Upload
svetlana-svetlichnaya
View
289
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Auditing, Accounting
Citation preview
ADVANCED AUDITING
WorldCom: The Expense Recognition Principle
Case 1.7
[Type the author name]
2/17/2014
1. The matching principle requires expenses to be recognized when incurred and the
revenue associated with the expense is recognized. This makes the timing of expenses
and revenues very important. By shifting the timing of when expenses are recognized, a
company can artificially make its business appear more profitable. Therefore, the
accounting standards institute has established clear guidelines to minimize any subjective
judgment regarding when to recognize expenses.
Since, financial statements are periodic; the matching principle promotes compa-
rability, which helps users evaluate the performance of the company. According to this
principle, other costs not expensed are considered as assets or inventories which can later
be recognized as revenues if the sales are made in future period. This helps end users sep-
arate bottom-line from the assets of the company, distinguishing the company’s stability
versus the current performance.
2. WorldCom began violating the matching principle in the beginning of the second quarter
of 1999 when management began demanding the release of line cost accruals usually
without any underlying analysis to support the release. By doing so, they were not
matching the release with any actual expense reduction and thereby falsely reducing
accrual accounts.
Under GAAP, WorldCom was required to estimate its line costs each month and
immediately expense them, even though many of these costs would be paid later. In
order to estimate the cost, a liability account called ‘accrual’ was set up by WorldCom.
As the bills arrived, the company would pay the pills and reduce the balance of the
accrual by the same amount. However, because the accruals were estimates, WorldCom
was allowed by GAAP to re-evaluate the accounts to ensure that they were properly
valued. If actual charges were lower than the estimate, then the accrual is released. An
entry that management could have been using to make reduction of line expenses without
any underlying support would be reporting line cost as a capital expenditure on the
balance sheet.
The management of WorldCom was also not releasing certain line costs in the
period in which they were identified. But rather, these certain line cost accruals were
kept as “rainy-day” funds that could be released when management needed to improve
reported results.
3. WorldCom had not established an effective system of internal control over financial
statements. Control policies and procedures that would have monitored and prevented
management override and the release of line costs, which resulted in overstated financial
statements. When linking internal controls to financial statement assertions for expense
accounts, it is evident that several management assertions were incorrect and not
identified by the controls. False management assertions fell into the categories of
accuracy, valuation presentation and disclosure. The management assertions of accuracy
and valuation, which states that the transactions and events have been recorded accurately
and that account balances have been valued correctly was false because WorldCom’s
management did not correctly disclose the expense. Management’s assertions of
presentation and disclosure, which state that all transactions and events have been
presented correctly and that all relevant information has been disclosed to financial
statement users was also violated. WorldCom failed to disclose the release of line costs
the lowered its expense account and increased its revenues.
4. The PCOAB Auditing Standard No. 15 lists many procedures an auditor can use to
gather evidence to observe the accounting quality of a company. At WorldCom, the
auditors could have used physical examination to check the documents related to the
decline of the line cost. They would have noticed these declines were done through top
side journal entries with no supporting analysis. The auditors could also have used
confirmations with other companies that charged WorldCom to find out the actual
expense amount and if there were any reductions in charges. Auditors could have
analyzed the outcome of the reported information and for significant fluctuations through
analytical procedures. Auditors can also inquire of the client and raise questions about
the particular approach and the validity of it. Auditors could have made recalculations of
the accrual accounts. Since the adjustments were so big, auditors would have easily
identified the issue and then presented to management the correct way of making these
adjustments. If management refused to follow the suggested entries of the auditor, they
should not get a qualified opinion.
5. Ethics Rule 102 Paragraph 1 states that in the performance of any professional service, a
member shall maintain objectivity and integrity, shall be free of conflicts of interest, and
shall not knowingly misrepresent facts or subordinate his or her judgment to others.
Ethics Rule 102 Paragraph 2 states that a member shall be considered to have knowingly
misrepresented facts in violation of rule 102 when he or she knowingly—
Makes, or permits or directs another to make, materially false and misleading
entries in an entity’s financial statements or records; or
Fails to correct an entity’s financial statements or records that are materially false
and misleading when he or she has the authority to record an entry; or
Signs, or permits or directs another to sign, a document containing materially
false and misleading information.
David Schneeman and Charles Wasserott were correct in refusing to make the line cost
accrual adjustments. However, since David Schneeman was the CFO, and was aware
that the vice president and controller had someone else do what he refused, he had the
responsibility to correct those entries as stated in Paragraph 2 of ET 102. David
Schneeman would still be found to have knowingly misrepresented the facts.
References
AICPA, ET Section 102, “Intergrity and Objectivity.” Accessed February 17, 2014.
http://www.aicpa.org/Research/Standards/CodeofConduct/Pages/et_102.aspx
PCOAB, Auditing Standard No. 5, “An Audit of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting That
Is Integrated with An Audit of Financial Statements.” Accessed February 17, 2014.
http://pcaobus.org/Standards/Auditing/Pages/Auditing_Standard_5.aspx.