Search results

This case is based on using the fraud triangle, theoretical aspects like rationalization and motivation for understanding the financial pressures and corporate greed lead to accounting fraud. Building on the corporate governance’s weakness, the case explores the challenges and the changes that the company has to make to survive.

The case study has been entirely based on published resources. The case explores out the reasons why the companies commit accounting fraud using the motivations, financial pressures and the opportunities exploited due to a weak governance system.

The case deals with a RMB 2.2bn accounting fraud at Luckin Coffee Inc. (L.K.), a US-listed Chinese company, which led to a steep fall in its share price by more than 80% in April 2020. The company’s CEO had to resign in light of the accounting fraud, which involved fabricating the transactions in 2019, the same year it got listed on the NASDAQ stock exchange. The case is a classic example of greed, corporate ambition and flaws in the corporate governance that led to the fraud while framing a course of action for the company moving forward. The case allows the learners to dive deep into the facts to find out why the fraud happened and its repercussions for the company and its various stakeholders. The case can be useful in Accounting, Corporate governance or Ethics modules for both undergraduate and postgraduate students.

The case can be used for both postgraduate and undergraduate financial accounting or corporate governance modules or the executive development programmes explicitly dealing with ethical challenges and accounting fraud.

This case involves a real-life Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Sir Allen Stanford, a man who bribed Antiguan regulators and a certified public accountant firm to perpetuate his scam. The case includes the process of making victims whole, which involves a court-initiated clawback process: taking back payouts to investors or charities to redistribute the funds to other fraud victims who did not receive their fair payout. Students apply theory learned in an upper-level fraud or forensic accounting course. Finally, the case addresses the aftermath of a fraud scheme.

Ponzi schemes – one of the most common types of investment fraud – have caused investors to lose billions of dollars. Because of the prevalence of Ponzi schemes and the ramifications to investors, it is important for business students to understand the nature of these schemes and to learn how to recognize them. As future business professionals, students will be charged with recognizing a Ponzi scheme early and uncovering it before investors lose their investments.

This case is designed for upper-level undergraduate students or graduate students taking a fraud or forensic accounting course, which is best introduced after professors cover Ponzi schemes and also these concepts: fraud triangle, fraud diamond and fraud red flags.

The impact of corporate governance on internal controls and quality of financial disclosures.

Analysis of a real financial fraud event for a non-US multinational corporation. The case relies on accessing and analyzing annual reports for the firm, both before and after the fraud. Additional information on industry governance characteristics are provided in the case itself so that students can compare the firm to the industry.

This business case is centered on the analysis of Schneider Electric, a French multinational corporation, which had to restate their financial statements in 2011 because of accounting fraud. Following this event, Schneider undertook major changes in their board structure to improve internal control mechanisms. This pedagogical business case familiarizes students with international differences in ownership and board structure and emphasizes potential corporate governance changes after financial statement fraud.

Managerial finance, corporate finance, international finance, auditing. This case is more appropriate for upper-level undergraduate and graduate courses.

In 2011, Sherry Hunt was a vice president and chief underwriter at CitiMortgage headquarters in the United States. For years she had been witnessing fraud, as the company bought billions of dollars in mortgage loans from external lenders that did not meet Citi credit policy and sold them to government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). This resulted in Citi selling to GSEs such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pools of loans that were considerably defective and thus likely to default. Citi had also approved hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of defective mortgage files for U.S. Federal Housing Administration insurance. After reporting the mortgage defects in regular reports, notifying and working closely with her direct supervisor (who was subsequently asked to leave Citi after alerting the chairman of the board to these issues) to stop the purchase of defective loans, leaving anonymous tips on the FBI's and the Department of Housing and Urban Development's websites, and receiving threats from two of her superiors who demanded that she change the results of her quality control unit's reports, the shy and conflict-avoidant Hunt had to decide who she should tell about the fraud, and how.

The case gives students the opportunity to recommend how Hunt should proceed based on their analysis of the stakeholders involved. To aid instructors, the case includes Kellogg-produced videos of Hunt—the only on-camera interviews she has ever given—explaining what happened after she reported the fraud to Citi HR and, later, the U.S. Department of Justice. Within the case, students are also briefly exposed to legislation and bodies pertinent to whistle-blowing in the United States, including the Dodd-Frank Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the SEC Office of the Whistleblower.

This case won the 2014 competition for Outstanding Case on Anti-Corruption, supported by the Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME), an initiative of the UN Global Compact.

