Ethics Articles

http://ethics4cpas.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Ethically-Speaking.pdf

http://ethics4cpas.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Ethically-Speaking-October-2011.pdf

The AICPA has developed a nonauthoritative table entitled “Categories of Information” to supplement Ethics Ruling No. 2 “Disclosure of Client Information to Third Parties” under ET Section 391 – Ethics Rulings on Responsibilities to Clients.

http://www.aicpa.org/InterestAreas/ProfessionalEthics/Resources/Tools/DownloadableDocuments/Categories-of-Information.pdf

Revised structure, wording will make ethics standards more consistent.

While the AICPA Code is technically “codified” today, some subjects are scattered about the Code, making it more difficult for members and other users to know whether they have considered all relevant standards. In addition, a substantial amount of nonauthoritative ethics guidance is found outside the Code. These materials include informal AICPA staff positions; frequently asked questions on nonattest services; and basis-for-conclusions documents that can help members better understand and apply certain ethics rules. The Codification Project gives PEEC an opportunity to re-evaluate that guidance, where it resides, and its connection to the Code.

http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Issues/2011/Jun/20113740.htm#

The April 2011 issue contains summaries of several new exposure drafts. Of particular note is Interpretation No. 501-9 “Confidential Information Obtained From Employment,” which impacts all CPAs. There is also an update on the ethics codification project.

http://www.aicpa.org/InterestAreas/ProfessionalEthics/NewsAndPublications/EthicallySpeakingNewsletter/DownloadableDocuments/2011AprilEthicallySpeaking.pdf

The Professional Ethics Executive Committee has issued an exposure draft, dated April 4, 2011, which contains three new proposed ethics interpretations under Rule 501, Acts Discreditable, of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct and one new proposed definition under ET section 92, Definitions (AICPA, Professional Standards).

All proposals in this exposure draft apply to CPAs in business and industry while one of the proposed interpretations is applicable to all CPAs. The proposed interpretations relating to CPAs in Business and Industry cover topics not previously addressed in the Code of professional Conduct.

The Proposed Interpretations are:
No. 501-9 – “Confidential information obtained from employment,” under Rule 501
No. 501-10 – “Financial interests,” under Rule 501
No. 501-11 – “False, misleading or deceptive acts in promoting or marketing professional services,” under Rule 501
Proposed New Definition, “Member in business and industry,” under ET Section 92

http://www.aicpa.org/InterestAreas/ProfessionalEthics/Community/ExposureDrafts/DownloadableDocuments/2011April4BroadcastAlert.pdf

As part of its PCPS Independence Tool Kit, the AICPA has developed a practical tool to help practitioners assess the impact an inadvertent independence violation may have on the attest engagement team’s integrity, objectivity, or professional skepticism, and determine if a departure is justified. This tool provides suggested steps to be taken and related courses of action in dealing with matters that represent technical breaches of AICPA independence requirements.

http://www.aicpa.org/InterestAreas/PrivateCompaniesPracticeSection/Resources/KeepingUp/DownloadableDocuments/InadvertentIndependenceViolationsPracticeTool.pdf

Should auditors be able to exercise more ethical judgment?

Has the accounting profession created a situation in which the auditors’ ethical behavior is impaired by their professional obligations? Imagine an external auditor in this situation. In the course of a financial statement audit, unequivocal evidence of a fraud is uncovered. The auditor confronts the client with evidence; the client admits to the fraud and agrees to make the requisite adjustments in the firm’s financial statements. The auditor also notifies the client’s audit committee of the fraud. However, the committee comes to the decision that no further action is necessary. Despite that the client attempted to commit fraud (a fact that might be relevant to investigators or regulators), the adjustments remove any material misstatements. The auditor, at this point, has no further recourse but to issue an unqualified opinion. Read on …..

http://www.fraud-magazine.com/article.aspx?id=4294968847

http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/22/bernard-madoff-trust-psychology-leadership-managing-ponzi.html?boxes=Homepagechannels

How did Madoff earn the trust of so many people? Wasn’t there some concern that he was using smoke and mirrors to get the returns that he achieved year after year? This article explores the topic of trust and how Madoff, and others, garner trust and how you can benefit from understanding the kind of trust they displayed.

http://www.aicpa.org/Publications/Newsletters/EthicallySpeaking/DownloadableDocuments/2010December17EthicallySpeakingNewsletter.pdf