Tag: Fraud Case Study

Australian Wheat Board AWB Scandal Case Study Essay
Case Study of Australian Wheat Board AWB Scandal Criminology Overview with Simple Essay. This essay will talk about the main organizational shape and motives of the Australian Wheat Board scandal. Hereafter referred to as AWB. This used to be a scandal of international magnitude, whereby AWB paid tremendous economic bribes to Iraq officers in blatant non-compliance with the guidelines set out in the Oil-for-Food program. Which used to hook up by using the United Nations. Moreover, this essay will talk about the proof introduced in the “Cole Royal Commission”. An inquiry was set up to look at the habits of numerous Australian organizations regarding the oil-for-food program. AWB a governmental corporation used to be the principal employer beneath scrutiny.

Here are the articles to explain, Criminology Overview on a Case Study of Australian Wheat Board AWB Scandal Essay

This essay will also examine the regulatory failures that facilitated corruption at the Governmental level to occur. Which remained predominantly unfettered for a protracted period. Incidences of governmental and corporate corruption and deviant behavior. Which often involve considerable numbers of active or passive participants, and are seldom the result of opportunism alone. But are far more often insidious and methodical by nature.

The AWB case is a clear illustration of governmental corporate culture and demonstrates a plethora of systemic regulatory and policy failures. All of which further influenced and defined the AWB’s decision-making process and unethical posture. Lastly, the aforementioned material will discuss commencing with a summary and literature review. And comprehensive case analysis to demonstrate the ubiquitous nature of this particular type of Governmental crime. Which sits under the broad ambiguous umbrella of ‘white-collar’ crime.

Case Summary

Contemporary society in a globalized world demonstrates an almost overwhelming abundance of criminal activity, in particular, ‘white-collar crime’. However, numerous types of research demonstrate that not all crimes and criminals stand dealt with in the same manner. In fact, on closer examination, research has suggested that there is an innate tendency for specific crimes. And criminals to positively overlook, typically these being crimes of the powerful, primary example is that of the AWB scandal.

The questionable Utilitarian approach of “seeking the greatest good for the greatest number of people”. Found assumed by the AWB and its Board, analyze in the Cole Enquiry Report. The Cole Report stimulated awareness of the fundamental deficiencies in both corporate governance and culture. Which play a significant function in permitting or precluding the occurrence of unethical conduct. Furthermore, the inaction demonstrated by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade hereafter referred to as DFAT, and the Australian Federal Government in investigating claims against AWB further highlights the systemic failures that permitted AWB’s unethical behavior to prevail.

Key causes

The key causes of, and major influences on unethical behavior determined from the Cole report are:
- The AWB organization’s strong profit-driven demand to meet financial or business objectives. And the promotion of tolerance for illegal/criminal acts (white-collar crime)
- A culture of “getting the job done”, where corrupt acts stand justified under the proviso. That the greatest good will achieve for the company
- A lack of control mechanisms and moral agents in both corporate and public sector governance
- The implication of privatization of Australian rural entities
- Policy and Regulatory design and the lack of adherence and implementation
- Governmental oversight of wheat growing monopoly, international monopolization
- Conduct of foreign policy – misconduct United Nations Oil-for-Food-Program – International Trade Sanctions.
One crucial aspect to consider is that Australia is a signatory to both the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. And the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Officials in International Business Transactions. Australia’s interpretation of the aforementioned United Nations Convention is “The Criminal Code Amendment (Bribery of Foreign Public Officials) Act”, referred to as the “Bribery Act”. Which is the Australian Parliament’s legislative implementation of the latter convention.

Review for Australian Wheat

It is common knowledge that conventional criminals consider it normal to utilize any instrument or weapon to perpetrate a crime. Therefore, it would also seem normal for organizations to utilize the organization itself to acquire money from ‘victims’ by way of its deviant misbehavior. These ‘victims’ are varied and may be customers or members of the organization themselves. This is a prime example of what refer to as the organizational weapon. The organization is for white-collar criminals as the gun or knife is for conventional criminals.

Harris and Hartman (2002), state that an organization’s culture consists of the values, norms, and attitudes of the people who intrinsically make up the organization. Moreover, the stated values demonstrate what is important; whereas norms reveal expected behavior; attitudes expose the mindset of individuals. Therefore, organizational culture informs people about what is important in the organization, expected behaviors, and how to observe things. Culture is a part of organizational life that influences the behavior, attitudes, and overall effectiveness of all members of an organization.