• Analyze stakeholders' motivations to prepare counter-arguments to the resistance one might encounter when reporting unethical behavior

• Write a script for who to tell, how, and why

• Discuss how incentive structures, management, and culture play roles in promoting or hindering ethical behavior in organizations

• Identify behaviors that help a whistle-blower be effective

• Gain experience resolving ethical dilemmas in which two values may conflict, such as professional duty and personal ethics

Analyze stakeholders' motivations to prepare counter-arguments to the resistance one might encounter when reporting unethical behavior

Write a script for who to tell, how, and why

Discuss how incentive structures, management, and culture play roles in promoting or hindering ethical behavior in organizations

Identify behaviors that help a whistle-blower be effective

Gain experience resolving ethical dilemmas in which two values may conflict, such as professional duty and personal ethics

The learning outcomes are as follows: Students/participants can understand the type of financial fraud pertaining to the case; Students/participants can analyse the case using the fraud triangle perspective; students/participants can describe detection/anticipation strategies to prevent such acts from taking place in the future; students/participants can evaluate the case using the ethical decision-making framework; and students/participants can comprehend the importance of financial literacy when investing, especially in this digital era.

This case discusses the investment funds mismanagement accusations addressed to PT Jouska Finansial Indonesia (Jouska). Jouska is a financial planner business that was immensely popular among Indonesian young investors. It actively posted interesting content on its social media accounts, gaining attention from the millennial and Gen Z generations. However, in 2020, many of its clients reported and filed complaints that their portfolio values decreased significantly because of Jouska’s decision to invest their funds in low-quality stocks. Jouska was also alleged to violate its role as a financial planner by being able to perform several activities that fell under the authority of investment managers. This case attracted the attention of authorities so that the Investment Alert Task Force (SWI) stopped Jouska’s operational activities and initiated an investigation into the case. SWI also blocked Jouska’s websites, applications and social media accounts, in cooperation with the Ministry of Communication and Information. Despite settlement agreements that Jouska claimed had been offered to several clients, at the end of 2020 some of its clients and former clients filed a formal lawsuit. As of January 2021, several alleged criminal actions attributed to Jouska were still under investigation, comprised of money laundering, clients’ funds embezzlement, fraud, and insider trading. In October 2021, Aakar’s status was a suspect in the allegations. This case is another example of investment misconduct or fraud; to put it another way, it is the effect. It is expected that the participants can deliberate other perspectives during the discussion that could be the cause of such a case, hence viewing it holistically.

Undergraduate level.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

To complete this case, students will need to access financial statements from the Securities and Exchange Commission’s webpage. The links are provided. Students will also need to review the conceptual framework that is typically covered in Intermediate 1 to respond to question 5.

This case is based on the three financial statement restatements that Weatherford International Ltd. made over an approximately 18-month period. The restatements were due to a fraud committed by manipulating the income tax accrual in the financial statements. The manipulation used was to overstate the amount of income used to calculate the dividend exclusion and then use a relatively high tax rate to calculate the resulting tax benefit. The tax rate used for the fraud was substantially more than Weatherford’s effective tax rate (ETR), which was a prominent part of the company’s strategic growth plan. The tax senior with the external auditors who reviewed the entry made for the dividend exclusion captured the inconsistency with the comment that “This [the entry] deserves a huh?” The case is intended for students in Intermediate 2, where financial statement restatements and their effect on the company’s financial statements are typically covered. During the years covered in this case, Weatherford was also under investigation for violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Weatherford’s FCPA violations included multiple instances of bribery, the inappropriate use of volume discounts, improper payments and kickbacks in the United Nation’s Oil for Food program. Weatherford received the eighth-largest fine in the history of FCPA violations (at that time) of $152m. Weatherford’s FCPA investigation expanded, and the company paid another $100m in fines for violations of sanctions law and export control law. This case focuses only on the fraudulent manipulation of the financial statements through the tax accrual and does not delve into the other investigations. However, the linkage between those investigations and the fraud in this case is Weatherford’s nonexistent internal controls.

This case was designed to be used in Intermediate 2 financial accounting classes to highlight financial statement restatements and review the conceptual framework and materiality. The students who used the case did not have difficulty with the tax aspect of the case. However, most of the students had taken one tax class previously or concurrently. If students have not had any exposure to tax, the instructor might want to walk students through the tax aspects of the case.

