Abstract
For auditors, failing to detect fraud at their clients is usually accompanied by substantial monetary penalties and/or negative publicity. Thus, the profession has re-evaluated its fraud assessment processes and has attempted to find new ways in which material misstatements due to fraud can be identified. The purpose of this study is to determine whether auditors can effectively use nonfinancial measures (NFMs) in their analyses of fraud. Given that auditors can identify NFMs (e.g., facilities growth) that should coincide with financial measures (e.g., revenue growth), inconsistencies between these two variables may be indicative of higher fraud risk. The results show that all of the respondents believed that financial measures
…show more content…
To put it succinctly, if auditors take at face value everything they see or hear, they are not doing their jobs. A final reason auditors don’t uncover fraud is because they frequently don’t use the analytical tools that are available to them.
2
In times past, when analysis was difficult and time-consuming, perhaps auditors could not justify the additional effort (Joseph T. Wells, copyright 2003).
The use of NFMs in the evaluation of firm performance has garnered much attention since Kaplan and Norton (1996) published the “The Balanced Scorecard.” For firms that fraudulently misstate their financial statements, it is unlikely that they will (or have the ability to) concurrently misstate NFMs that are indicative of their true financial condition.
In another study conducted by Brazel, Jones and Zimbelman in 2005, they concluded that NFMs can convey new information not previously contained in financial statement variables that have been found to be correlated with fraud. In addition, their study showed that NFMs can be used as benchmark against which the auditors can compare actual revenue to enhance the effectiveness of their analytical procedures during fraud risk assessment.
Oftentimes, auditors look at the financial measures as the basis in detecting the likelihood of fraud in the firms being audited. This strategy has been proven to be effective most of the time. Financial measures primarily are the core features that firms and outside parties (e.g.,
E. Why does the auditor not use the same tolerable misstatement or percentage of account balance for all financial statement accounts?
The auditor must remember that all information collected during the audit needs to be sufficient enough to further the audit process. The information must not only possess the two qualities, relevance and reliability, but it should also test various assertions. For instance, in the audit of Walmart, the auditor should make an attempt to acquire information such as financial statements from the company’s bank, as opposed to acquiring the statements from Walmart’s management. Taking such crucial information from Walmart’s management will put the reliability of that information into question. It is possible that management may manipulate the financial statements, so that they are more appealing to the public and investors. Management may do things
Professional auditing standards discuss the three key “conditions” that are typically present when a financial fraud occurs and identify a lengthy list of “fraud risk factors.”
"In applying analytical procedures as risk assessment procedures, the auditor should perform analytical procedures relating to revenue with the objective of identifying unusual or unexpected relationships involving revenue accounts that might indicate a material misstatement, including material misstatement due to fraud. Also, when the auditor has performed a review of interim financial information in accordance with AU sec. 722, he or she should take into account the analytical procedures applied in that review when designing and applying analytical procedures as risk assessment procedures."
