Spotting Financial Distortions: A Primer for Attorneys The Web - - PDF document

spotting financial distortions a primer for attorneys
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Spotting Financial Distortions: A Primer for Attorneys The Web - - PDF document

Spotting Financial Distortions: A Primer for Attorneys The Web Conference Series For Corporate Counsel January 17, 2007 To ask a question using the question pane Enter your question into the text area and click Ask. The presenter will


slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

Spotting Financial Distortions: A Primer for Attorneys

The Web Conference Series For Corporate Counsel January 17, 2007

To ask a question using the question pane

Enter your question into the text area and click Ask. The presenter will address your question shortly.

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

To answer a polling question:

When a poll is posted…

– Click the radio button next to your response choice.

Need assistance?

Contact Live Meeting Customer Support

– US / Canada: 1-800-893-8779 – International: +1.971-544-3222 – Toll Free International: 00.800.9522.3000 – Email: lmhelp@microsoft.com – Web: www.livemeeting.com/support

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

Addressing Trends… Sharing Solutions

2006 Year in Review book coming in January Today’s summary in March InsideCounsel Advance copy for today’s participants

Today’s Moderator

Robert Vosper Editor, InsideCounsel

  • InsideCounsel is the leading publication

exclusively for general counsel and

  • ther in-house counsel
  • Editorial mission – be the business and

management tool for the corporate legal department

  • Dedicated to the exploration of the

relationship between in-house counsel and the law firms that serve them

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Today’s Presenters

Mark Plichta

Senior Counsel, Foley & Lardner LLP

  • Member of Transactional & Securities

Practice Area

  • Practice covers mergers &

acquisitions, and general corporate business law

  • Regularly counsels publicly held

companies regarding compliance matters

Today’s Presenters

James Pajakowski

Managing Director, Protiviti Inc.

  • Member of Protiviti’s Global Business Risk

Services Group

  • Focuses on financial Investigations &

Litigation Consulting practice, e-Discovery and Data Forensics Consulting, Sarbanes- Oxley Compliance Consulting, Financial Risk Consulting, and Operational Risk Consulting

  • Experience includes audit services,

business process improvement consulting, enterprise risk management projects

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

Spotting Financial Distortions: A Primer for Attorneys

The Web Conference Series For Corporate Counsel January 17, 2007

Discussion Topics

SOX: Results so far Recent fraud statistics Identification and detection techniques Common fraud scenarios Client considerations Protiviti’s 2007 Fraud Risk Management Survey Accounting issues to watch in 2007 Areas of focus / key take-aways

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

Results So Far – SOX 404 Compliance

  • Results for Year 1 filers (through May 30, 2006):

– Almost 3,600 filed internal control reports – Over 580 companies, or 16.2 percent, reported material weaknesses

  • Results for Year 2 filers (through May 30, 2006):

– Over 2,900 companies filed internal control reports – 215 ( 7.4%) reported material weaknesses

  • While over 16% of companies subject to Section 404 disclosed

internal control weaknesses in their first year of reporting, more than half of these companies reported in Year 2 that they had corrected them.

Year 1 and Year 2 Section 404 Disclosure Stats

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

How many financial restatements has your

  • rganization experienced within the last three

years?

  • One
  • Two
  • Three
  • Four or more

Live Meeting Poll

Changes directly made to this slide will not be displayed in Live Meeting. Edit this slide by selecting Properties in the Live Meeting Presentation menu.

Results So Far – Restatement Activity

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 (forecasted)

Source: Audit Analytics.com – April 25 and June 9, 2006

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

Results So Far – Restatement Activity (cont’d)

  • The number of restatements is expected to increase in 2006

compared to 2005, however this increase is being driven by smaller companies.

  • Large audit firms’ clients were responsible for 65% of the

restatements in 2005, however they were associated with less than half of public company restatements in the first half of 2006.

  • Meanwhile smaller auditing firms’ clients’ share of

restatements has more than doubled, with 497 restatements in the first half of 2006 compared to 185 restatements in the first half of 2005.