Further to this

Daboub & Coulton (2002) stressed the importance of organizations selecting business partners. Who share a comparable commitment to both the social and environmental practices and ethical commitment of the company. They further stated that this would assist in ensuring that the organization does not place itself in compromising situations. Due to unethical acts perpetrated by those companies with whom they have working associations. Robbins (2000) argued that today’s global business environment can lead to such problematic associations. And stated the need for organizations to take a fervent pro-active stance to further ensure. That the “codes of conduct” under which they operate are transparent, implicit, and adhered to by their associates.

Furthermore, the political influence on large governmental or privatized organizations. The desire not to over-regulate can also be very influential. Politicians are mindful of the detrimental effect that heavy regulation can have on businesses that are often generous economic contributors. The will of governments not to introduce laws that hinder corporate activity stands evidenced by the lack of substantial powers. And penalties (specifically prison terms) available to regulatory bodies, the lack of resources available to enforce those provisions already available. The government’s commitment to regularly review any legislation that may impact adversely on the competition.

Case Analysis

The United Nations Oil-for-Food program involved not only companies but also governments. However, various activities by the Howard Government were outside the provisions of reference of the Cole Enquiry. Which was fundamentally sanctioned to examine the actions of the companies specifically mentioned in the 2004 United Nations report on the Oil-for-Food program. Furthermore, Cole was unable to examine the extent to which government policy during that period encouraged or discouraged bribes from the AWB, or equally whether Australian Government Ministers should have enquired further, especially considering that warnings were received that something was inappropriate. Or indeed how the government managed its relationship with the AWB throughout this protracted process.

To illustrate further, Henry Bosch former chairperson of Transparency International Australia. Also one of Australia’s most experienced business regulators, argued that somebody somewhere must have known what was going on. Bosch stated to the Ethical Corporation that he suspected, that “the executives involved in winning contracts. Were a bit less careful than they should have been regarding the status of payments existing demanded”. The AWB’s justification for this deviant and criminal behavior was to argue. That it simply was not aware of the payments. Moreover, numerous critics pointed out that it was virtually impossible for government Ministers and various. Other officials to not have known, especially because the fees paid to the contractors selected by Saddam Hussein’s bureaucrats would have been noticeably and remarkably high the AWB’s responses raised far more questions than answers.

Further to this

The Cole Enquiry argued that the AWB’s structure was primarily to blame. For example; the company was responsible for the marketing and exporting of one of Australia’s major export commodities. Moreover, all Australian wheat exports passed through the offices of the so-called ‘single-desk’ export authority. Which was heavily vested in the AWB. The ‘single-desk’ export authority was established in 1915 to assist Australian wheat growers to get their products to global export markets. Therefore dealing with the AWB was a major factor for all businesses involved in Australia’s powerful expansive wheat growing sector.

In addition to this, Iraq was a massive market and there was a need for the organization to justify its often-criticized monopoly on Australia’s global wheat exports, particularly in the face of strong competition from the United States and other suppliers. Numerous critics observed that since the AWB was privatized in 1998. And consequently listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) in 2001 the AWB had noticeably become far more extreme. Than its former bureaucratic culture might have previously endorsed.

Established

Furthermore, a United Nations report on October 27, 2005, established that the Australian Wheat Board (AWB) had paid $US221.7 ($AU300) million in bribes to the Iraqi Government between 1999 and 2003 under the United Nations Oil-for-Food program. Through this mode of immoral and illegal behavior, the AWB defrauded their shareholders out of their financial investments and profits as well as causing irreparable damage to Australia’s trade reputation globally. Further to this, the United Nations report on the inquiry into corruption in the Oil-for-Food Program, led by Paul Volcker, revealed that 2200 companies participating in the program were misappropriating funds from the United Nations accounts to redistribute them to the Iraqi government but none of the magnitude of the AWB.

Moreover, AWB was a company with a high profile and faced serious legal problems. Therefore the AWB was likely to draw attention from both the Australian and worldwide public and media. Consequently, with the release of the report and mass media and public attention, the AWB was facing a dire crisis. Due to this in February 2006, the AWB managing director Andrew Lindberg resigned after demonstrating outrage. Throughout the press and collective Australian wheat growers.

Scandal

The AWB scandal has left an indelible black mark on the AWB’s reputation throughout the world and puts into question how reliable it was and how well suited it was to represent and market nearly all of Australia’s wheat to the overseas marketplace. In addition, the AWB was sued for AU$1 billion in compensation by collective wheat farmers in North America for alleged, bribery and other corrupt activities to corner the grain markets internationally. The effect of the scandal resulted in Iraq refusing to purchase wheat from the AWB and the consequential loss of a substantial overseas market for Australian wheat growers.

In an attempt to minimize damage to the Howard Government’s reputation, Prime Minister Howard launched an official inquiry in November of 2006, into the payment of bribes by the AWB Ltd, formerly known as the Australian Wheat Board, to the Saddam Hussein regime, this inquiry essentially produced a whitewash report designed for several key purposes. Foremost, was the need to clear Prime Minister John Howard and his leading ministers of any political and/or criminal responsibility for the payment of bribes to Iraqi bureaucrats. Another critical concern was to fend off United States agricultural interests that were demanding the dismantling of the AWB’s wheat export monopoly as part of a ruthless trade war.

To illustrate further

It was paramount for the Howard government to prevent any examination of the motives behind Canberra’s participation in the U.S occupation of Iraq. Therefore, in an obvious act of scapegoating, inquiry Commissioner Cole singled out 11 former AWB executives and one ex-BHP executive for blame and the possibility of criminal prosecutions. Sanctioned by the Howard government the mass media immediately did its best to assist this diversionary exercise by dubbing these 12 individuals the ‘dirty-dozen’ in newspaper headlines around the country, demonstrating the great measures that politicians will take to cover their corruption.

Howard’s use of Cole, a trusted lawyer who had previously conducted a witch-hunting inquiry against building workers on behalf of Prime Minister Howard wreaks of the unfettered abuse of governmental power. It was therefore not surprising that Cole attributed the payment of nearly $AU300 million in bribes under the United Nations 1996-2003 so-called Oil-for-Food Program solely to a handful of 12 individuals. Moreover, Cole stated that these 12 individuals’ deviant corrupt behavior developed from a closed culture of superiority. And impregnability within the organization. Which had existed produced by the AWB’s 67-year monopoly and stronghold over all Australian wheat exports.

In addition to this

Cole stated that it was obvious that the AWB’s unethical policy in Iraq was “to do whatever is necessary” to retain the $AU500 million in annual wheat sales. And further stated that was precisely what the Howard Government’s policy was at the time. The substantial and comprehensive documents tabled at the Cole inquiry confirm that the AWB. Which was a government agency up until 1999 and then subsequently privatized continue to operate and receive Canberra’s protection. Almost as a virtual arm of the Howard Government throughout the lead-up to the March 2003 U.S. led invasion of Iraq

Conclusion

The AWB scandal raises significant questions and concerns about the Australian policy-making processes. And the attitudes of the government ministers involved.

Reference;

It Retrieved from: https://www.ukessays.com/essays/criminology/australian-wheat-board-scandal.php?vref=1
Image Source from Photo by Warren Wong on Unsplash.

Criminology Overview on a Case Study of Australian Wheat Board AWB Scandal Essay.
August 14, 2022
Whiskey Ring American Public Scandal Case Study

Case Study of Whiskey Ring American Public Scandal Accounting Overview. This is actually by many exclusive sources, this is due to the fact it should no longer destroy due to the fact of its robust political connections. The Whiskey Ring was once a team of whiskey distillers, (they have stood dissolved in 1875). And they made secret plans to defraud the federal authorities of taxes.

Here are the articles to explain, Accounting Overview on a Case Study of Whiskey Ring American Public Scandal!

They operated mainly in St. Louis, Mo., Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and a Chicago. The Whiskey Ring pursued Internal Revenue officials and other people involved in the scandal in Washington to keep the liquor profits for themselves. Benjamin H. Bristow, (secretary of the Treasury) had organized an investigation that stood meant to be a secret. And this idea exposed the ring meaning the results ended in 238 indictments and 110 convictions.

Claiming that the idea was illegal, the tax money (which was being held illegally) was being used in the Republican Party’s national campaign for President Ulysses S. Grant to re-election, which raised suspicion for the public. Although President Grant does not suspect doing this, his private secretary (Orville E. Babcock) was pointed out in the secret plan but ended up being declared guilty after President Grant testified his innocence. Was the Whiskey Ring a public scandal? Yes, the Whiskey Ring was once a public scandal.