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate (Louwers & Reynolds, 2007). We believe that the audit evidence obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
Legitimacy in accounting practices is ensured by the check and balance of having independent auditors from registered public accountant firms reviewing financial practices. The report features eleven sections and these sections pertain to accounting overview, independence of auditors to reduce interest conflicts, corporate responsibility, financial disclosures, tax returns, criminal fraud and various elements of white collar criminal activity (107th Congress
SAS no. 99 and AU 316 require that an auditor detect fraud if it results in materially misstated financial statements (AICPA, 2007 and PCAOB ,2012). While no other rules require the CPA or auditor to detect fraud, statements of professional conduct such as the AICPA’s Principles of Professional
For the accountants and auditors, integrity is the primary characteristic and constitutional element to accomplish the profession. It allows users such as investors to trust the financial information they receive about the combines that they have the desire to invest in. To ensure everyone follows the same rules, the accounting statements and financial reports must be accurate, relevant, and understandable. Which it did not happen in Wells Fargo case because most of the financial reports were inaccurate. Even thought, the Motivator which is the monthly report were arranged to achieve the
The chief executive of the company was closely working with the vendors whose confirmations were vital in the auditing work and hence they could have submitted false confirmations. The auditing firm established a national risk management program for its clients and so national reviews were done to identify the high risk items in the financial statement. The vendor allowances were particularly high but they were not documented. As such, the auditors were supposed to demand for the documentations and compare them with the real figures. It is however noted that most of the documentations received were non-standard and this could have led to a different audit report given that vendor allowances were earlier identified as a high risk area. Inventory management was found to be poor especially in the allowances for inventory reserves. The audit firm was therefore obliged to carry out a thorough evaluation of the inventory reserves and determine whether it was reasonable. The valuation was also supposed to include all classes of inventory but for the case of the company, the evaluation excluded instances where no sales had been made. Hence, this evaluation could not accurately represent the position of the inventory reserve in the company. (Waters,2003)
Fraudulent, erroneous, and illegal acts committed by a public company, usually at a managerial or executive level, have been a very serious problem for many years and have prompted development of strict and updated regulations, such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, in an attempt to prevent these occurrences. Unfortunately, these new or updated regulations are not enough to prevent these acts from happening, thus not alleviating the auditors of their responsibility to detect fraud. Some methods that management and auditors can employ to prevent and detect fraud, errors, and illegal acts are: improving knowledge, improving skills,
Following the risk assessment procedures, substantive procedures are designed and conducted to detect material misstatements of relevant assertions. Substantive procedures include analytical procedures and tests of details. Analytical procedures involve evaluations of financial statement information by a study of relationships among financial and nonfinancial data. Tests of details may be divided into three types. One test is the test of account balances to address whether there are misstatements in the ending balance of an account. In the case of Crazy Eddie, auditors should have put greater attention to inventory and accounts payable accounts. The second test is a test of classes of transactions to determine whether particular types of transactions have been properly accounted for during the period. Crazy Eddies fraudulently classified these transshipping transactions as retail sales to inflate its sales revenue and continue growth at existing stores. A key ratio for retailers is to compare growth in existing stores to growth from new stores. The third and final test is a test of disclosures to evaluate whether financial statement disclosures are properly presented. Crazy Eddie prepared bogus debit memos of over $20 million to understate accounts payable.
Analytical procedures can often point to areas that are out of sync with the prior results of the firm. Auditors should look closely at changes in the gross profit ratio and unusual changes in revenues or expenses. Once unusual results have been identified, auditors must search for reasonable explanations. If the explanations provided seem implausible then the auditor must expand the scope of testing and obtain additional corroborating evidence.
The presence of an external auditor allows creditors, investors or bankers to use financial statements that have been prepared with confidence. Although it does not guarantee the accuracy of a financial statement, it provides users with some reassurance that a company’s financial statements give a true and fair view of its financial position and its business operations. It also provides credibility, where in business, is a major asset. With credibility, the willingness of investors, bankers and others to relate and undertake business projects with a company increases. Credibility is also important to build positive reputations.
An important function of the accounting field is to provide external users of financial statements with assurance that the financial information being presented is both reliable and accurate. This basic function of accounting is so important that there is an entire field of experts, called auditors, dedicated to assuring its proper performance. Throughout history there have been many instances in which the basic equilibrium between an institution and current/potential investor has been threatened due to a lack of accountability and trust between the two parties. This issue has been the catalyst for many discussions regarding the proper procedures a firm should follow in order to provide
Professional skepticism practices as neutral but discipline approach to detection and investigation. Per SAS No. 1 it suggests that an auditor neither assumers that management is dishonest or assumes unquestionable honesty. Professional skepticism requires fraud examiners to “pull on thread” in which means Red flags are warning signal or something that demands attention or provokes an irate reaction. Red Flag symptoms of fraud may be divided into at least six categories: unexplained accounting anomalies, exploited internal control weaknesses, identified analytical anomalies where non