History of Restatements

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

History of Restatements (cont’d) History of Restatements (cont’d)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

Wall Street Journal – May 8, 2006

Tracking t g the Nu e Numb mber ers / O / Outside A e Audi dit: Chec ecks ks o

  • n I

Internal al C Control P Pay Off Off

27.7% Down 5.7% 25.7%

Russell 3000 share index

17.7%

Companies that reported no internal-control weaknesses in 2004 or 2005 Companies reporting internal-control weaknesses in 2004, but no weakness in 2005 Companies reporting internal-control weaknesses in both 2004 and 2005

Regulation Pays

Share price performance

  • f companies complying

with internal-control rules called for under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act *

* From March 31, 2004 to March 31, 2006

Does SOX Have A Positive Impact on Companies? Securities Fraud Class Actions Decreased in 2006

  • In 2006, securities fraud class actions decreased by 38%, while

allegations of specific accounting irregularities in filed complaints increased

  • Cases involving “other” accounting irregularities dramatically

increased – almost 50% related to stock-option issuances

  • Total Disclosure Dollar Loss was $52B in 2006 - a 44%

decrease from 2005 (i.e., market capitalization losses at end of class period, typically time of disclosure of alleged fraud)

  • Maximum Dollar Loss fell from $362B in 2005 to $294B in

2006 (i.e., shareholder losses measured by largest capitalization decline experienced during class period

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

Securities Fraud Class Actions Decreased in 2006 (cont’d)

Three contributing factors cited:

– Strengthened federal enforcement environment / pressure on companies to conduct internal investigations that implicate individual executives responsible for fraud – Strong stock market combined with lower stock price volatility – Majority of securities fraud class actions filed in late 1990s-early 2000s are “behind us”

Recent Fraud Statistics

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

Three Perspectives on Fraud

  • Black’s Law Dictionary defines fraud as:

– All means by which one individual can get an advantage over another by false suggestions or suppression of the truth. It includes all surprise, trick, cunning or dissembling, and any unfair way by which another is cheated.

  • Institute of Internal Auditors defines fraud as:

– Any illegal acts characterized by deceit, concealment or violation of

  • trust. These acts are not dependent upon the application of threat of

violence or of physical force. Frauds are perpetrated by parties and

  • rganizations to obtain money, property or services; to avoid payment or

loss of services; or to secure personal or business advantage.

  • Statement on Auditing Standards No. 99 (“SAS 99”) defines fraud as:

– An intentional act that results in a material misstatement in financial statements that are the subject of an audit. Two types of misstatements are relevant to the auditor’s consideration of fraud: (1) fraudulent financial reporting and (2) misappropriation of assets.

Common Types of Financial Fraud

Asset Misappropriation (91.5%)

– $150,000 median loss

Corruption (30.8%)

– $538,000 median loss

Fraudulent Financial Statements (10.6%)

– Most costly, median losses of $2 million per scheme

Note: The sum of percentages in this chart exceeds 100% because a number of cases involved multiple schemes that fell into more than one category.

Source: Association of Fraud Examiners ‘2006 Report to the Nation’

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

Note: Total exceeds 100% because some survey participants cited more than one method for initial discovery of the frauds

Source: Association of Fraud Examiners ‘2006 Report to the Nation’

Who Discovers Fraud?

Tips (34.2%) By accident (25.4%) Internal Audit (20.2%) Internal controls (19.2%) External Audit (12%) Notification by law enforcement (3.8%)

Occupational Frauds Based On Industry – Sorted By Frequency

Mining Agriculture, Fishing and Hunting Communications/Publishing Arts, Entertain. and Recreation Transportation and Warehousing Wholesale Trade Real Estate Oil and Gas Utilities Construction Service (professional, scientific or technical) Service (general) Education Retail Insurance Health Care Manufacturing Government and Public Admin Banking/Financial Services

Industry

$17,000,000 1 $71,000 8 $225,000 16 $175,000 22 $109,000 27 $1,000,000 30 $200,000 30 $154,000 32 $124,000 34 $500,000 35 $300,000 58 $163,000 60 $100,000 73 $80,000 75 $100,000 78 $160,000 89 $413,000 101 $82,000 119 $258,000 148

Median Loss # Cases

Source: Association of Fraud Examiners ‘2006 Report to the Nation’

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

Examples include: – Embezzlement – Theft of Company Property – T&E Fraud – Vendor Kickbacks – Diversion of Corporate Opportunities – Unauthorized Use of Property

Who Benefits from Fraud?