Case Reviews 01

There existed many people involved in The Whiskey Ring scandal. At the time of the scandal, the president of the United States (for Visa) was President Ulysses S. Grant. Grant didn’t know about The Whiskey Ring Scandal, but he was responsible for giving jobs to many old friends who ended up being dishonest. President Ulysses S. Grant (original name Hiram Ulysses Grant), was born on April 27, 1822, in Point Pleasant. He graduated from West Point in 1843, where he knows as a skilled horseman, but he was not so good of a student.

Grant existed authorized as a lieutenant in the 4th U.S. Infantry, and he was then stationed at Jefferson Barracks, Missouri which was near St. Louis. After Grant existed done with his schooling years, he met his spouse Julia Dent. Which was the sister of one of his West Point classmates. After seeing action in the Mexican-American War, President Grant was to return to Missouri and then married Julia, (his spouse) in August of 1848. The couple had four children together. In the early years of their marriage, President Grant was assigned to a series of remote army posts, and some of them were on the West Coast which parted and eventually separated him from his family.

Case Reviews 02

He then resigned from the military in 1854. Grant stood introduced to the White House during the Reconstruction era. As president, Grant tried his hardest to keep a peace bond between the North and South territories. He also supported ideas from former confederate leaders and meanwhile was attempting to help and protect freed slaves’ civil rights. In the year of 1870, Amendment number 15 was ratified. This amendment gave black men the right to vote. Grant then signed legislation to limit the activities of white terrorist groups, like the Ku Klux Klan, which used violence to scare blacks and prevent them from voting in elections.

At various times in the chaos, the president stationed federal troops throughout the South to keep law and order. The highly judgmental group involved in the scandal charged that Grant’s actions violated states’ rights, while others knew and supported the fact that the president did not do enough to protect freedmen. In 1877, after leaving the White House, President Grant and his family pursued a two-year trip around the world. While they were abroad, they met with dignitaries and cheering crowds in many of the countries they visited.

Case Reviews 03

At the Republican National Convention in 1880, a group of delegates voted to nominate Grant for president again; but James Garfield (a U.S. congressman from Ohio (1831-1881), ultimately earned the nomination instead of Grant. After those events, Grant went on to win the general election and become the 20th U.S. president. Grant was the U.S. commander of the Union armies of the American Civil War from the years 1864-1865 and the 18th president of the United States. As stated in the article “Reconstruction and Corruption in the Grant Administration”, “When Grant took office he admitted that he lacked political experience.

In his inaugural address, he said, “The office has come to me unsought.” Grant strongly believed in racial equality, not only in the South but also in the North. In his inaugural address, he spoke in favor of the “security of a person, property, and free religious and political opinion in every part of our common country.” Grant took no action as president to enforce this belief, however, and his motto guided him: “Let us have peace.’” Grant had a very powerful presence and did his best to be a good president. Next, United States 30th Secretary of the Treasury Benjamin H. Bristow, (was an American lawyer, the first Solicitor General, a union military officer, reformer, civil rights advocate, and a republican party politician).

Case Reviews 04

Also, Orville E. Babcock, (who stood acquitted through the personal intervention of the president), 4th, John McDonald (former senator), Last, John B. Henderson, (Co-author of the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and government official and the United States Senator from Missouri). These individuals were also a part of many more events throughout history. The Whiskey Ring was fast to include hundreds of government officials and also people in the liquor industry throughout the Midwest.

Also, the Whiskey Ring stood revealed in May 1875, with its center in St. Louis. The Whiskey Ring scandal had a very simple idea. According to the article named, “Secrets of the Great Whiskey Ring”, “Here, in very simple terms, is how the scam worked: Sometime around 1870, government agents charged with keeping an eye on how much whiskey was being made, arranged to ignore a certain percentage of the distillate in return for cash in the amount of roughly half the money the distillery would have paid in taxes.

