Q4. Identify the key auditing principles violated by the E&Y auditors in this case. Briefly explain how each principle was violated. https://pcaobus.org/Standards/Auditing/Pages/Auditing_Standard_3.aspx In this case, E&Y auditors violated several auditing principles among the ten generally accepted auditing standards, and I would like to illustrate specifically four key auditing principles that they violated: 1) Due professional care (General Standards), 2) Sufficient appropriate evidence (Field Work Standards), 3) Accordance with GAAP and 4) Proper opinion
(Reporting Standards)
• Due Professional Care Auditors should exercise due professional care when they perform auditing to prepare reports. An auditor should be equipped with the degree …show more content…
However, the appropriate mentoring can help to facilitate each auditing standard. For example, the second general standard, “Adequate technical training & proficiency”, requires proper knowledge transfer from mentors to subordinates because the subordinates are lack of technical proficiency and knowledge on the industry at first. Although they can learn it themselves by self-studying more, it would take more time, and sometimes there are many cases that knowledge from books is not practically and directly applied in a real …show more content…
If he pursued to conform to the professional code of conducts and auditing standards, he would not participate in deleting and manipulating the 2010 workpapers led by Trauger, and would rather become a whistleblower to disclose the Trauger’s wrongdoings to other managers or regulatory institutions. Q6. Assume the role of Oliver Flanagan in this case. What would you have done when Thomas Trauger asked you to help him alter the 2000 NextCard audit workpapers? In answering this question, identify the alternative courses of action available to you. Also identify the individuals who may be affected by your decision and briefly describe how they may be affected. http://www.llsdc.org/assets/DoddFrankdocs/crs-r41350.pdf I believe Flanagan had largely three choices when Trauger asked him to assist him to manipulate the 2000 NextCard audit workpapers. 1) Ignore the partner’s proposal, but not disclose it to others 2) Directly persuade Trauger not to do 3) Be a whistle
(Reporting Standards)
• Due Professional Care Auditors should exercise due professional care when they perform auditing to prepare reports. An auditor should be equipped with the degree …show more content…
However, the appropriate mentoring can help to facilitate each auditing standard. For example, the second general standard, “Adequate technical training & proficiency”, requires proper knowledge transfer from mentors to subordinates because the subordinates are lack of technical proficiency and knowledge on the industry at first. Although they can learn it themselves by self-studying more, it would take more time, and sometimes there are many cases that knowledge from books is not practically and directly applied in a real …show more content…
If he pursued to conform to the professional code of conducts and auditing standards, he would not participate in deleting and manipulating the 2010 workpapers led by Trauger, and would rather become a whistleblower to disclose the Trauger’s wrongdoings to other managers or regulatory institutions. Q6. Assume the role of Oliver Flanagan in this case. What would you have done when Thomas Trauger asked you to help him alter the 2000 NextCard audit workpapers? In answering this question, identify the alternative courses of action available to you. Also identify the individuals who may be affected by your decision and briefly describe how they may be affected. http://www.llsdc.org/assets/DoddFrankdocs/crs-r41350.pdf I believe Flanagan had largely three choices when Trauger asked him to assist him to manipulate the 2000 NextCard audit workpapers. 1) Ignore the partner’s proposal, but not disclose it to others 2) Directly persuade Trauger not to do 3) Be a whistle