  • Management Fraud – Acts where the

principal benefits of the act are derived by the company

  • Employee Fraud – Acts where the

principal benefits of the act are derived by the individual

  • Third Party Fraud – Acts where the

principal benefits of the act are derived by an entity outside the

  • rganization

Examples include: – Financial Statement Fraud – Bribery – Price Fixing – Contract Bidding Fraud Examples include: – Duplicate Invoices – Altered Payee on Checks – Commission Schemes – Related Party Transactions – Supplier Fraud – Contractor Fraud

Who’s Involved in Fraudulent Acts?

2.6% 2.2% 1.6% N/A 1% Board of Directors 31.8% 14.9% 57.4% 43% 31% Accounting 34.4% 27.9% 26.4% 17.8% 25.7% Executive / Upper Management 1.9% 13.8% 1.1% 5.6% 6.3% 6.3% 1.9% 3.3% N/A 2.6% 4.5% 7.8%

Corruption

0.6% N/A 0.9% 3.3% Information Technology 1.9% 4.7% 5.6% 3.8% Finance 3.9% 4.7% 11.2% 4.8% Customer Service N/A 18.7% N/A N/A 0.9% 1.9% N/A N/A N/A

Cash Larceny

2.4% 7.6% 1.9% 7.1% 3.3% 5.2% 1.4% 1.4% N/A

Billing Schemes

Expense Reimbursement

Check Tampering Department

0.6% N/A Internal Audit N/A N/A Warehousing / Inventory 14.3% 3.1% Sales 2.6% N/A Research & Development 0.6% 0.8% Purchasing 1.9% N/A Marketing / Public Relations 1.3% 0.8% Manufacturing & Production 1.9% N/A Legal 1.3% 0.8% Human Resources

Source: Association of Fraud Examiners ‘2006 Report to the Nation’

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

Who’s Involved in Fraudulent Acts? (cont’d)

N/A 1.4% 1% 1.1% 3.1% Board of Directors 25% 42.4% 47.6% 11.1% 17.3% Accounting 48.2% 23% 19.4% 23.7% 50% Executive / Upper Management N/A 19.4% N/A 2.2% N/A 1.4% N/A 0.7% N/A 0.7% 0.7% 7.9%

Skimming

N/A N/A 4.2% N/A Information Technology 12.5% 1% 3.2% 8.2% Finance 5.4% 9.7% 12.1% 1% Customer Service 7.9% 17.4% 2.6% 4.2% 1.6% 8.9% 0.5% 1.6% N/A

Non-Cash Misappropriations

1% 11.2% N/A 3.1% 1% 1% 2% 1% N/A

Financial Statement Fraud

Wire Transfer Schemes Payroll Schemes Department

N/A N/A Internal Audit N/A 1% Warehousing / Inventory 7.1% 5.8% Sales N/A 3.9% Research & Development N/A N/A Purchasing 1.8% 1% Marketing / Public Relations N/A 3.9% Manufacturing & Production N/A 2.9% Legal N/A 2.9% Human Resources

Source: Association of Fraud Examiners ‘2006 Report to the Nation’

Identification and Detection

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

Typical Factors - Intentional Financial Distortions

Incentive / Pressure Rationalization Opportunity

P r e v e n t D e t e r D e t e c t E v a l u a t e Mitigate M

  • n

i t

  • r

Typical Factors - Unintentional Financial Distortions

Pressure Complexity Capacity

P r e v e n t D e t e r D e t e c t E v a l u a t e Mitigate M

  • n

i t

  • r
slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

Common Fraud Scenarios: Excerpt of Potentially Material Frauds

Percentage-of-completion

On false estimations

Collusion

To non-existent customers Record fictitious revenue

Recording revenue instead of

liability when cash received

Side agreements

Record revenue when:

