Question

The Detroit accounting firm of Norman, Braver- man, Potvin, and Benjamin, CPAs, has always had a...

The Detroit accounting firm of Norman, Braver- man, Potvin, and Benjamin, CPAs, has always had a cordial, but frequently contentious, relationship with its publicly traded audit client, Jay-Scott, Inc. Jay-Scott sells beverages and must collect a refund- able deposit on every glass bottle and aluminum can sold. Lately, for instance, this audit client angrily accused the firm of “sabotage” for failing to allow it to record a portion of these refundable deposit collections as revenue transactions in the year of collection. According to the management of Jay-Scott, statistics prove that 20% of all deposits will be claimed by customers, and therefore, the forfeited deposits constitute immediate revenue.

Jay-Scott, Inc. retains this accounting firm annually to perform both tax preparation services and its audit. When the CPA firm informed Jay-Scott that its fee for tax services was going to increase by 4% during the upcoming year, Warren Harris, the CEO of Jay-Scott, said, “That’s not being fair to you. You work hard, so let’s up that to a 30% increase.” Did this client violate SOX?

0 0
Add a comment Improve this question Transcribed image text
Answer #1

Ans. The Detroit accounting firm of Norman, Braver- man, Potvin, and Benjamin, CPAs, has always had a cordial, but frequently contentious, relationship with its publicly traded audit client, Jay-Scott, Inc. Jay-Scott sells beverages and must collect a refund- able deposit on every glass bottle and aluminum can sold. Lately, for instance, this audit client angrily accused the firm of “sabotage” for failing to allow it to record a portion of these refundable deposit collections as revenue transactions in the year of collection. According to the management of Jay-Scott, statistics prove that 20% of all deposits will be claimed by customers, and therefore, the forfeited deposits constitute immediate revenue.

Jay-Scott, Inc. retains this accounting firm annually to perform both tax preparation services and its audit. When the CPA firm informed Jay-Scott that its fee for tax services was going to increase by 4% during the upcoming year, Warren Harris, the CEO of Jay-Scott, said, “That’s not being fair to you. You work hard, so let’s up that to a 30% increase.”

Looking at the above scenario, the client is violating SOX beacause of the following reasons:

(i) Failure to record revenue

(ii) Same firm performing both tax preparation services and its audit

(iii) Increasing cost to reduce tax implication

Add a comment
Know the answer?
Add Answer to:
The Detroit accounting firm of Norman, Braver- man, Potvin, and Benjamin, CPAs, has always had a...
Your Answer:

Post as a guest

Your Name:

What's your source?

Earn Coins

Coins can be redeemed for fabulous gifts.

Not the answer you're looking for? Ask your own homework help question. Our experts will answer your question WITHIN MINUTES for Free.
Similar Homework Help Questions
  • The Detroit accounting firm of Norman, Braver- man, Potvin, and Benjamin, CPAs, has always had a...

    The Detroit accounting firm of Norman, Braver- man, Potvin, and Benjamin, CPAs, has always had a cordial, but frequently contentious, relationship with its publicly traded audit client, Jay-Scott, Inc. Jay-Scott sells beverages and must collect a refund- able deposit on every glass bottle and aluminum can sold. Lately, for instance, this audit client angrily accused the firm of “sabotage” for failing to allow it to record a portion of these refundable deposit collections as revenue transactions in the year of...

  • The Detroit accounting firm of Norman, Braverman, Potvin, and Benjamin, CPAs, has always had a cordial,...

    The Detroit accounting firm of Norman, Braverman, Potvin, and Benjamin, CPAs, has always had a cordial, but frequently contentious, relationship with its publicly traded audit client, Jay-Scott, Inc. Jay-Scott sells beverages and must collect a refundable deposit on every glass bottle and aluminum can sold. Lately, for instance, this audit client angrily accused the firm of “sabotage” for failing to allow it to record a portion of these refundable deposit collections as revenue transactions in the year of collection. According...

ADVERTISEMENT
Free Homework Help App
Download From Google Play
Scan Your Homework
to Get Instant Free Answers
Need Online Homework Help?
Ask a Question
Get Answers For Free
Most questions answered within 3 hours.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT