items on e-Bay was a 64-page copy of Enron’s corporate code of ethics. One seller/former employee proclaimed it had “never been opened.” In the forward Kenneth L. Lay, CEO of Enron stated, “We want to be proud of Enron and to know that it enjoys a reputation for fairness and honesty and that it is respected (Enron 2).” For a company with such an extensive code of ethics and a CEO who seemed to want the company to be respected for that, there are still so many unanswered questions of what exactly went wrong. I believe that simply having a solid and thorough code of ethics alone does not prevent a company from acting unethically when given the right opportunity.
The law requires auditors to report any fraudulent activities discovered during the course of an audit to the SEC. This is when Article I of Section 51 of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct comes into play. The auditor may uncover illegal acts or fraud while auditing the financial statements of a company. In such instances, the auditor must determine his or her responsibilities in making the right judgment and report their discovery or suspicions of the said fraudulent activities. Tyco International is an example of the auditors’ failure to uphold their responsibilities. Tyco’s former CEO Dennis Kozlowski and ex-CFO Mark Swartz sold stocks without investors’ approval and misrepresented the company’s financial position to investors to increase its stock prices (Crawford, 2005). The auditors (PricewaterhouseCoopers) helped cover the executives’ acts by not revealing their findings to the authorities as it is believed they must have known about the fraud taking place. Another example would be the Olympus scandal. The Japanese company, which manufactures cameras and medical equipment, used venture capital funds to cover up their losses (Aubin & Uranaka, 2011). Allegedly, thei...
Although the crisis came to head in 2008, there were people who had realized that trouble was coming for years. The largest warning sign was the amount of credit in the market place. Many of the big companies and banks had very little capital, and the lack of capital was brought on by the housing bubble. Companies were lending too much money to people who could not pay them back. And even before people started to default on their mortgages, people could see that this was a problem. During a meeting with the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs in January 2007 the staff of the Federal Reserve admitted “that they were aware of [the] problem in the housing issue three years earlier” (Dodd). And they were not the only ones. As far back as 2001 there were people who saw the danger that sub-prime mortgages were and who were trying to have bills passed to stop the bad lending that was going on, but no one wanted to list...
Mortgage loans are a substantial form of revenue for the financial industry. Mortgage loans generate billions of dollars in the financial industry. It is no secret that companies have the ability to make a lot of money by offering a variety of mortgage loan products. The problem was not mortgage loans but that mortgage companies were using unethical behavior to get consumer mortgage loans approved. Unfortunately, the Countrywide Financial case was not an isolated case. Many top name mortgage companies have been guilty of unethical behavior. Just as the American housing market was starting to recover from its worst battering since the Great Depression, a new scandal, an epidemic of flawed or fraudulent mortgage documents, threatens to send not just the housing market but the entire economy back into a tailspin (Nation, 2010).
Freddie Mac has paid back the $188 billion that they owed the government. The company compounded the problem of their self-inflicted structural vulnerabilities with a series of misjudgments that involved taking on excessive risk just at the point that housing prices were peaking. According to press reports, the chief executives of Freddie Mac disregarded warnings from their risk officers and sought to catch up with the market by greatly increasing their purchases of risky loans. Mortgage finance company Freddie Mac FRE will pay $50 million to settle federal charges that it fraudulently misstated earnings over a four-year
The problem to be investigated is the ethics and effects of subprime loans on the financial institutions, borrowers and stakeholders. The subprime market was created to provide borrowers with a FICO score below 570 access to home loans. Inopportunely these loans were a major financial risk as most of the borrowers did not have the long-term income to pay for the high interest rate loans. (Jennings, 2012)
Many other businesses may not want to do business as the company was involved with immoral behavior. The unethical business practices of the company will also gain exposure in the media and to the public (Nicol, 2015, n.p). Employees no longer keep unethical activities of the company to themselves. As a whistleblower, they may be perceived as a traitor, but in this case the senior executives are being traitors. They are taking money from immoral behavior and tarnishing the name of the company (Nicol, 2015, n.p).
Enron. (2011, March 18). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved March 19, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Enron&oldid=419486167
Individuals like the two young and rambunctious mortgage consultants portrayed in the film gave loans to anyone and everyone that could sign the paper, regardless of the recipient’s ability to pay the loan in full. It is doubtful that all consultants fully understood the ramifications of their actions, but undoubtedly the overall disregard for consequence was the start of the collapse. Mortgage consultants mislead and tricked people into loans they could never afford by playing on their desire to live the American dream. Distributing adjustable rate loans to individuals without jobs, without collateral is unconscionable. Unfortunately, from their perspective they were helping these individuals. In a twisted way, these consultants were acting ethically from a utilitarian point of view. The consultants won because they received utility in the form of a bonus for distributing the loans, and the loanee won because they could now afford the home of their dreams. What the consultants didn’t consider in their calculations were the long term results and utility of their actions, unethically building the flawed foundation of the housing
The "subprime crises" was one of the most significant financial events since the Great Depression and definitely left a mark upon the country as we remain upon a steady path towards recovering fully. The financial crisis of 2008, became a defining moment within the infrastructure of the US financial system and its need for restructuring. One of the main moments that alerted the global economy of our declining state was the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers on Sunday, September 14, 2008 and after this the economy began spreading as companies and individuals were struggling to find a way around this crisis. (Murphy, 2008) The US banking sector was first hit with a crisis amongst liquidity and declining world stock markets as well. The subprime mortgage crisis was characterized by a decrease within the housing market due to excessive individuals and corporate debt along with risky lending and borrowing practices. Over time, the market apparently began displaying more weaknesses as the global financial system was being affected. With this being said, this brings into question about who is actually to assume blame for this financial fiasco. It is extremely hard to just assign blame to one individual party as there were many different factors at work here. This paper will analyze how the stakeholders created a financial disaster and did nothing to prevent it as the credit rating agencies created an amount of turmoil due to their unethical decisions and costly mistakes.
Unethical accounting practices involving Enron date back to 1987. Enron’s use of creative accounting involved moving profits from one period to another to manipulate earnings. Anderson, Enron’s auditor, investigated and reported these unusual transactions to Enron’s audit committee, but failed to discuss the illegality of the acts (Girioux, 2008). Enron decided the act was immaterial and Anderson went along with their decision. At this point, the auditor’s should have reevaluated their risk assessment of Enron’s internal controls in light of how this matter was handled and the risks Enron was willing to take The history of unethical accounting practic...
They were committing fraud by creative accounting, acting illegally when using insider trading and shredding their documents relevant to the investigation. Next, consider the stakeholders. Anyone who owns stock in the company would suffer, along with every employee. Under the values bullet we can assume that they have none. Greed and power got the better of every one of them.
The main ethical issue with the Enron scandal is that Enron allowed legal loopholes to supersede ethical principles (Bowen & Heath, 2005). Enron used legal principles to justify what they were doing instead of acknowledging that the accounting processes they were using were unethical. Another one of the ethical issues is that Enron faced was that