The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) is taking Mountain Ltd to court for breach of the legislation under the Corporations Act 2001 in the 2018 financial year. The matter is still ongoing, and the company does not expect the matter to be resolved until November 2020. 1f found liable, the fines could be between $200,000 and $2,000,000. The company is somewhat confident that they will not be fined the full $2,000,000 but they are uncertain about the outcome. The company wants to ensure that they have reported the matter correctly in the financial accounts for the year ended June 2020. The date is August 1 and the directors have not signed off on the financial accounts. 1. Discuss whether an adjustment in the financial accounts is required or a note disclosure, give reason for your answer. 2. Discuss the effect the scenario has on the accounts and how they are presented.

Select any one company listed on the Australian S&P/ASX200 Index and discuss that company’s 2020 mission statement/vision. There is a word limit of 200 words for this question.

Select any one company listed on the Australian S&P/ASX200 Index and discuss that company’s 2020 mission statement/vision. There is a word     limit of 200 words for this question.

Select any one company listed on the Australian S&P/ASX200 Index and discuss that company’s 2020 mission statement/vision. There is a word limit of 200 words for this question.

Select any one company listed on the Australian S&P/ASX200 Index and discuss that company’s 2020 mission statement/vision. There is a word limit of 200 words for this question.

THE PROBLEM

From 1996 through 2002, KPMG received $124 million in tax consulting fees from promoting tax shelters that allowed individuals and corporations to improperly avoid more than $1.4 billion in federal taxes.⁷ E-mail messages obtained and released by the Internal Revenue Service indicated that KPMG officials were aware that the tax shelters were questionable.

As one example, a shelter referred to as bond-linked issue premium structures (BLIPS) created $5 billion in tax losses for investors. Under this shelter, clients would purchase foreign currency from offshore banks with funds borrowed from those same banks only to sell the currency back to the same bank a few months later. These investments were presented to the Internal Revenue Service as seven-year investments.⁸ Other shelters in question carried similar names such as FLIP, OPIS, and SOS.

THE OUTCOME

On August 26, 2005, KPMG admitted to criminal tax fraud and agreed to a payment of $456 million in penalties (an average of $300,000 per KPMG partner); the government agreed to deferred adjudication and, in January 2007, dismissed all criminal charges against the firm. Subsequently, Judge Lewis Kaplan of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed indictments against 13 of 16 former KPMG partners and, on December 18, 2008, two of the remaining three partners were convicted on multiple counts of tax evasion. (The remaining partner was acquitted.)⁹

In the midst of this activity, federal prosecutors indicted four current and former partners of Ernst & Young on similar charges. The shelters designed and sold by these partners brought Ernst & Young $120 million in fees. Those familiar with the matter do not expect that the firm itself will face criminal charges in this matter¹⁰; however, on May 8, 2009, four current and former E&Y executives were convicted.

THE ISSUE

KPMG has avoided the fate of Arthur Andersen: dissolution. However, the KPMG case has raised numerous questions about the future of the accounting profession if the small number of international accounting firms should become even smaller. For example, the Securities and Exchange Commission discussed various actions to assist companies in changing auditors if KPMG was indicted, including allowing companies to seek waivers to the stricter independence rules on a case-by-case basis and allowing KPMG to continue to perform audits if it were indicted. An unidentified SEC official indicated that “we have scenarios in place for any eventuality that could come out of this.”¹¹ In addition, prior to the settlement, Deloitte & Touche, Ernst & Young, and PricewaterhouseCoopers reportedly requested that their partners not solicit current KPMG clients.¹²

^question:

Provide us a very high-level summary of the Issues in the Case Study (Think who, what, where, and when.)

Disscussion 4

It should be 10-15 lines long. 2 paragraphs.

Is the timing and substance of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe's firing similar to the firing of former FBI Director James Comey? Should Attorney General Jeff Sessions have allowed Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to fire Andrew McCabe due to a previous conflict of interest? please cite the source where you get your information from.

Stewart, Martina. (2018, March 17). Source: Fired Deputy FBI Director Took Memos, Notes About Interactions With Trump. NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2018/03/17/594562355/source-fired-deputy-fbi-director-took-memos-notes-about-interactions-with-trump (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Chapter 5 of the online text, "Internal Control and Audit Compliance: Documentation and Testing Under the New COSO Framework" discusses the concept of segregation of duties. What does this concept mean? Discuss your current or maybe a former workplace where you noticed that there was a proper segregation of duties or maybe a lack of segregation of duties. What procedure might have helped to strengthen the internal controls?Chapter 5 of the online text, "Internal Control and Audit Compliance: Documentation and Testing Under the New COSO Framework" discusses the concept of segregation of duties. What does this concept mean? Discuss your current or maybe a former workplace where you noticed that there was a proper segregation of duties or maybe a lack of segregation of duties. What procedure might have helped to strengthen the internal controls?