ACACT304A Audit and Assurance Services Assessment 3 – Individual Case Study Essays (20% Weighting) Due: 14/09/2022 Essay Topic: Outline and discuss the key audit or accounting issues arising from your...

1 answer below »



Outline
and discuss the key audit or accounting issues arising from your allocated case
study (refer table below) and detail why each issue is important.








On Lehman Brothers
(USB




ACACT304A Audit and Assurance Services Assessment 3 – Individual Case Study Essays (20% Weighting) Due: 14/09/2022 Essay Topic: Outline and discuss the key audit or accounting issues arising from your allocated case study (refer table below) and detail why each issue is important. On Lehman Brothers (USB) Essay formal style Introduction Body Conclusion This is to be completed as an individual assessment, in an academic style essay format - length 1,500 words (+/- 10%). You should reference at least five sources in your essay (a minimum of 3 academic journal articles and 2 other sources, such as newspaper articles or websites). Use of either the Harvard or APA referencing styles is acceptable. All submissions must comply with the requirements listed in the Course Handbook. Audit & Assurance in Practice Debate Audit & Assurance in Practice Debate Assessment#2 How the Debate works These guidelines are here to assist you with understanding how a debate works. The job of the Affirmative team is to present as many arguments as possible for why they agree with the statement that has been assigned to them. Affirmative teams will need to research the reasons put forward by those who agree with the statement. They can then assign the reasons they come up with to different team members to present in the debate. The other team (the Negative team) has the job of researching reasons put forward by those who don't agree with the statement, so that they can argue why they don't agree with the statement. One speaker from each team (beginning with the Affirmative team 1st speaker) will speak in turn to present different reasons for their teams' side of the argument. They may also spend a short time (optional) to disagree with (called refute) a point made by a previous speaker on the other team (of course this is must be done in a polite and professional way). The only person who cannot refute is the first speaker for the Affirmative team (since they are the very first person in the whole debate to speak!). The order of the speakers along with their typical role is as follows (allow approx. 2 - 3 minutes per speaker): 1st Speakers 1st speaker Affirmative team Introduces the Affirmative team argument and presents a couple of points to support it. May also mention that the 2nd and 3rd Affirmative team speakers will follow and will have further points to support the Affirmative team argument. 1st speaker Negative team Introduces the Negative team argument and presents points to support it. May also mention that the 2nd and 3rd (if applicable) Negative team speakers will follow and will have further points to support the Negative team argument. May wish to (briefly) refute a point or points made by the previous Affirmative team speaker (here they must support their refutations with reasons why they disagree). 2nd Speakers 2nd speaker Affirmative team Presents further points to support the Affirmative team argument. May also mention that the 3rd Affirmative team speaker will follow and will have further points to support the team argument. May wish to (briefly) refute a point or points made by the previous Negative team speaker (here they must support their refutations with reasons why they disagree). 2nd speaker Negative team Present further points to support the Negative team argument. May also mention that the 3rd (and 4th - debate No. 1 only) Negative team speaker will follow and will have further points to support the Negative team argument. May wish to (briefly) refute a point or points made by the previous Affirmative team speakers (here they must support their refutations with reasons why they disagree). 3rd Speakers 3rd speaker Affirmative team (if applicable) Present further points to support the Affirmative team argument. May wish to (briefly) refute a point or points made by the previous Negative team speakers (here they must support their refutations with reasons why they disagree). Should also wrap up (summarise) the Affirmative team argument and why the Affirmative team believes it to be correct. 3rd speaker Negative team (if applicable) Normally the final speaker in the debate. Presents any final points to support the Negative team argument. May wish to (briefly) refute a point or points made by the previous Affirmative team speakers (here they must support their refutations with reasons why they disagree). Normally this speaker will wrap up (summarise) the Negative team argument and why your team believes it to be correct. This speaker usually has the final say - nobody can refute their points! The Process Each team is free to work out who will be 1st, 2nd and 3rd speakers for their team. This assessment will not be marked on who argues best (which is normally the purpose of debating), but more how well each team demonstrates that they have thoroughly researched their assigned topic. You will find that you need to understand the opposite team argument so that you can argue in support your own team argument. To see how a proper debate works, you can also find one on YouTube. However please note our debates will not be as formal as normal debates - the key is just to have the points assigned that each person will present. Each team should also listen to the points made by the opposite team, as it may prompt something that their next speaker can then refute (you all help one another with this).
Answered 1 days AfterSep 07, 2022

Answer To: ACACT304A Audit and Assurance Services Assessment 3 – Individual Case Study Essays (20% Weighting)...

Prince answered on Sep 08 2022
70 Votes
Auditing and Accounting Issues in Lehman Brother’s
Student Name
8th Sep 2022
Introduction
Global financial organisation Lehman Brothers offered brokerage, trading, investment banking, and other services. In terms of size, it ranked as the 4th investment bank in the country. Lehman Brothers' collapsed on Sept
ember 15, 2008, marked the biggest insolvency in the United State history (Wolff 2011). The 2008 financial crisis was caused by the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, which had a domino effect on the world economy (Wolff 2011). Lehman Brothers' demise was mostly brought on by reckless lending during the 2003–2004 housing boom (Sraders 2018). It bought five subprime lending companies and afterwards experienced a historically high subprime loan default, which caused it to collapse (Sraders 2018). In brief, it was a risky move into subprime lending that involved excessive leverage and became the catalyst for the 2008 financial crisis that led to the collapse of the banking and housing industries (Sraders 2018). The Lehman bankruptcy incident has sparked discussion about the independent auditor's historical function as one of the few management checks and if these companies still owe obligations to the general investment public. When auditing Lehman Brothers' financial records, independent auditor Ernst & Young was accused of professional negligence (Miseviit 2015). Lehman Brothers' auditing was not performed with sufficient accuracy to identify and prevent a probable collapse.
This situation was unexpected by a number of key stakeholders in the business, including the owners, shareholders, creditors, and clients. They had not expected the insolvency, let alone the collapse, of the fourth-largest investment bank. In part, this was because of the reliance that people at the time had on inefficient auditing techniques. In this report, we'll talk about the concerns with negligent auditing and an absence of professional scepticism in the Lehman Brothers case.
Auditing and Accounting Issues
Weak and ineffective auditing is what led to the unforeseen collapse of the investment firm. The absence of professional scepticism will be the main topic of discussion for the audit issue. Professional scepticism is described as "an attitude that comprises a questioning mind as well as a critical appraisal of audit evidence” by Arens et al. (2017, p. 112). As a result, while auditors cannot assume that management is dishonest, it is noteworthy that the likelihood of dishonesty is considerable (Arens et al. 2017, p. 112). Professional scepticism is crucial for the quality of the audit since it demonstrates the effort auditors put forth to test the sample and look for proof that the books with statement transactions match. Lehman Brothers served as an example of an object lesson that really was ready to be learned: complicated transactions must have their substance well understood, correctly recorded, and effectively reported to those who would be using the financial statements. In actuality, the repurchase agreements were secured loans rather than outright sales, and the accounting industry had...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here