This case describes a situation in which Malkit Singh Bal (Bal) partner of Bal Roadlines shares with Mr. Ghura, who was about to be hired as consultant for Bal Roadlines, about the rise in issue of fraud and crime done by the fleet drivers and asked him to help a way out to solve the problem. The purpose of this case is to provide an opportunity to the participants of an MBA or Management Executive Education Programme to step into the shoes of Ghura, a consultant and to explore the options and to select the best possible option to offer a solution to Bal. The context for this involvement is the rise in fraud and crime done by the fleet drivers.

The fraud diamond theory, the COSO framework on internal control and theories of ethical leadership and ethical decision making are applied.

The details of this case were compiled using publicly available information, including court records and news reports. No modifications were made to the names of individuals or places mentioned in the case. All resources have been properly cited.

Employee embezzlement is a common issue in limited resource organizations when adequate controls are not in place to prevent or detect fraud. In such organizations, personal financial hardships can drive individuals to commit crimes that are out of character. This case is a story of a respectable small-town couple implicated in a near million dollar embezzlement scheme. Students are asked to consider what went wrong and propose solutions for the prevention of similar crimes. Lessons learned from this case emphasize the importance of ethical leadership, creating a strong ethical environment and how small unethical acts can escalate over time.

Instructors can utilize this case to teach the topics of ethical leadership and decision making, fraud prevention and detection and internal controls. The themes of this case fit well into any business ethics, accounting or auditing course at the undergraduate or graduate level. The case has been implemented in courses for full-time and part-time MBAs, and master’s programs in finance, human resources and accounting.

The subject areas for this case are auditing, fraud and investigations. It is also relevant for teaching aspects of corporate governance.

This case consolidates techniques and methodologies of special investigations and demonstrates weaknesses in governance and internal controls. It is appropriate for final year undergraduate students and graduate students who have attended classes on basics of accounting and financial reporting.

The case is about institutional governance and the effects of ineptness at different levels of an organization that resulted in TAS. 133 billion being “improperly” paid out to 22 firms in the financial year 2005/2006.The case is structured to focus at the dilemma of the Director of Finance as an individual who featured in the latter stages of an extensive fraud where old unclaimable debts were revived and were being claimed and paid to fictitious assignees involving a number of Central Bank officials. However, the case seeks to interrogate issues related to financial records and controls in which the position of Director of Finance had more relevance.

Working on this case should result in enabling students to acquire expertise necessary for forensic accounting. It should also enable students to learn to gain an understanding of the practice of investigative and forensic accounting as well as an understanding of the interrelationships of the parties involved in forensic investigations.

Teaching note.

The case study is designed to help students understand how the “growth at all costs” attitude can lead to compromised corporate governance in a start-up leading to disastrous implications for all the stakeholders. This case study aims to make students understand the components of the fraud triangle, the impact of financial fraud on various stakeholders, the role of venture capitalist (VC) investors and the importance of good corporate governance in start-ups. The case study presents an excellent opportunity for students to discuss the consequences of ignoring good governance in the pursuit of growth in a start-up. After analyzing the case study, the students shall be able to explain the concept of the fraud triangle and to be able to identify the motivation, opportunity and rationalization of financial irregularities in a start-up; analyze the impact of financial irregularities on various stakeholders; comprehend the business model of VCs and evaluate its influence on VC-funded start-ups; and appraise the importance of good corporate governance in start-ups.

The case study revolves around the confession of financial irregularities made by one of the cofounders of GoMechanic, a start-up headquartered in Gurugram, India. On January 18, 2023, Amit Bhasin confessed to financial irregularities in the company’s financial statements, leading to laying off 70% of the workforce of the company. GoMechanic had earlier raised close to US$62m [1] from maverick global investors including Sequoia Capital, Tiger Global, Orios Venture Partners and Chiratae Ventures, and was negotiating to raise Series D financing from the Japanese multinational SoftBank with aspirations to be a unicorn (start-up with a valuation of over $1bn). The confession led to a debate about the consequences of the “growth at all cost” culture being followed by start-ups as well as VCs. GoMechanic was not an isolated instance of a lack of governance in the start-ups. The confession had consequences not only for the GoMechanic but for the entire start-up ecosystem of India, which was the third largest in the world. Bhasin stated that the founders take full responsibility for the situation, and they were working on a plan which was most viable under the circumstances. However, it was not going to be easy to regain the confidence of the investors.

The case study is best suited for senior undergraduate- and graduate-level business school students and in executive education programs in courses such as corporate governance and ethics, private equity and entrepreneurial finance.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and finance