Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why ethics is important accounting ; accounting scandals
Why ethics is important accounting ; accounting scandals
Why ethics is important accounting ; accounting scandals
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
WorldCom and The Mississippi Scheme are both large financial scandals that have occurred. WorldCom was a telecommunication company that overstated their cash flow by reporting $7.6 billion in operating expenses as capital expenses. WorldCom is the largest accounting scandal in US history as of March 2002. The Mississippi Scheme was a business scheme that destroyed the economy of France during the 1700’s. The scheme involved the loss of paper money’s purchasing power as a result of asset inflation. Both WorldCom and The Mississippi Scheme were frauds involving manipulation to create higher stock prices and dubious practices within the organizations to keep the public unaware.
Bernie Ebbers was the founder and CEO of WorldCom. He took a small telecommunications firm and transformed it into an industry giant before it collapsed into bankruptcy in 2002. The stock prices of WorldCom began to fall in 2000 and in order to prevent the price from falling further WorldCom made mass loans to Ebbers to stop him from selling his stock. He initiated the fraud and false reporting. He did not give accounting details as to how the false reporting should occur but he did repeatedly say it was important to “make the numbers.”
Scott Sullivan was the CFO and on the board of directors of WorldCom. He oversaw the conspiracy to hide operating expenses in order to improve reported profits of the company. He advised Bernie Ebbers to inform the public of the WorldCom’s deteriorating situation but Sullivan’s advice was not taken. Ebbers had instructed Sullivan to adjust the accounting numbers.
David Myers was the controller of WorldCom. He instructed the accounting department to make billions of dollars in adjustments to financial state...
... middle of paper ...
...t themselves. The Duke de Bourbon and the Prince de Conti were members of the council of the regency. They abused their positions and their influence to see that measures were taken to get the shares to rise while in their hands in order to make huge profits. This is similar to Ebbers and Sullivan selling shares of stock in 2000 when they had inside information that the stock price would be falling. Ebbers was offered a loan instead of selling his shares, though.
WorldCom and the Mississippi Scheme were both major financial scandals of their time. These scandals have similarities and differences. WorldCom was the second largest phone company in the United States as of 1998. The Mississippi Scheme was a plan that affected every household in France during the 1700’s. Both scandals would never have occurred if the people in charge would not have been fraudulent.
Richard Hawkins, ex-CFO of a health service industry giant McKesson, was accused and later brought to court for inflating revenue at McKessonHBOC. The acquisition of HBOC, a medical software company, happened long after Hawkins became the CFO, but right before the management of both companies decided to falsify the facts.
John Rigas started Adelphia Communcations in 1952 with the help of two partners, but soon bought it out. The company was taken public in 1986 and as a result would have to abide by the regulations of the SEC. By the early 2000s, Adelphia was one of the top cable companies in the United States. This was the peak of a corporation that would begin a downward spiral over the first half of 2002 as a result of fraudulent use of the company’s assets at its’ shareholders expense. Members of the Rigas family drove the company to bankruptcy through rampant spending of company funds on personal expenditures (Barlaup, 2009). These expenditures included the likes of gross misuse of the company’s aircraft for personal trips by members of the Rigas family and the construction of a personal golf course on the family’s private land (Markon, 2002). This was accomplished after careful manipulation of the company’s reported numbers and fabrication of transactions within the company. Co-borrowing and self-dealing were commonplace in this time period that resulted in over 2 billion dollars’ worth of debt. All this was done under the nose of shareholders and culminated in an insurmountable debt that would lead the company to bankruptcy and to the imprisonment of multiple members of the Rigas family (Barlaup, 2009).
The Fastows headed to Mrs. Fastow's native Houston in 1990, both taking jobs at a young company called Enron. Just five years old, Enron was starting to evolve from a natural-gas and pipeline company into a trading firm. Mr. Fastow was one of the first managers hired by Mr. [Jeffrey Skilling], who himself had only recently arrived, from management consultants McKinsey & Co. Brought into Mr. Skilling's inner circle, Mr. Fastow returned the loyalty, telling colleagues he had named a child after his mentor. When Mr. Skilling became Enron's president and chief operating officer in early 1997, he and Mr. [Kenneth Lay] promoted Mr. Fastow to lead a new finance department. A year later, Mr. Fastow became chief financial officer.
Bernard Madoff had full control of the organizational leadership of Bernard Madoff Investments Securities LLC. Madoff used charisma to convince his friends, members of elite groups, and his employees to believe in him. He tricked his clients into believing that they were investing in something special. He would often turn potential investors down, which helped Bernard in targeting the investors with more money to invest. Bernard Madoff created a system which promised high returns in the short term and was nothing but the Ponzi scheme. The system’s idea relied on funds from the new investors to pay misrepresented and extremely high returns to existing investors. He was doing this for years; convincing wealthy individuals and charities to invest billions of dollars into his hedge fund. And they did so because of the extremely high returns, which were promised by Madoff’s firm. If anyone would have looked deeply into the structure of his firm, it would have definitely shown that something is wrong. This is because nobody can make such big money in the market, especially if no one else could at the time. How could one person, Madoff, hold all of his clients’ assets, price them, and manage them? It is clearly a conflict of interest. His company was showing high profits year after year; despite most of the companies in the market having losses. In fact, Bernard Madoff’s case is absolutely stunning when you consider the range and number of investors who got caught up in it.
