Chapter 4 Question 29

Discussion Question 37:  Explain why Benford's Law is useful to auditors in the detection of fraud. (write a one page response for each question):

SOX, whistleblower awards is apparently wrong. Which else could be the right answer?

Bb.

Please describe a time when you were faced with a personal dilemma regarding whether to blow the whistle on a wrongdoing. Some examples of a wrongdoing are witnessing cheating on an exam, witnessing someone trying to steal, noticing someone trying to take advantage of another, and completing a project at work without recording time spent in order to meet time constraints. Who were the stakeholders in the situation and how were they impacted by the wrongdoing? How did rationalization encourage the wrongdoer to follow through with their wrongdoing? What did you do and why? Case scenario: for someone working but not clocking in  How would this fit under this dilemma? Please explain:

8. Charlie, CPA, is performing a compilation service for Clean and Green Corporation. In the course of performing compilation procedures, Charlie became aware that some of the information provided by Clean and Green's management are incomplete. Client management refuses to comply with Charlie's requests for additional information. In this case, Charlie should: A. Issue a qualified opinion on the financial statements compiled. B. Issue an adverse opinion on the financial statements compiled. C. Issue a disclaimer of opinion on the financial statements complied. D. Withdraw from the engagement.

Explain your answer

Answer the following from Chapter 7 of the textbook (write a one page response for each question):  Discussion Question 37:  Explain why Benford's Law is useful to auditors in the detection of fraud.

Assume Ethan sets a meeting with Vick in two days to follow-up on his request. Vick has decided not to be part of the cover-up. Use the GVV framework to help Vick prepare for the meeting. Consider the following:       What should Vick say to counteract Ethan's request?     How might Vick's intended action affect the company and the external auditors?     Who can Vick go to for support?

Indicate the alternative that best completes the following sentence: Upon obtaining factual documentation of unethical business conduct by the vice president, to whom the chief audit executive (CAE) reports, the CAE should do the following: Oa. Report the facts to the chief executive officer and the audit committee. Ob. Conduct an investigation to determine the extent of the vice president's involvement in the unethical acts. O c. Schedule an audit of the business function involved. d. Confront the vice president with the facts before proceeding with the investigation.

4 AICPA members who work in industry and government must always adhere to which of the following AICPA rules of conduct:     Rule 101 independence     Rule 202 Compliance with Standards     Rule 301 Confidential Client information     Rule 501 Acts Discreditable   Question 5 Before accepting an engagement to audit a new client, a CPA is required to:     Ask the prospective client's consent to make inquiries of the predecessor auditor, if any.     Conduct an assessment of the fraud risk factors likely to cause material misstatements.     Gain an understanding of the prospective client's industry and business.     Obtain the prospective client's signature to a written engagement letter

9

[The following information applies to the questions displayed below.] Per SEC release, from 2012 through 2014 then EY partner Pamela Hartford violated Independence Rules by having an affair with a client. Reports state she engaged in a personal relationship with Robert Brehl, the chief accounting officer of a public company that she serviced as a member of the audit engagement team. Another EY partner Michael Kamienski (the supervising partner on this engagement) became aware of facts suggesting an improper relationship between Hartford and Brehl. However, he failed to follow up on his suspicions. While Hartford and Brehl tried to keep their relationship a secret, they did attend client and EY social events. This suggests that others at both EY and the client could have been aware of the affair. As part of the first SEC enforcement action of its kind, the SEC made charges of a breach of Independence against EY, Hartford, and Kaminski as well as Brehl. All parties agreed to settle the…

[The following information applies to the questions displayed below.] Per SEC release, from 2012 through 2014 then EY partner Pamela Hartford violated Independence Rules by having an affair with a client. Reports state she engaged in a personal relationship with Robert Brehl, the chief accounting officer of a public company that she serviced as a member of the audit engagement team. Another EY partner Michael Kamienski (the supervising partner on this engagement) became aware of facts suggesting an improper relationship between Hartford and Brehl. However, he failed to follow up on his suspicions. While Hartford and Brehl tried to keep their relationship a secret, they did attend client and EY social events. This suggests that others at both EY and the client could have been aware of the affair. As part of the first SEC enforcement action of its kind, the SEC made charges of a breach of Independence against EY, Hartford, and Kaminski as well as Brehl. All parties agreed to settle the…