This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: 9-56A) 1. Kent insists that their errors and irregularities program from last year is still OK. He is not worried about finding fraud as he will deal with it when it comes up. It would seem he is trying to hide something before it is even found.2. Mints employment contract has almost no salary and only bonuses and stock options. Why would a CEO accept nearly no salary and all the responsibility behind it?3. The audit committee is responsible for hiring the CEO? There seems to be a conflict of interest there.4. There is a lack of segregation of duties in the cash disbursements department. No one checking to make sure cash is disbursed properly and no skimming happening.5. Frequent disputes with past auditor and was eventually fired and brought in a new auditor that seems less concerned with fraud issues.B) 1. The board of directors approved Mints contract so everything must be ok.2. The existing audit programs are just fine because they worked in the past. 3. The internal control deficiency is ok and it can be justified by cost-effectiveness. 4. Laying off employees will improve SCSs financial results because of less overhead through employee costs....
View Full Document
- Spring '11