{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Brent Dorsey Case 2

Brent Dorsey Case 2 - family but he would be violating GAAP...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Jenai Davis ACG 4642 301 1.12.11 A Day in the Life of Brent Dorsey Case 2) What consequences for Brent, the auditing firm, and others involved, may arise from “eating time,” as Scott suggested? Similarly, what consequences for Brent, the auditing firm, and others involved may arise from not completing audit procedures, as Megan suggested? Brent would lose time with this family, work many extra, unaccounted for, hours and would be violating the rules of GAAP in General Standards stating, “The auditor must exercise due professional care in the performance of the audit.” The auditing firm would report a false amount of hours necessary to complete the audit, which could affect the outcome of future audits. That in turn could affect others involved. If he does what Megan suggested, he would have time for his
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: family, but he would be violating GAAP in the General and Field of Work Standards that state, “The auditor must exercise due professional care in the preparation of the report” and “The auditor must obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence by performing audit procedures to afford a reasonable basis for an opinion regarding the financial statements under audit.” The auditing firm could potentially lose a client due to failing to find a mistake, because of the amount of information pulled for the audit. That would affect anyone who worked on that team, if it impairs them from working on another client, or losing that client. If it is discovered, people would get bad evaluations and possible be terminated....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}