Obligation exists to provide

future services

Buyer right-of-return No buyer obligation-to-pay Inability of buyer to pay Goods don’t meet buyer

specifications Record revenue when:

Customer has options to

terminate, void or delay sale

Channel stuffing Bill and hold Holding books open until

after period end

Side agreements Back-Dating sales

agreements and documents Ship goods before sale is complete Recognize unearned revenue Materially overstate revenues

Examples Fraud Risk Sub-Category Common Fraud Scenario

Common Fraud Scenarios: Excerpts of Potentially Material Frauds (cont’d)

Inappropriate methods Excessive lives

Depreciating or amortizing costs too slowly

Bad debts Bad loans Excess and obsolete

inventory

Bad investments

Continuing to carry worthless assets

Start-up costs R&D costs Normal period expenses Overstating goodwill in an

acquisition Improper capitalization Shifting current period expenses to future periods Materially understate expenses

Supplier credits and rebates Kickbacks

On receipt of vendor credits

Like-kind exchanges with

intent to record a gain

Barter transactions

On exchange of similar assets Record fictitious revenue (cont’d) Materially overstate revenues (cont’d)

Examples Fraud Risk Sub-Category Common Fraud Scenario

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

Common Fraud Scenarios: Excerpt of Potentially Material Frauds (cont’d)

Hiding losses under

discontinued operations Misuse of discontinued operations

Mixing gains from recurring

and non-recurring activities

Mingling operating and non-

  • perating income

Restructuring charges vs.

  • perating expenses

Not segregating unusual and non- recurring gains/losses from normal operating results

Bad investments – stock Bad investments -

acquisitions

Fixed assets – under-

performing plants, etc. Failing to record asset impairments to reduce to net- realizable value

Bad debts Bad loans Excessive and obsolete

inventory Failing to record loss contingencies to reduce to net- realizable value Overstating assets Materially misleading presentation of financial position and/or results of

  • perations

Examples Fraud Risk Sub-Category Common Fraud Scenario

Ask these Questions…

Where are the weakest links in the system’s

controls?

What deviations from conventional good accounting

practices are possible?

How are off-line transactions handled and who has

the ability to authorize these transactions?

What would be the simplest way to compromise the

system?

What control features in the system can be

bypassed by higher authorities?

What is the nature of the work environment?

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

Entity Level – Red Flags

  • Internal control gaps, deficiencies,

weaknesses

  • Business results that continually
  • utperform expectations
  • Management override of controls
  • Rapid or significant turnover of

resources – Senior management – Key financial positions – Key employees

  • Inadequate segregation of duties

– Turnover – Cut-backs / lay-offs

  • Unusual end-of-month or end-of-

quarter variations

  • High-level of related-party

transactions

  • Systems are manual and/or

decentralized

  • Employee, customer or vendor

complaints

  • Repeated changes of independent

public accountants

  • Continuous problems with various

regulatory agencies

  • Significant and continuing issues

with reconciling financial statements to underlying support

Process-Level Considerations - Be Skeptical!

  • Always request original documents
  • Ask yourself whether transactions make sense (e.g. too high, low, round, often, rare)
  • Have documents been altered?
  • Look to see where the documents are maintained (e.g. are certain invoices maintained

separately from all other invoices)

  • Is there a “right to audit” relationship with customers and vendors? (if so, have they or

you exercised that right)?

  • Are reconciliations of underlying data to summaries (bank recs, A/R, A/P) always

delayed or do they always involve significant and conflicting reconciling items?

  • Do employees have close personal relationships with vendors?
  • Is there a lack of supporting documentation?
  • Do background checks on employees and vendors identify related parties and DBAs?
  • Does an answer not make sense?
  • Are you avoided more than usual?
  • When asking a relatively simple question, are you unexpectedly referred to someone

high up in the organization?

