Auditing & Assurance of Lehman Brother Investment Banking Firm

Question: Discuss about the Auditing Assurance of Lehman Brother. Answer: Introduction One of the four biggest firms in the field of investment banking was Lehman Brothers in the United States before its collapse in 2008 due to bankruptcy. Lehman Brothers firm was a financial service providing firm before 2008 when it collapsed, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy after becoming bankrupt. The main cause of the collapse of t6he Lehman Brothers can be distributed between the management and the auditors. Management didnt analyze the risky decisions it was making and the auditors paid full support, who should have warned the firm about the consequences (Montgomery, 2017). The financial statements didnt comprise of such data that would reveal the fact that Lehman Brothers was now depending on loans to invest in the mortgage market. The years from 2001 to 2008 were seemingly a boon for all the enterprises as it was a period of profit making. The firm also seemed to make enormous profits during this period and started investing in the mortgage market. It didnt pay attention that due to this period the sub-prime mortgage market has already been destroyed (Tepalagul Lin, 2015). Another mistake on the part of the firm was to offer private financing, real estates, and leveraged lending, but all from its own assets. Negligence and the absence of facts and the issues which concern while drafting the financial statements were: There was a specific period from the year 2001 to 2008 as it was regarded as a time to make huge profits. Large amounts of money were taken as a loan by the Lehman Brothers as they dreamt of the huge profits they were never going to make. They were totally attracted by this boon in the market. But the situations went uneasily as the destruction of the sub-prime mortgage market started simultaneously in the fields of investments. The firm with the dream of making billions started to invest in dangerous portfolios and this was followed by neglecting all the required inquiry about the performance of the portfolio and without thinking the consequences (Arens et. al, 2013). The firm borrowed billions from different financers to invest in these risky deals. This happened because by that time the firm had started to give its own securities and assets as loans in the form o private financing, real estate, and many other forms. Financial Instruments The firm was running down on money. It wanted more loans to satisfy itself and this was done by the use of Repo 105 transactions. The firm very cleverly presented a false image of the firm in front of the public by manipulating the values in the financial statements. This was done so that the reputation of the firm remains intact and to get the loans easily. The firm now started to keep its securities as collateral. But due to change in securities the value of the collaterals would change so the firm upon consideration from the auditors made manipulations on the balance sheet (Elder et. al, 2010). The company was at that time paying off the debts of the financers from the loans taken from other parties. The Repo 105 transactions were shown as the sales inventory of securities and this led to the decrease of the securities from the firm. Moreover, the loans taken up by the firm on the part of the securities it had, were not at all in the image on the balance sheet. The loans were take n against these securities. The firm was clever enough to show these loans in the form of Sale proceeds of investment securities. So it can be seen that the firm left no chance to highlights its liquid assets and neutral liabilities (Montgomery, 2017). The Repo transactions and the commercial papers were later used by the firm to borrow short-term loans from third parties. The firm started to invest its long-term profit making assets in the mortgage market. It didnt take long for the firm to get bound to take loans on a daily basis in the year 2008. These enormous borrowings provided a path for the collapse of the firm due to various risks. There was a sudden increase of the rate of interests due to the entry of the debt obligations in the management of the firm causing a major upset in the firm (Story et. al, 2010). The time came when mostly all the financial institutions started to refuse the take the assets and securities of the firm against short-term financing. This resulting in were unable to pay the debts (Messier, 2013). Each and every wrong step took them further to destruction by it was the concealment of the facts which sealed the deal. The collapse could have been prevented or may have been delayed if the auditors playe d their part skillfully. Auditing Standards ASA 701 communication of the key Audit matters in the Independent Audit Report All the financial reporting periods terminating on 15th December or after the specified date were the ones on which the auditing standard was applied. The functioning of this auditing standard is to collect information about the conditions of finance and other important details and report it directly to the management department of the auditor firm as soon as possible. This auditing standard is a positive move on the part of the shareholders and the public who can look upon the financial sheets directly to know about the conditions of the company and then take the time to wisely plan their investments in the company (AuASB, 2015). Positivity on the part of the financial statements by applying these standards and as per the case of the Lehman Brothers, the firm could have been saved if the ASA 701 existed and was applied. It is strictly the duty of the auditors to pay heed towards matters of great significance and importance as they can be helpful during the filing of the financial statements, if neglected then can cause serious problems. As per Wiggins et. al (2015), the auditor must be aware of the material misstatement and matters of grave uncertainty and should think about the consequences related to these problems. All these key points should be kept in mind while drafting the balance sheet. Auditing issues responsible for the collapse of Lehman Under the presence of the ASA 701, the important facts and figures about the conditions of the firm would have been revealed. The absence of the ASA 701 and other auditing standards paved a way for the collapse of the firm and this path was infused with non-communication and concealment of the major facts and figures describing the worth of the firm. All these loopholes drained the Lehman Brothers completely. Concealment of misstated Leverage Ratio The leverage ratio saw a marked difference in its values in the year 2008 in comparison to the year 2007. The leverage ratio has clearly been decreased for the Lehman Brothers. This was due to the loans borrowed by the firm which was paid after the end of the fiscal quarters thus reestablishing the securities to be depicted in the balance sheet. These payments were the ones of the Repo transactions (Fox, 2009). The firm by the use of these Repo transactions imaged the decrease in the ratio as temporary and untruthful. The time came