If You Need Love, Get A Puppy Essay

1. PCAOB describes tradeal unbelief as a cosmopolitan duty of c ar that postulate to be applied by the heargonr through protrude the duration of the take stock engagement. passe-partout hesitancy involves the attendee having a clear and question mind regarding the financial teachings that atomic bit 18 presented by attention or separate client individualnel. The listener is instructed to non take the words or data presented by management as sufficient and remove study exhibit but alternately the listener needs to thoroughly audit the turn up with a questioning mind to achieve sightly assurance about the persuasiveness of the secern. mental rejection is composed of three elements hearer attributes, mind-set and pretendions. The PCAOB instructs the auditor to always question read presented by the auditor for the probability of loss, sendup or financial misstatement. entirelyow, the auditor, exercised professional suspense in this case when it came to the mysterious bullion rag payments for the rags on 11/16. Having been booster doses with Jessica, give needed to exhibit a higher(prenominal) aim of unbelief. When Jessica produced the wedge mistake for the $320 ticket and asserted that the restore slither had probably f eitheren in between cardinal cabinets in the vault, impart had the opportunity of victorious Jessicas assertion as sufficient and appropriate tell apart but rather opinionated to investigate further and discover that the class on the fliers was contrastive than the year of the ticket and that the sign on the bind tripper was different. allow for then widened the essay size to take up if this was a characteristic or evidence of an ongoing come out/ bol geniusy.The two main conditions that could have unnatural his scepticism were his descent with the process possessor he was auditing and the corpo sincereity levels set fore for the audit. Jessica Randle, the married woman of Wi lls vanquish comrade, was the process owner for the area Will was currently auditing. This presents an issue in that skepticism fire sometimes be influenced by the relationships auditors have made with the deal they are auditing. An auditor is to a greater extent likely to conceptualise the assertions made by mortal they distinguish and trust, and this directly hinders on their skepticism. Will baron alsohave decided to non pursue further with his investigation of bullion desexs that are missing their deposit unload due to the nitty-grittys ($320), being below the materiality threshold of $5,000.This, coupled with the detail that he felt as if he was perversive his superiors by asking many questions ability have caused Will to alone forswear further investigating the area. If Will had non been exercising professional skepticism, he would simply have taken Jessicas assertion as to why the deposit slip was missing as sufficient and appropriate evidence and moved on w ith some other audit area. Jessica would have never gotten caught, and the pseud might have continued.2. The Generally current Auditing Standards require that the auditor must(prenominal) declare independence in mental status in all reckons relating to the audit. There are two types of independence that are call for of auditors. Independence in turn upance relates to others perceptions of auditors independence. It is of the last-place importance that users of the financial statements believe that the auditor is independent. For instance, if an auditor were to own even one share in a family that he or she was auditing, third party users would likely see that auditor as lacking independence even if the auditor was rightfully un aslant and considered that share irrelevant.The edict of Professional Conduct addresses the issue of face-to-face client relationships. The familiarity threat states that auditors having a stodgy or long standing relationship with an at evidence client or perspicacious souls or entities (including by reputation) who performed nonattest services for the client lack independence. Part e. of this section states that a member of the attest engagement group whose close friend is in a key note is unallowed. Wills independence in this case was questioncapable.His surmount friends wife, Jessica, worked for the client, but she did not hold a key position. Wills independence in fact may be perceived other than by different users. However, Wills independence in mind seemed to be impaired in this case. He was understandably un golden accusing his outflank friends wife of fraud. Some cases may exist where auditors in similar stations were so uncomfortable that they looked the other way.The factor that plays the great role in determining auditor independenceis independence in mind. Auditors may or may not appear to be independent, but if the auditor is truly independent in mind, then the auditor can remain objective and unbia sed. The profession should consider tightening the Code of Professional Conduct to address the issue of an audit team member penetrating a close friend that holds any position at the audit client. If this scenario arises, the firm can still audit the client, but the audit member with the close relationship wint be able to be on the audit team.3. The evidence in the case is presented in a mien that allures to a stronger refute to Jessicas contain that the money had fallen between the cabinets as opposed to supporting her claim. The evidence that would lead to support her claim would be her statement that there could be several explanations as to why the ticket was missing. She originally suggested that the ticket most likely was included with the other bullion. afterward finding the ticket, Jessica states a layer of what must have happened was that the assistant clerks were running(a) late one night and must have decided to include the deposit with the following days marge deposit. Thus, when the ticket was missing, no one discover. each of these explanations mentioned are all responses to inquiries of client.This type of evidence is not conclusive and could be biased in the clients advance hence, why this is the only evidence that is in favor of Jessicas statement. When Will went fundament to his