Case Reviews 05

When ‘straight’ tax collectors who were not part of the ring were due to call, the distillers existed forewarned to “play safe” and pay up. Whiskey distillers paid federal agents with massive bribes. In return, the federal agents helped the distillers evade federal taxes on the whiskey they produced and sold. Whiskey was supposed to be taxed at 70 cents per gallon. But the distillers could pay off agents involved in the ring for 35 cents per gallon. The ‘crooked whiskey’ was stamped as having its tax paid by the agents and the distiller made a great profit.” The scandal itself was a group of public officials who defrauded the federal government of liquor taxes.

According to Andrew Wanko (Public Historian), “Millions of dollars in annual taxes stood being siphoned off in an elaborate scandal. The Whiskey Ring involved hundreds of individuals across half the nation. Nearly half of those involved worked though St. Louis, with the rest spread across major cities including Chicago, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, New Orleans, and Washington D.C. Among the Conspirators, were storekeepers, distillers, politicians, reporters, U.S. Treasury workers, and IRS agents. The corruption stretched to General Orville E. Babcock (Private Secretary), to President Grant and a Whiskey Ring plotter.”

Case Reviews 06

From 1870 to 1875, the Whiskey Ring was still in effect. Also, many other significant events happened around the time of The Whiskey Ring, which may have had an impact on this scandal. The first event that happened was The Franco-Prussian War. Bismarck’s influence on the German states lead to a year-long conflict in which France stood defeated. Another event that occurred in 1870, would be when congress adopts the Fifteenth Amendment.

This very much had an impact on The Whiskey Ring. The 15th Amendment of the United States Constitution forbids all governments in the United States from denying a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen’s color or race. The 15th amendment was ratified on February 3rd of 1870. What is interesting about this is that there was no mention made of gender. And it then took another 50 years to guarantee that women had a right to vote, with the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920. Another example is John D. Rockefeller.

In 1870, he formed the Standard Oil of Ohio company. By 1890, Standard Oil controlled 88% of oil in the U.S. John D. Rockefeller was a chairman and major shareholder, founder, and the company he worked with made him the richest man in history. By the year 1871, British Columbia became a part of Canada. Last, finally recognized as an imperial territory by Britain, Britain was named British Columbia in 1858, and became part of Canada in 1871.

Case Reviews 07

There was a lot of background talk about The Whiskey Ring. This includes the rumors. An example would be that Orville E. Babcock stood acquitted through the personal intervention of the president. Many people believed that The Whiskey Ring was part of a plot to finance the Republican party by fraud but this rumor stood never proven. There were also various rumors that people involved in The Whiskey Ring in St. Louis were openly advertising that the prosecutors would not press until the end because if they were they would reach the white house.

The rumors about The Whiskey ring were an issue. They were causing problems. Due to President Grant’s incompetency and the other scandals within his administration, by the end of the year 1874, President Grant was no longer popular among his people. Although he was thinking about running for a third term. He had once told congress that he does not prepare for office at all. People within his administration were without hope, as a result of some of the people he had chosen to work with him.

Case Reviews 08

The rumors of The Whiskey Ring were coming to the truth. And many people at the White House stood relieved when Browstow stood appointed to the Treasury. Bristow was a very well-respected man. One of his first acts of Treasury was to grant money to highly sort out the alleged corruption within the Internal Revenue Service. With the help of news and paperman in St. Louis, Treasury (Bristow), was about to crack the ring wide open. During The Whiskey ring, the government stood specifically affected by the Republican party. Which contributed to the national weariness of Reconstruction which had ended after Grant’s presidency with the compromise of 1877.

The Whiskey Ring was a cause-and-effect event, just like many. Soon after the Civil War, taxes stood raised to some very high levels. In some cases, the price of liquor stood raised to eight times the price. Meaning people had to pay way more than the normal price. Grant does not directly involve in the scandal but his reputation stood damaged, as a result. The scandal, along with other abuses of power by the Republican party, contributed to the national weariness of Reconstruction, which ended after Grant’s presidency with the Compromise of 1877.

Reference;

It is Retrieved from: https://www.ukessays.com/essays/politics/whiskey-ring-scandal-6918.php?vref=1
Image Source from Bribery Scandal of the 1870s. https://www.thoughtco.com/the-whiskey-ring-5220735.

Accounting Overview on a Case Study of Whiskey Ring American Public Scandal.

