Report on Auditing Issues of West Point Group of Industries
Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary
2. Introduction
3. Discussion
4. Audit Issues in the audit of West Point by KPMG
i. Failure to Obtain Audit Evidence
ii. Failure to give appropriate audit opinions:
iii. Inadequate Fund Raising
iv. Failure to identify solvency of the Company
v. Failure to follow directions of Corporate Authority
vi. Expectation Gap
5. ASIC Action against KPMG & West Point
6. Conclusion
7. References
Executive Summary:
West point group of companies was an Australian based company which was carrying on
Property development business throughout Australia. For extending its business, West point
Secured loans from many banks but it topped up those secured loans with risky, unsecured
mezzanine financing that it received from rich financial planners in a result of which it
collapsed in January,2006.
Failure to give appropriate audit opinions as in the later investigation conducted by ASIC, West point found guilty of breaching a number of accounting standards and policies regarding proper disclosures before investing the money and then paying interests out of capital investments rather than out of profit, KPMG auditors failed to qualify audit opinions on the basis of breaches of Australian accounting standards. Three partners of KPMG namely Brett Charles Fullarton, Robert Charles Kelly and Jonathan Grant Robinson were involved in conducting auditing of West point group of companies who were banned by Corporate watch dog ASIC. Failure to identify solvency of the Company , ASIC took action against KPMG for conducting negligent audit of west point and failing to identify issues related to the solvency st...
... middle of paper ...
...vil court are also launched under section 50 of the ASIC Act for compensation of the loss caused by soft auditing done by KPMG.ASIC has already separately commenced actions against directors and officers of the West point Group as well as a trustee and several financial services licensees.
CONCLUSION
West Point group of companies was one of the biggest giants of Australia, dealing with property and real estate business which became insolvent and went into liquidation because of many reasons, one of which was soft auditing of a big auditing firm KPMG. ASIC took action against some auditors of KPMG and recovered a huge amount from them as compensation for the damages caused by their conduct.
REFERENCES :
www.asic.gov.au
www.kpmg.com.au
The Business Journal , 2011, Andrew Burrell.
Audit Negligence, Publication No 11-04 , KordaMentha
The Savings and Loans Crisis of the 1980’s and early 90’s created the greatest banking collapse since the Great Depression in 1929. Over half the S & L’s failed, along with the FSLIC fund that was created to insure their deposits.
As a partner in the public accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche. LLP. James, in this case, was responsible for this violation. First, James was no on the basis of full inspection of the subsequent discovery existing at the date of the auditor 's report. Second, he did not detect and address problems regarding Ligand Pharmaceuticals ' exclusion of certain types of returns from the evaluation of future returns. Last but not least, he did not adequately perceive the reasonableness of Ligand’s estimates of future product
prime mortgages. The effect of the credit emergency started to show a to a great degree genuine
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 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
I believe Andersen violated the law. The management, including David Duncan, obviously knew Andersen would get an investigation due to the audit fai...
...me a director of the third company within five years after the liquidation of the two companies. The third company was funded by a creditor, Mr. Silverleaf. When the third company was wound up, Mr. Silverleaf then had knowledge of the previous two companies’ failures and claimed a debt of close to ₤135,000 . Mr. Silverleaf was successful in bringing proceedings under sections 216 and 217 of Insolvency Act 1986 even there’s no evidence of any asset transfer between the companies.
According to the article authored by Mark Rupert, what are the seven best practices in the roles and responsibilities of an internal audit function?
provided by the government. This meant that the new bank debt would be the most senior piece in and would
The first problem poses many deficiencies in the audit process. To start off with, it is not sufficient enough to take a sample size of only four test documents when over 1,100 vendors exist. If an error was able to be detected in only four test documents, than the auditor should have expanded their sample size to ensure that no actual material misstatements existed. The auditors claim that the amount was not material, but because the sample size was so small they could not make an accurate judgement. The second problem occurred when the auditor accepted phone confirmations and internally generated documents such as cash receipts to confirm that the sample material was correct. This evidence should not be accepted, because the reliability of the evidence is flawed. The best type of confirmation that the auditor could have received would have been written confirmations from the external parties. Looking at this situation, the auditor should have made a professional judgement call to determine if the evidence received was persuasive enough for him to make an accurate determination on the accuracy of the Accounts Payable. With such a small sample size, the auditor is taking on too much audit risk, and ...
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).
Almost all professions are demanded by a society to be ethical, especially the accounting profession. The accounting profession was founded on the notion that proper ethical behaviour is the cornerstone of providing professional services to clients. The collapse of Enron, the largest energy-trading company in the US had jolted the profession out of its complacency and serves a warning that all is not well with the profession. Ethics had aroused significant interest amongst practitioners and academics alike. The message is clear that it is under scrutiny, if accountants want to be relevant, they have to be more diligent and ethical. In recent years, there are many financial scandals in some very big corporations in Malaysia. According to the former Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA) President, Abdul Rahim Abdul Hamid, the responsibility of any wrongdoing in any company is on the shoulders of the directors, senior management team as well as the auditors, among others (MIA, 2007). As a result, litigations taken against auditors are increasing in number. For example, there are many financial scandals which include Perwaja Steel, Oilcorp Berhad, Transmile Group Berhad, Megan Media Holdings, Southern Bank and Technology Resources Industries Berhad.
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.
To understand what KPMG does, the term “accounting services” needs to be understood. Accounting services mainly break up into three sectors: Auditing, Taxation, and Consulting. KPMG basically works with all these departments. An audit is mainly a checking of financial records. It is to show proof or documentation of business activities. The “auditor” then checks these documents and recorded events to make judgments and give opinions on how to improve effectiveness on control and risk management. All public companies, by law, have to undergo audits. It is crucial to see whether the capital being invested in firms is being done legally. In their auditing service, they offer reports professionally and with excellent quality. Their specialists are bas...
394 et seq. CO. Generally, publicly traded companies must have their annual accounts and if applicable their consolidated accounts reviewed by an auditor in an ordinary audit (art. 727 para. 1 sec. 1 CO). SAirGroup was a publicly traded company; hence it had to call in an external auditor. The auditor has the duty that the financial statements of the company comply with the statutory provisions (art. 728a para. 1 sec. 1 CO). Furthermore, if the auditor supposes that there have been infringements of the law, the articles of association or the organisational regulations, it must inform the matter to the BoD (art. 728c para. 1 CO). Additionally, the court has to be notified, for example, if the company is clearly overindebted (art. 728c para. 3 CO). The auditor and all persons concerned in the audit are liable both to the company and to the individual shareholders and creditors for the losses arising from any intentional or negligent breach of their duties (art. 755 para. 1 CO). Mario Corti consciously brought in KPMG for PWC and they made corrections in the financial statements (NZZ, 03.10.2001). KPMG noticed that the debt of SAirGroup was even higher than detected in the first audit from PWC (BUERKLE & SMITH, pp. 6-7). The corrections KPMG executed seemed to be of legal