ACC 290 Week 5 Complete Work

ACC 290 Week 5 Complete Work Week 5
Learning Team
Internal Control Paper/Presentation
Internal Controls Paper:
Prepare a 5-7 page paper, in which your entire team analyzes and answers the following:
a.   What is the purpose of internal control?
b.   Why is internal control important?
c.   How can internal controls help or hinder a company’s success?
For the reminder of the paper, each team memberwill discuss and provide examples from current (or prior) professional private, public, not-for-profit, government or military experience, to answer the following individually:
d.   Who is (or was) responsible for establishing internal controls within the organization?  In your opinion, are (were) they successful in accomplishing employee adherence to the corporate controls?  Why or why not?
e.   Identify and discuss three examples of internal controls that your organization uses (used)?
f.   How does (did) your organization determine if its internal controls are (were) effective and adhered to? 
Properly cite all references for this paper.
Internal Controls Presentation:
The team will prepare a 15-20 minute oral presentation (accompanied by approximately 5-8 Microsoft® PowerPoint® slides) illustrating each member’s individual portion of the paper (items d, e and f as identified above). During the presentation the team members will briefly share one ormore of their own real-life examples.
  What is an example of a potentially unethical accounting situation? Why is the situation unethical? How do ethics affect the financial results of a company?
The most dishonest accounting situation is cooking the books, concealing figures and lying regarding what the true volumes are. For instance like what Enron was carrying out with their own organization, falsifying their accounting to make their organization look much better than the organization really was.
Not just the shareholders, public and their workers but he deceived his very own group because a huge number of individuals who worked for the organization resided near the organization. By Enron's dishonest methods were found, not just did the CEO's capture wind of what was about to take place, but sold their own share the previous day leaving the rest of their workers with no notice to what was about to take place. The following day, the workers discovered they lost their career, their share and their pension.
Many organizations provide ethics training. But there is no such thing of learning honesty over one-night. Ethics, morals and ideals are all educated and learned right from the start of their lift up to the present day. Ethics are more importantly carried out by their instructors, the neighborhood and most importantly by their parents. With the organization teaching honesty, they are just teaching the moral principles of what the organization desires. But the organization desired its workers to already have fine ethics habits. However, it does not matter when an adult is advised or trained, they will never be capable to modify their set of methods of honesty.
When a company gets into financial trouble, the executives of the company are guided in 2 ways. One path is guided by image and the other is guided by ethics. They can be upfront with the shareholders and let them know there are some fiscal issues going on, or they can take the sneaky route and do a bit of creative accounting to make the books look flourishing. This type of unethical issues may lead to lose the customer confidence which thereby lacks potential investment from the investors. This results in potential losses of the company.
·        Do you think the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has made a difference in the ethical behavior of companies regarding their financial accounting? Why or why not?

I do believe that this company has made a big difference, and after this article about the company, now I am 100% sure that this company changed the outlook on how to do things the correct way.

 The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed in response to a flood of corporate accounting scandals. Its most famous provision requires chief executives to sign off on their companies' books, guaranteeing that the financial statements released to investors are not fraudulent. But it contains a morass of other requirements of companies-meaning a more complex and expensive job for the public accounting firms auditing companies' books. In response, some smaller accounting firms have stopped auditing publicly traded clients, citing increased costs associated with such engagements. The Big Four, meanwhile, are licking their chops. More complexity in corporate accounting regulations means more complex audit engagements, after all-complete with higher fees. Indeed, according to a survey conducted by Financial Executives International, companies needing audits in the wake of Sarbanes-Oxley expect to pay more than a third more than they used to for audit engagements.
But Sarbox is a double-edged sword, requiring that companies use different firms for tax and audit work. That's creating a window of opportunity for second-tier public accounting firms, such as Crowe Group and Grant Thornton, which are picking off more and more Big Four clients. This is happening in many cases because Big Four firms are ending audit relationships with companies they consider more risky to audit. Regardless, the second tier of accounting firms is enjoying a bigger bottom line as a result of the significant new clients coming their way-meaning these are becoming increasingly good places to find jobs.
Powered by