More handpicked essays just for you.
Contemporary accounting case 1.1 enron summary
Contemporary accounting case 1.1 enron summary
Enron scandal accounting failures
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Contemporary accounting case 1.1 enron summary
This week’s case study, Enron: Questionable Accounting Practices Bring New Regulation to the United States, reflects the increased government control regarding accounting and financial issues in corporations. This increased control was implemented due to the downward economic spiral occurring in the late 1990s. Although, Enron had successfully concealed their debt for years, they inevitably collapsed under an avalanche of debt and profit misrepresentation (Ferrell, Hirt, & Ferrell, 2009). Flawed principles and disclosures surfaced within accounting practices. Therefore, the government implemented the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act provided oversight to corporate financial reporting protocols, ethical employee standards, and financial
Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley Acts are important legislations in the corporate world because of their link to public and privately held companies. Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted to enhance transparency and accountability in publicly traded companies. On the contrary, Dodd-Frank Act was enacted to disentangle the confused web of financial service company valuations. Actually, these valuations are usually hidden by complex and unclear financial instruments. The introduction of Sarbanes-Oxley Act was fueled by recent incidents of accounting frauds by top executives of major corporations such as Enron. In contrast, Dodd-Frank Act was enacted as a response to the tendency by banks, insurance companies, hedge funds, rating agencies, and accounting companies to serve up harmful offer of ruined assets and liabilities brought by systemic non-disclosure (Anand, 2011, p.1). While these regulations have some similarities and differences, they have a strong relationship with the financial markets.
It has been a decade since the Sarbanes-Oxley Act became in effect. Obviously, the SOX Act which aimed at increasing the confidence in the US capital market really has had a profound influence on public companies and public accounting firms. However, after Enron scandal which triggered the issue of SOX Act, public company lawsuits due to fraud still emerged one after another. As such, the efficacy of the 11-year-old Act has continually been questioned by professionals and public. In addition, the controversy about the cost and benefit of Sarbanes-Oxley Act has never stopped.
The CFO, Andrew Fastow, systematically falsified there earnings by moving company losses off book and only reporting earnings, which led to Enron’s bankruptcy. Any safeguards or mechanisms that were in place to catch unethical behavior were thrown out the window when the corporate culture became a situation where every person was looking out for their own best interests. There were a select few employees that tried to get in front of the unethical accounting practices, but they were pushed aside and silenced. The corporate culture at Enron became a place where if an employee would not make unethical decisions then they would be terminated and the next person that would make those unethical decisions would replace them. Enron executives had no conscience or they would have cared for the people they ended up hurting. At one time, Enron probably was a growing company that had potential to make a difference, but because their lack of social responsibility and their excessive greed the company became known for the negative affects it had on society rather than the potential positive ones it could have had. Enron’s coercive power created fear amongst the employees, which created a corporate culture that drove everyone to make unethical decisions and eventually led to the downfall and bankruptcy of
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 corporate world has been rocked by scandals occurring in well-known companies such as Enron and WorldCom. These blatant examples of fraudulent financial reporting and related corporate corruption created the necessity for more stringent and comprehensive laws and punishments to avoid such corporate scandals in the future. On July 30, 2002 President Bush signed into law the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The law was enacted to bolster public confidence in our nation’s capital markets. It imposes new reporting requirements and significant penalties for non-compliance on public companies and their executives, directors, attorneys, auditors and securities analysts. In my opinion, one of the significant provisions of the Act, that covers companies registered under section 12 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, provides federal protection for “whistleblowers”. The Act requires that companies covered in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act should encourage employees to come forward and provide management with information regarding potential corporate fraud. It also specifically prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who provide such information. This Act was passed as a result of Enron’s attempted retaliation against Sherry Watkins who blew the whistle on the company. It’s purpose seems to be to enable ethical employees help keep management abreast of unsavory activities that will in the long run not only harm employees, stockholders and other stakeholders, but as past experience has shown will often lead to the demise of the company.
The development of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was a result of public company scandals. The Enron and Worldcom scandals, for example, helped investor confidence in entities traded on the public markets weaken during 2001 and 2002. Congress was quick to respond to the political crisis and "enacted the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which was signed into law by President Bush on July 30" (Edward Jones, 1), to restore investor confidence. In reference to SOX, penalties would be issued to non-ethical or non-law-abiding public companies and their executives, directors, auditors, attorneys, and securities analysts (1). SOX significantly transformed the procedures in which public companies handle internal controls and reporting within accounting and finance and the managerial aspects of public companies (2). Among the many objectives of SOX the most important objective is to oversee public accounting, publicly reporting companies, and the investment industry; however, SOX needed assistance in order follow through with these objectives:
The Oxford dictionary states that fraud is the “wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain” (Oxford University Press, 2014). It is arguable that only individuals have the ability to engage in fraud, but these individuals may lead corporations, which allows corporations also to commit acts of fraud. From a high-level perspective for combating this issue, many governments build a regulatory environment that interacts through firms and individuals. This regulatory environment exists as a series of laws and directives on the various government entities interact to ensure this protection. These laws and directives protect the public from fraud. This coverage of the regulatory environment even protects the public from fraud that happens within a corporation. Laws, such as the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2002 give protection against internal fraud. Understanding the effects of regulation on ethical behavior, and understanding the regulatory environment, ensures that one possesses a basic understanding of how the regulatory environment protects the public.
"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.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted following a prolonged period of corporate scandals involving large public companies from 2000 to 2002, this was to restore investors confidence in markets and close loopholes for public companies to defraud investors. This act has had a profound effect on cooperate governance in the US, it requires public companies to strengthen audit committees, perform internal controls tests, set personal liability of directors and officers for accuracy of financial statements, and strengthen disclosure. The Sarbanes-Oxley
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
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...
After Enron’s corporate unlawful activity, and the misconduct of some other companies, such as WorldCom and Halliburton, the government and the public sector started to look for fresh methods to support ethical behavior. In light of this, the Congress of the United States passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002 to address ethical and legal risks (Ferrell, Fraedrich, Ferrell, 2013, p.14). Given the ethical lapses manifested over the past two decades, restoring trust in the free-market system and in leaders has become a challenge. Government involvements have also been helpful in regulating unethical practices. Studies have revealed that society at large consider that good ethics is good business. The capitalist system has put a lot of faith in implementing high ethical standards, including respect, integrity, honesty and citizenship. As corporate ethics have become a growing concern for society, it has become clear that enhancing social responsibility, enforcing an ethical culture, and making ethical decisions, can not only lead to business success, but also benefit our economic system in the long
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.
Through an organizational culture that focused on financial greed for self, illegal accounting practices, conflicts of interest partnerships, illegal business dealings, fraud, negligence, and massive corruption at all levels, the Enron scandal help to create new laws and regulations with stiff penalties if violated (Ferrell, et al, 2013). The federal government implemented the Sarbanes Oxley Act (SOX) (Ferrell, et al, 2013).
The 1980’s and 1990 saw further deregulations in favor of business, nevertheless it also lead to notable failures. A prime example is a series of corporate bankruptcies in the early 21st century, which involved fraudulent bookkeeping. The federal government exercised regulatory authority to promote greater scrutiny (Lai, Loi, Lei, ed, 2001).