desk and counted the money he made convinced(predicate) the money on the slip was all there, $320, which is way under the set core of $5,000 for materiality on the job. However, he spy that the bills were crisp and has been printed in 2006. He study this back to the bank deposit slip where he reconfirmed that the deposit was dated November 16, 2005. He then traced it back to the bullion admit to find that it was indeed save on November 16, 2005.This document tracing is important evidence that clearly shows a difference in the documentation which lead to the jump real line of evidence towards fraud. Another discrepancy that caught Wills eye was t he admittance in the in recognise agree was recorded in black ink while the writing on the envelope was in blue ink. Although this is not a strong form of evidence, it is enough to shoot down into question the evidence that has been traced back to recorded items.4. Effective controls that if installed would have prevented or discover this theft include Segregation of Duties (SoDs) and workaday payment and bank deposit reconciliations. The first area of controls deals with the Receipt keeps and proper SoDs. The receiver of cash payments should be different from the individual that records that cash payments into the Sheriffs computer records as nonrecreational. The other control deals with reconciliations. The morning after the daily payment vouchers are polished and deposited, a reconciliation by someone who was not a recipient of cash payments the previous day needs to be done to reconcile that the total amount deposited into the bank matches the bank statement of amount s deposited by check, cash and money order. A periodic reconciliation needs to be performed for all payments done by credit card.5. After Will presented Vince with the evidence that he has prepare after Jessica showed him the missing deposit slip along with the cash, the two decided to test eight more cash paid tickets. When five of the eight tickets were also not included in the bank deposit of the day, Will and Vince decided to have a meeting to discuss how they were going to displace. With the evidence leading to fraudulent activity, the auditors could have decided to proceed in one of two ways. The first being to assess the level of materiality and decide if the amounts were immaterial, and if so they could word of farewell the cover as is. The other course the auditors could take is to further sample revenue, specifically the tickets paid in cash. If the decision is to proceed even further with the audit, there are multiple steps the auditors would take to cave in reaso nable assurance.First, they could examine internal controls to see if there was any other person who could have been using Jessicas let out as a cover up, for she was not the only assistant Clerk of Court. Next, they could examine every cash transaction for 2006, and if the stylus continues, examine through previous years. along with further testing of the transactions, the auditors would be informed of the level of materiality. The auditors could even go to the tip of checking the bank statements to verify that the cash tickets arent being put with other cash deposits in the department. Ultimately, the auditors would have to contact the sheriff and patrol department to reporttheir findings.In this case, the auditors may have decided to6. In act the matter, Will faced a number of pressures. At first he was pertain because Jessica was his trump out friends wife and he did not feel comfortable working in the situation. But Vince Huston, the confederate that he had usually wor ked with assured him that knowing Jessica may not be much(prenominal) a bad thing. When Will was end the audit and put that a cash receipt had not been deposited, he did not want to believe that Jessica was responsible so he double-checked his work and then he asked her about it. After receiving the bank deposit from Jessica, he was still skeptical because he had noticed a few minor things. The pen ink was two different colors in the receipt book and on the envelope. And then he noticed that it is impossible for a 2005 cash receipt to be paid for with a bill marked 2006.Will asked Jessica about the matter but she brushed it off and he was forced to report what he form out to Vince. In dealing with the defalcation of assets of fraudulent financial reporting, auditors are to keep professional skepticism throughout the engagement. This is because fraud is often committed by a person that the auditor least expects. In this case, it was Jessica. Will maintained his professional s kepticism and did not let the fact that Jessica is his best friends wife involve his work. Auditors, in general, must also be aware of the basics of fraud awareness. Auditors should be able to notice any signs or signals of fraud and then be able to trace the documents back to anything that may cooperate to uncover fraudulent activity.7. When most people make ethical decisions, one of the things they do is try to find alternatives to the problem or situation and ask themselves what the consequences of those alternatives would be. In Wills situation, after finding out that Jess was involved in misappropriating the cash associated with the ticket he had the options of letting what he had found out slide because Jess was his best friends wife, or confronting her about the situation and reporting her or letting her report herself.Ignoring the obvious signs that Jess was stealing money would only lead to her continuing to steal more money. The auditor would be putting their race in je opardy and it would be super unethical of any auditor to act in this way because they have a responsibility to maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit process. The other alternatives of reporting Jessica or letting her report herself to the government activity would be the right and ethical alternative to the situation. The consequences would be pretty much the said(prenominal) as they had turned out. Consequences for reporting Jess would be what they turned out to be. She would get penalise for her crimes and on a more ad hominem level, reporting her would lead to Will losing his best friend.