  • Go with your gut
slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

Monitor Fraud Risk with Computer- Assisted Audit Techniques

Search for duplicate payments Analyze voids and refunds by employee, using

passwords or employee ID numbers

Search for duplicate addresses within files: Payroll,

Vendor, Accounts Receivable Write-offs

Analyze use of override transactions Analyze file maintenance on employee accounts Look for patterns List large payments to individuals

Client Considerations: Managing Intentional and Unintentional Financial Distortions

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

SEC and PCAOB Guidance on Fraud Risk Management

Proposed changes to SEC and PCAOB Internal Control Auditing and Reporting focus on:

Risk management and assessment in general Fraud risk management in particular:

– Audit Committee’s role in the oversight of fraud risk monitoring activities – Risk (and mitigation/testing) of management being able to

  • ver-ride controls to perpetrate financial or financial reporting

fraud – Monitoring activities at all levels of the organization as employees, supervisors and senior management perform their daily activities – and how those are assessed.

What is the main role of General Counsel within your organization’s fraud risk management program?

  • Responsible for management of one or more fraud prevention
  • r detection activities
  • Consulted by others on an “as-needed” basis regarding

development of programs, policies, practices or procedures

  • Reactive only, i.e., involvement limited to investigation,

remediation and/or prosecution / recovery

  • Other

Live Meeting Poll

Changes directly made to this slide will not be displayed in Live Meeting. Edit this slide by selecting Properties in the Live Meeting Presentation menu.

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

What is Fraud Risk Management?

  • Anti-fraud policy
  • Anti-fraud programs
  • Background checks

and screening procedures

  • BoD / AC oversight
  • Code of conduct /

ethics

  • Corporate fraud risk

strategy

  • Corporate compliance

and ethics programs

  • Forensic data analysis
  • Fraud risk assessment
  • Fraud risk brainstorming

sessions

  • Fraud testing plans
  • Investigative unit

resourcing

  • Investigative protocols

and procedures

  • Incident response and

case management

  • Disciplinary,

prosecution and recovery guidelines

  • Preventive / detective

controls and monitoring

  • Self-reporting /

disclosure guidelines

  • Security functions
  • Training and

awareness workshops

  • Whistleblower

programs

Fraud risk management involves the strategies, techniques, programs and controls utilized by an organization to evaluate, mitigate and monitor its risk to fraud and misconduct. This includes, but is not limited to:

Entity-Level Considerations: Control Environment

Control Environment

  • Sets tone of organization, which

influences control consciousness of its people

  • Foundation for all other

components of internal control

  • Factors include:

– Integrity and ethical values – Commitment to competence – Board of Directors and Audit Committee – Management’s philosophy and

  • perating style

– Assignment of authority and responsibility – Human resource policies and practices

COSO: Internal Control – Integrated Framework

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

Entity-Level Considerations: Anti-Fraud Program and Controls

Prevention

  • Tone at the top
  • Value system (“Code of Ethics

/ Conduct”)

  • Positive workplace

environment

  • Hiring, promoting and

retaining appropriate employees

  • Training and awareness

programs

  • Confirmation / affirmation of

Code of Conduct or Ethics

  • Ombudsman programs
  • Whistleblower programs
  • Incident response / case

management processes

  • Investigative procedures
  • Discipline, prosecution and

recovery guidelines Prevention

  • Tone at the top
  • Value system (“Code of Ethics

/ Conduct”)

  • Positive workplace

environment

  • Hiring, promoting and

retaining appropriate employees

  • Training and awareness

programs

  • Confirmation / affirmation of

Code of Conduct or Ethics

  • Ombudsman programs
  • Whistleblower programs
  • Incident response / case

management processes

  • Investigative procedures
  • Discipline, prosecution and

recovery guidelines

Detection

  • Identification and

measurement of fraud risk (“fraud risk assessment”)

  • Processes and procedures

to mitigate identified fraud risk

  • Effective internal controls

at entity and process level

  • On-going monitoring

activities

  • Computer-assisted audit

techniques

  • Investigation of:

– Internal control weaknesses / breaches – Non-response to Code confirmation / affirmation – Reported issues

Detection

  • Identification and

measurement of fraud risk (“fraud risk assessment”)

