Auditing CaseLong Beach Bridge (a non-public company) operates a major bridge. Vehicles are required to paya toll based on their type (e.g., passenger cars pay 5.00, commercial trucks pay $7.00). Toll revenues support the maintenance and upkeep of the bridge.There are 8 toll booths, several of which are automated for exact change while others are manuallyserviced by Long Beach Bridge employees. Each toll booth has an automated count mechanismto monitor the number of vehicles using the bridge each day. Periodically throughout each day,employees collect accumulated tolls. The funds are provided to an on-site, independent contractorhired by Long Beach Bridge to perform cash count and reconciliation functions. The funds arethen transferred daily to a local depository institution.Beginning in January, 2015, several toll collectors and their supervisors conspired to steal tollmonies and employees of the independent cash count contractor agreed to participate in thescheme. In order to âcover their tracks,â the cash count contractors altered the daily reports, including vehicle use and other cash reconciliation records. This alteration process was so effectivethat reconstruction of the original transactions was impossible.The thefts continued until November, 2015, when one toll collector felt he was not receiving his âfairshareâ of the money and anonymously called the Long Beach Bridge offices and reported thescheme.In order to estimate the amount of tolls stolen, Long Beach Bridge management engaged a qualified consultant to perform a demographic study of toll bridge use over a period of time. LongBeach Bridge management used this study to arrive at their estimate of tolls lost. Theft losses for2015 were estimated to be $1.7 million. In preparing the financial statements of Long BeachBridge for 2015, Long Beach Bridge management included their estimate of stolen revenue inârevenuesâ and reported the same amount as âestimated losses due to theft lossâ in the costs andexpenses section of the income statement. Toll revenue (including the estimate of stolen revenues) reported for 2015 was $9.2 million.There is no argument that some amount of tolls were collected and diverted to the benefit of thethieves; however, the actual amount stolen cannot be determined from the financial or otherrecords. Long Beach Bridge management believes that the stolen tolls meet the criteria for revenue recognition and that the financial statements should include an estimate of tolls stolen in revenues with an equal amount included in expenses with a note to the financial statements describing the theft and the use of an estimate to record the revenue and expense.In December, 2015, your CPA firm (XYZ Certified Public Accountants) was engaged to perform anaudit of Long Beach Bridgeâs financial statements for the year ended December 3, 2015. The TollBridgeâs financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2014 were audited by other auditors who expressed an unmodified opinion on 2014 financial statements.Both the Toll Bridgeâs 2015 and 2014 financial statements will be included in the Toll Roadâs 2015annual report. Your opinion on the 2015 financial statements will also be included in the 2015 annual report. The other auditorâs opinion on the 2014 financial statements will not be included in the2015 annual report.Business Assumptions and Other Data1013113 Acct 470 Sâ13 Auditing Case Long Beach Toll Road.WPdocxLong Beach Bridge had profitable operations in 2015 despite the theft loss. There appears to beno reason to question the integrity of Long Beach Bridgeâs management – collusion among the tollcollectors, supervisors and cash count contractors allowed the theft to go undetected and to circumvent internal controls. Long Beach Bridgeâs management has taken appropriate action to remedy the situation and has enhanced controls even further. In addition, XYZ Certified Public Accountants believe that the estimate of the theft loss for 2015 was done in a professional mannerbut understand that the estimate is only an estimate and that it might be significantly different thanthe actual theft loss. In addition, XYZ Certified Public Accountants believe the $1.7 million estimated loss is not highly material in relation to Long Beach Bridgeâs 2015 financial statements.Web Page Information and Authoritative Literature:Access FASB accounting principles authoritative literature at aaahq.org/ascLogin.cfm. Log in using username(AAA51300) and password (3upX7UM), click on âFASB Accounting Standards Codification,â click on âIaccept,â click on âConcept Statements,â click on applicable concept statements (# 5 and Chapter 3 of # 8).Access AICPA authoritative auditing literature at aicpa.org. Click on âResearch – Standards,â clickon âAuditing and Attest Standards,â click on âClarified Statements on Auditing Standards,â clickon applicable AU-C sections (700, 705, and 706).Required:1.Discuss the matters that should be considered in determining whether or not Long BeachBridgeâs management is correct in its belief that the stolen tolls meet the criteria for revenuerecognition and that Long Beach Bridgeâs financial statements should include an estimate oftolls stolen in revenues with an equal amount included in expenses. Do not concern yourself as to whether the expense should be classified as an extraordinary item. Indicate yourconclusion regarding this matter and discuss the bases for such conclusion.2.Indicate the type of auditorsâ report that should be issued on Long Beach Bridgeâs 2015 financial statements assuming an estimate of tolls stolen is included in revenue with an equalamount included in expense and a note to the financial statements discloses the underlyingassumptions and methods used in compiling the estimate. Also, assume no unusual items,other than the stolen tolls, came to the attention of the auditors. In addition, assume nothingcame to your attention during the audit of the Long Beach Bridgeâs 2015 financial statementthat caused you to believe that Long Beach Bridgeâs 2014 financial statements were notpresented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.2013113 Acct 470 Sâ13 Auditing Case Long Beach Toll Road.WPdocx
101papers.com is always working towards customer satisfaction. Our professional academic writers always aim at producing comprehensive papers that possess quality and originality at pocket-friendly prices. Students are assured that all their private information is safe with us.
101papers.com provides a system where students can request for money-back in case they cancel the order or in the rare instances of dissatisfaction. The refund policy adheres to the company’s term and conditions on money-back.Read more
While providing the best professional essay writing services, we guarantee all our students of plagiarism-free papers. All papers produced by our professional academic writers are checked against all web resources and previously completed papers to avoid plagiarism.Read more
In our urge to provide the best professional essay writing services, we guarantee students of free revision policy. The free revision policy is a courtesy service where students can request for unlimited for their completed papers. We always aim at achieving 100% customer satisfaction rates. The free revision policy is one among many of our major advantages.Read more
At 101papers.com, every student is entitled to total security. Our professional academic writers are always committed to protecting all private information of our customers. We do not share any personal information with third parties. Additionally, we provide safe systems for all online transactions.Read more
Working with us is the greatest step towards achieving all your academic goals. We always deliver the best professional essay writing services as promised. We, therefore, expect all students to work cooperatively with us, as we work towards achieving our goal, your satisfaction. This way, all services will be delivered accurately and on time.Read more