In this essay, I will be examining the financial events surrounding Bernie Madoff, and the events surrounding Enron. Bernie Madoff, “a former American stock broker, investment advisor, non-executive chairman of the NASDAQ stock market, and the admitted operator of what has been described as the largest Ponzi scheme in the history of the world”. Bernard Madoff, 2011, para. 78. 1) Bernie was able to convince investors to give him large sums of money with the promise that they would receive between eight percent and twelve percent return a year.... ...
...ent expense the year it incurred. Due to the reporting error, in 2001 $3.055 billion was misclassified and 4791 million in the first quarter of 2002 (Law Maryland). In order to avoid getting caught, WorldCom was trying to be slick by leaving some line costs as current expense so that the error in classifying would not be easily detectible. This error in classifying expenses cause WorldCom to increase net income and assets. This fraud was found by the companies internal audit, Cynthia cooper, on May 2002. This detection was not good news to Arthur Anderson as they were the outside auditors of WorldCom. Anderson had already been affected by Enron scandal and neglecting to do to their job correctly. But with WorldCom they claimed that the chief financial officer Scott Sullivan did not tell them about the line costs being capitalized and they were unaware of this fact.
In modern day business, there can be so many pressures that can cause managers to commit fraud, even though it often starts as just a little bit at first, but will spiral out of control with time. In the case of WorldCom, there were several pressures that led executives and managers to “cook the books.” Much of WorldCom’s initial growth and success was due to acquisitions. Over time, WorldCom discovered that there were no more opportunities for growth through acquisitions when the U.S. Department of Justice disallowed the acquisition of Sprint.
Lyke, B and Jickling, M. (2002). WorldCom: The Accounting Scandal. CRS Report for Congress, p2.
Giroux, G. (Winter 2008). What went wrong? Accounting fraud and lessons from the recent scandals. Social Research, 75, 4. p.1205 (34). Retrieved June 16, 2011, from Academic OneFile via Gale:
In the public eye, Bernard Ebbers seemed like an ideal pillar of the community in which he worked in. Ebbers volunteered and was engaged religious functions, served meals to the needy, lived in a modest house and invested most of his wealth in company stock (Johnston n.d.). Bernard Ebbers did all of these good acts in the in public eye, but behind the doors of WorldCom Bernard Ebbers ran the company with fear, intimidation, and manipulation in order to get the result he wanted. This can clearly be seen with Ebbers offering loans to other executives in order to retain high stock prices (Treviño, 2005). Ebbers wanted this in order to use the stock as a tool to fiancé all of WorldCom’s mergers and buyouts. Ebbers was adamant about cutting and
For those who do not know what fraud is, it’s basically deception by showing people what they want to see. In business it’s the same concept, but in a larger scale by means of manipulating figures that will be shown to shareholders and investors. Before Sarbanes Oxley Act there was “Enron Corporation”, a fortune 500 company that managed to falsify their statements claiming revenues over 101 billion in a span of 15 years. In order for us to understand how this corporation managed to deceive the public for so long, the documentary or movie “Smartest Guys in the Room” goes into depth by providing viewers with first-hand information from people that worked close with or for “Enron”.
The Tyco accounting scandal is an ideal illustration of how individuals who hold key positions in an organization are able to manipulate accounting practices and financial reports for personal gain. The few key individuals involved in the Tyco Scandal (CEO Kozlowski and CFO Swartz), used a number of clever and unique tactics in order to accomplish what they did; including spring loading, manipulating their ‘key-employee loan’ program, and multiple ‘hush money’ payouts.
Prior to 2000, Enron was an American energy, commodities and service international company. Enron claimed that revenue is more than 102 millions (Healy & Palepu 2003, p.6). Fortune named Enron “American most innovative company” for six consecutive years (Ehrenberg 2011, paragraph 3). That is the reason why Enron became an admired company before 2000. Unfortunately, most of the net income for the years 1997-2000 is overstated because of unethical accounting errors (Benston & Hartgraves 2002, p. 105). In the next paragraph, three main accounting issues will identify for what led to the fall of Enron.
Dowd (2016) runs above and beyond with the clarification to state accounting fraud incorporates the change of accounting records in regards to sales, incomes, costs and different components for a profit motive, for example, boosting organization stock prices, getting ideal financing or maintaining a strategic distance from obligation commitments. Dowd is of the feeling that covetousness, absence of straightforwardness, poor administration data and poor accounting interior controls are a couple of explanations behind accounting fraud. (Dowd,
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).