when due to such activities of the firm the leverage ratio was decreased to a level which had to be shown on the balance sheet and also in the financial statements of the firm (Bris, 2010). These points clearly show that the Lehman Brothers were to collapse at any moment and a report should have been put up for those charged with governance. The existence of the ASA 701 could have saved the firm from drowning. The firm could also have been saved if the auditors without any settlement did their work honestly, not only the firm but numerous people investing in the firm would also be prevented from suffering huge losses (Reed, 2008). Non-disclosure of non-approval of True Sale opinion in the United States The firm was required to get a permit of true sales for carrying on the transactions. The US refused them with the same so the firm made a deal with the financing department of the UK to get a permit but conditions being that all the transactions were to be carried inside the UK. Trade of the securities would be done in the same way (Wearden et.al 2008). Approval of Lehman policy of Repo 105 for misleading the Balance Sheet The firm opted for policies like Repo 105, Reverse Repo, and Repo 108. All this would help to present a false image of the firm. This resulted as to show the equities as collateral in behalf of the securities so as to keep going with the transactions. In short, the financial statements were window dressed and the actual position was different (Fox, 2009). This was done in the notice of the auditors and hence, the financial statements were altogether showing a different position but the reality was different. There was a breach of the standards and the auditors were involved in it. Providing green signal to financial statements that conceal Repo transactions It was the duty of the firm to buy back the securities of the firm worth millions of dollars. These remained undisclosed in the financial statements and as mere fluctuations in the balance sheet (Reed, 2008). Such were not disclosed and those facts were provided at the footnotes that did not meet the criteria of the disclosure. This misguided the investors and an entirely different aspect were created. The buy back of the securities at a minimal rate was depicted as derivatives (Bris, 2010). This shows that numerous facts were concealed by the management and the auditors of the firm which caused the collapse. Thus the points provide transparency to the fact that it was the mistake of the auditors on every step which led to the collapse. It is also possible that if the ASA 701 was present at that time then the auditors have made a tough call and would not have agreed on the management play with the balance sheet and the financial statements. Had the standards were operative then the auditors would not have allowed the misleading information. In short, when the regulations are strong and operative there is always a balanced act otherwise any loopholes are exploited to the utmost. The same can be cited for the collapse of Lehman brothers. Recommendation It is totally the responsibility of the auditors to depict the real conditions of the firm by the use of the financial statements. The positive working of the auditors is a way to ensure the benefits of the company, as well as the people, are interested in making investments in the company. The auditors report can act as a way from which people can get knowledge and then can wisely plan their investments. This can only happen if the auditors totally comply with the auditing standards set up. IN the case of the Lehman Brothers the auditors from Ernest Young can be defined to have a major hand in the collapse of the firm. If the auditors prepared fair financial statements then the company would be stopped from borrowing large amounts which the firm did, because the financiers only depend on the statements to grant loans. It is the duty of the auditors to warn the companys management about the upcoming consequences. The downfall of the Lehman Brothers clearly shows that there is a dema nd of strict supervision. It is now important for policy establishes like IFRS, Accounting standard Board, and Basel to strengthen the rules. Conclusion The reasons for the downfall of Lehman Brothers are clearly indicated in the above report and stress the importance of ethical standards in the organization. The result that emerges from the collapse is that the corporate governance and ethical standards must be strongly embedded in the organization. The same must be followed with strict precision. The organization must ensure that the rules not only benefit the organization rather is a strong driving force for the entire organization. Moreover, it has a direct bearing on the financial performance of the company. It is of utmost necessity that the organization must prepare the financial statements that should reflect the correct position and this must be taken care of by the auditors. The failure of Lehman Brother indicates the deficiency on the part of the auditors and the reports prepared therein was misleading. Therefore, the companies must opt for the adoption of strong standards of accounting and regulations. References Arens, A. A, Best, P. J, Shailer, G. E. P Loebbecke, J. K, 2013, Assurance Services and Ethics in Australia, 9th ed, Australia: Pearson. AuASB 2015, Explanatory Statement ASA 701Communicating Key Audit Matters In the Independent Audit Report, viewed 20 May 2017 https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1cad=rjauact=8ved=0ahUKEwjHn8fisoDUAhUFuY8KHX-8AzoQFggmMAAurl=http%3A%2%2Fwww.legislation.gov.au%2FDetails%2FF2015L02016%2F3f9f21f6-38e3-4a6d-a1b3-c254e21f9d62usg=AFQjCNFuTx7N8zQsoLcER_cUQxKxD63tBAsig2=Ll0A_tO8Au2yrKz0LG3-LQ Bris, A 2010, The Lehman Brother Case: A corporate governance failure not a failure of the financial market. IMD International Elder, J. R, Beasley S. M. Arens A. A 2010, Auditing and Assurance Services, Person Education, New Jersey: USA Fox, J 2009, Three Lessons of the Lehman Brothers Collapse, viewed 20 May 2017 https://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1923197,00.html Messier, F. W 2013, Auditing and Assurance Services - A systematic approach, 9th ed. Australia: McGraw Hill. Montgomery, A 2017, The Death of ethics and the death of Lehman Brothers, Seven Pillar Institute Reed, K 2008, EY sued over Lehmans audit, viewed 21 May 2017 https://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/1934026/-sued-lehmans-auditStory, L Dash, E 2010, Lehman Channeled Risks Through Alter Ego Firm, viewed 20 May 2017 https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/business/13lehman.html Tepalagul, N. Lin, L 2015 Auditor Independence and Audit Quality A Literature Review, Journal of Accounting, Auditing Finance vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 101-121. Wearden, G, Teather, D Treanor, J 2008, Banking crisis: Lehman Brothers files for bankruptcy protection, viewed 19 May 2017 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2008/sep/15/lehmanbrothers.creditcrunch Wiggins, R.Z, Bennet, R.L Metrick, A 2015, The Lehman Brother Bankruptcy: The Role of Ernst Young. Yale School of Management