  • Processes and procedures

to mitigate identified fraud risk

  • Effective internal controls

at entity and process level

  • On-going monitoring

activities

  • Computer-assisted audit

techniques

  • Investigation of:

– Internal control weaknesses / breaches – Non-response to Code confirmation / affirmation – Reported issues Deterrence

  • “Active” oversight by Board

and/or Audit Committee – Fraud risk assessment and related measures – Code confirmation / affirmation process – Management’s involvement in financial reporting process and

  • verride of control

– Process to receive, retain and treat complaints of fraud / unethical conduct – Internal and external audit effectiveness

  • Internal audit

– Evaluation of adequacy / effectiveness of internal controls

  • Disciplinary examples

Deterrence

  • “Active” oversight by Board

and/or Audit Committee – Fraud risk assessment and related measures – Code confirmation / affirmation process – Management’s involvement in financial reporting process and

  • verride of control

– Process to receive, retain and treat complaints of fraud / unethical conduct – Internal and external audit effectiveness

  • Internal audit

– Evaluation of adequacy / effectiveness of internal controls

  • Disciplinary examples

Which one of the following statements best describes your

  • rganization’s fraud risk strategy?
  • Very well defined - strategy exists to proactively identify fraud risks and

corresponding anti-fraud programs and controls are agreed upon, monitored and measured by Board and senior management on an on-going basis

  • Defined - no formal strategy, but anti-fraud programs and controls and are

agreed upon, monitored and measured by Board and senior management

  • n an on-going basis
  • Less defined - no formal fraud risk strategy, but some anti-fraud programs

and controls exist

  • Reactive only – Fraud risk management is limited to reacting to allegations
  • f fraud or misconduct.
  • Undefined - no formal fraud risk strategy or anti-fraud programs and

controls

  • Don’t know

Live Meeting Poll

Changes directly made to this slide will not be displayed in Live Meeting. Edit this slide by selecting Properties in the Live Meeting Presentation menu.

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24 Highlights and Preview Results: Protiviti’s Fraud Risk Management Survey (2007)

  • Only one-half of F1000 indicated their fraud risk strategy is very well

defined, suggesting room for improvement in many organizations

  • More than half of organizations do NOT include anti-fraud overview or

definition of fraud in policy

  • High percentage of organizations have no plan in place when fraud

reported

– One-third of F1000 have no documented protocols and procedures for investigations – One-half of F1000 have no incident response plan.

  • Key challenges for managing fraud risk, two-thirds indicated:

– Fraud not considered “high risk” – “No fraud here” mentality – Or, “don’t know”

Accounting Issues to Watch in 2007

New proxy rules will have companies summarizing, under counsel’s scrutiny, more

information about executive compensation and inclusion within the proxy. Companies may discover things that heretofore had either been un-reported or mis- categorized.

“Mop-up” on stock compensation as it relates to back-dating. Ongoing issues on either options or their replacements/successors: deferred

compensation plans, restricted stock, etc. Executive Executive Compensation Compensation

Again, caused by a new accounting pronouncement. As companies approach placement of pension numbers (more of them) on balance

sheet, there may be some who discover that what they previously reflected may not conform to the old rules (especially amounts that should be in comprehensive income, tax-effected, time-sensitive valuations, etc.). Pension Accounting Pension Accounting

Advent of FIN 48 will have companies focus on accounting, including past

accounting) for uncertain tax positions, such as: – aggressive positions – “audit roulette” – transfer pricing – the “s” word [shelters] Income Taxes Income Taxes

slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

Areas of Focus / Key Take-Aways

1.

Fraud risk assessment

2.

Financial reporting risk profile

3.

Entity-level review

4.

Hotline and other reporting mechanisms

Thank you for your participation

Look for your advanced copy of today’s program summary in the next few weeks. For more information on the Web Conference series visit www.foley.com/webconference To receive a free subscription to InsideCounsel, please visit www.insidecounsel.com/freeoffer.

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

Thank you for your participation

Jim Pajakowski (James.Pajakowski@protiviti.com) Mark Plichta (mplichta@foley.com)