August 14, 2022
Caterpillar Inc CAT Tax Fraud Scandal Case Study

Case Study of Caterpillar Inc CAT Tax Fraud Scandal Accounting Overview. Caterpillar Inc. previously (1925–present) as understood inventory image CAT, With 2020 income and revenues of $51.0 billion. It is an American Fortune one hundred business enterprise that designs, develops, engineers, manufactures, markets, and sells machinery, engines, economic products, and insurance plan to clients by using an international supplier network. It is the world’s greatest construction equipment manufacturer.

Here are the articles to explain, Accounting Overview on a Case Study of Caterpillar Inc CAT Tax Fraud Scandal

Accounting fraud is the manipulation of financial statements to benefit the business financially or to create a false appearance of financial health. In the situation of Caterpillar Inc. (CAT) – a manufacturer of heavy construction and mining equipment, diesel-electric locomotives, diesel, and natural gas engines, and industrial gas turbines. The payment of federal income taxes on their earnings stood avoided to boost the company’s financial status. Also, Saving the company billions of dollars and keeping its stock price high.

Caterpillar, 2020

CAT 2020, having more than 500 locations worldwide – including the Americas, Asia Pacific, Europe, Africa, and the Middle East – is vast in size and an economic standpoint, with sales and revenues of $53.9 billion in the year 2019. However, a lawsuit against Caterpillar Inc. for inadequate tax disclosure greatly impacted the company from the period of 2013 to 2017.

Drucker, 2017

A great portion of Caterpillar Inc.’s investigation focused on a Switzerland-based parts subsidiary, known as Caterpillar SARL (CSARL). Over 13 years, the company had cut its tax bills by approximately $2.4 billion. Through the taxation of its profits in Switzerland. Where the tax rate had not reached nearly as great as the U.S. top corporate rate of 35%.

Grayson, 2018

Although the vast majority of CAT’s sales occurred in the U.S., 85% of the company’s part sales stood recorded to CSARL (Grayson, 2018). The company’s scheme had stood revealed when an anonymous employee, later revealed as tax-department employee Daniel Schlicksup, threatened to tip off the International Revenue Service.

He accused the company of using what he referred to as the “Swiss structure” and the “Bermuda structure”. Through the transportation of their profits to offshore shell companies to avoid the payment of U.S. taxes. Which were incomparable to the effective tax rate as low as 4% in Switzerland and Bermuda.

Reilly, 2018

From February 12, 2013, to March 1, 2017, the lawsuit sought class-action status and stood dismissed without prejudice. Which gave Societe Generale the authority to bring it again if it existed thought to be necessary.

Stempel, 2018

On March 2, 2017, law enforcement officials, including the IRS, raided three of the company’s Illinois-based facilities, confiscating electronic records and documents. The day following these raids, the lawsuit against Caterpillar Inc. stood filed on March 3, 2017.

Newswires, 2018

As CAT stood seen to have violated the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Which protected investors by reviewing legislative audit requirements and improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures, the lawsuit was put in order. Due to this, stakeholders – including stockbrokers, creditors, and customers – feared a loss. Affects the stock price and the corporation overall negatively.

Drucker, 2017

Caterpillar Inc.’s stock market value sank over $2.4 billion after the company’s facilities and headquarters in Peoria, Illinois was raided by the Department of Commerce, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, and International Revenue Service a total of three times. Following the report by Leslie A. Robinson, an accounting professor at the Tuck School of Business, in the New York Times. CAT’s shares were down by another 3%, causing the dollar value of the scandal to be approximately $2.5 billion.

Yu, 2017

As a result of the case, David Schlicksup, the global tax strategy manager, accountant, and whistleblower of this case, expect to receive about 30% of what the government can recover.

Stempel, 2018

As a result of IRS audits of its 2013 to 2017 tax returns, Caterpillar Inc. faces $2.3 billion worth of back taxes and penalties. CAT’s lawsuit is a reflection of the government’s capability of finding businesses that manipulate. Their financial operations improve their financial status. As GAAP Principles and legislations enacted to protect stakeholders stand often violated, operations. Such as the International Revenue Service, the Department of Commerce, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Are very effective to detect and inspecting these issues. Caterpillar Inc.’s manipulation is just another example of the significance of auditors. And a reminder to other businesses of the necessity, to be honest, and cooperative with the GAAP Principles and accounting legislations.

Caterpillar Inc CAT Tax Fraud Scandal Case Study; Photo by Sindy Süßengut on Unsplash.

August 14, 2022