REG - Ethics Flashcards
What is the body that issues permits to practice?
State boards of accountancy (or similar authorities)
What are requirements of the UAA?
- UAA contains requirements for the issuance of CPA certificates
- UAA contains a substantial equivalency provision to allow for movement between states
- UAA contains provisions for continuing education
- UAA does NOT require all accountants to be licensed, only those that perform attest services or compilations of FS
What are the possible results of an AICPA ethics investigation?
- No violation/dismissal
- Admonishment (warning) (publication is mandatory)
- Corrective action required (additional education)
- Suspension up to 2 years
- Expulsion
What are the items that may results in automatic expulsion or suspension from the CPA?
- Revocation of CPA certificate by an authorized body/state
- Filing a fraudulent tax return for client or self
- Failure to file his/her required tax return
- Conviction of a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year
- NOTE - conviction for a felony or misdemeanor does NOT result in auto expulsion
What is the likely result of a member of the AICPA being convicted of filing a fraudulent tax return?
Can be suspended or expelled without a hearing
What is a good defense against negligence for a CPA?
Performing an audit in accordance with GAAS does not guarantee there is no negligence, but it is normally a good defense.
Bad defenses include privity of contract (incl oral agreement), oral contract still enforceable without signed engagement letter, and CPA does not have to perform audit recklessly or with intent to deceive to be liable for negligence.
What is negligence for a CPA?
Means that a CPA failed to exercise due care owed of the average reasonable accountant in performing an audit.
How does a CPA meet the standard of due care in conducting an audit of a client’s FS
A CPA has the duty to perform with the same degree of skill and judgment expected of an ordinarily prudent CPA under the circumstances. The standard of due care is guided by state and federal statute, court decisions, contract with client, GAAS and GAAP, customs of profession.
When is a CPA liable for failure to detect fraud or irregularities
- a normal audit would have detected it
- the accountant by agreement has undertaken greater responsibility
- the wording of the audit report indicated greater responsibility
What are the elements needed to establish fraud against an accountant?
- misrepresentation of the accountant’s expert opinion
- scienter shown by either the accountant’s knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard of the truth aka GROSS negligence
- reasonable reliance by injured party
- actual damages
What must the auditor do if they become aware of weaknesses in the design or operation of the internal control structure?
The weaknesses/reportable conditions must be communicated to the audit committee of the client.
Which source of law would be used for the different types of parties?
Lawsuits by clients for negligence - common law
Suits by investors in securities issued by a public company would be filed under Securities Act of 1933
Suits by individuals who purchase or sell securities of a public company - Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Suits by individuals who purchase or sell securities regulated by a state - State securities law
What type of negligence should be proved on the part of the CPA if there is privity of contract?
Client only needs to prove ordinary negligence, not gross.
What must a third party prove against the accountant to be awarded damages?
- losses/damages
- negligence (ordinary or gross depending on the type of party) by the CPA
- proximate cause (reliance on the work of CPA caused losses)
What is the difference between joint, several, and joint and several liability?
Joint - both accountant and mgmt are liable up to the full amount of obligation
Several/proportionate - party is only liable for respective share of damages - liability standard in UAA
Joint and several - party is responsible for full amount but may seek reimbursement from other parties - applied by most state courts
How are CPAs liable to foreseeable parties?
Liable for gross negligence or fraud such as knowingly issuing an unqualified opinion on materially misstated FS
What is the Ultramares rule and where does liability go to?
Under Ultramares, the accountant is held liable only to parties whose primary benefit the FS are intended. Thus, only those in privity of contract, NOT to foreseen parties.
What is needed to establish common law liability against an accountant based upon negligence?
Must be proven:
1- accountant had duty to exercise due care
2 - accountant breached duty of due care
Evidence of due care/diligence includes following GAAS OR GAAP
3 - damages or loss resulted
4 - causal relationship exists between the fault of accountant and resulting damages
What is needed to establish common law liability against an accountant based upon fraud?
To prove common law fraud, following must be present:
1 - misrepresentation of a material fact or the accountant’s expert opinion
2 - scienter, shown by either an intent to mislead or reckless disregard for the truth.
3- reasonable or justifiable reliance by injured party
4 - actual damages resulted
Contributory negligence or lack of privity are NOT defenses in cases of fraud. Under fraud, accountant is generally liable to all parties defrauded.
What does the plaintiff need to prove under the Securities act of 1933?
Only that damages were incurred AND that there was a material misstatement or omission. The burden of proof is then shifted to the CPA to prove due diligence.
Do not need to prove scienter or negligence or even that there was reliance on the FS, or intent to deceive
What is the amount of liability for the CPA under the Securities Act of 1933?
The plaintiff can recover damages equal to the difference between the amount paid and the market value of the stock at the time of the suit.
What must be established under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Section 10b, Rule 10b-5?
Following elements must be proven:
- damages resulted to plaintiff in connection with the purchase or sale of security in interstate commerce
- material misstatement or omission existed in info released by firm
- plaintiff justifiably relied on FS
- existence of scienter - prove lack of good faith
It is less likely to prove this than 1933 Act.