Subject category:
Strategy and General Management
Published by:
IBS Case Development Center
Length: 21 pages
Data source: Published sources
Topics:
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA); Growth strategies; Sarbanes-Oxley Act; Security laws; Oversight Board; Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB); Generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP); Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS); Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB); Accounting scandals; Enron; Accounting Standards Board; Securities Exchange Commission (SEC); Challenges for AICPA
Share a link:
https://casecent.re/p/66452
Write a review
|
No reviews for this item
This product has not been used yet
Abstract
By the turn of the 21st century, due to a series of accounting scandals in companies like Enron and Worldcom in the US, Federal Public Policy makers felt that the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants'' (AICPA''s) authority to set accounting standards and their enforcement should be transferred to a government empowered body. Subsequently, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act established the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), which has jurisdiction over every area of CPA practice in relation to public companies. However, for the majority of practising CPA?s, who serve privately held business and individuals, AICPA retains its authority to set accounting standards, enforce professional ethics and monitor the quality of the firm practices. Since 2003, AICPA has begun many initiatives, which include programmes that would help in implementing the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and rebuild investor confidence. The case, while highlighting the growth of AICPA, offers scope to discuss the institution''s challenges against the backdrop of major accounting scandals that have rocked corporate America.
About
Abstract
By the turn of the 21st century, due to a series of accounting scandals in companies like Enron and Worldcom in the US, Federal Public Policy makers felt that the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants'' (AICPA''s) authority to set accounting standards and their enforcement should be transferred to a government empowered body. Subsequently, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act established the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), which has jurisdiction over every area of CPA practice in relation to public companies. However, for the majority of practising CPA?s, who serve privately held business and individuals, AICPA retains its authority to set accounting standards, enforce professional ethics and monitor the quality of the firm practices. Since 2003, AICPA has begun many initiatives, which include programmes that would help in implementing the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and rebuild investor confidence. The case, while highlighting the growth of AICPA, offers scope to discuss the institution''s challenges against the backdrop of major accounting scandals that have rocked corporate America.