LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

SEC v ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: 34-44444, Defendant: Arthur Andersen LLP, Plaintiff: SEC, UniqueCaseRef: SEC>34-44444, Accounting, Practices, Audit, Financial Statements, Commission, Misstatements, Waste Management, Engagement Team, Firm, Pajes, Audit Report, Auditing, Allgyer, Pursuant, Income, Exchange Act, Administrative Proceedings, Prior Period, Arthur Andersen Llp, Operating Expenses, Unqualified Audit Report, Gaap, United States, Sanctions Pursuant, Responsibilities, Securities Exchange Act, Audit Committee, Managing Partner, Restatement , ContentID: 120243969

Case Documents
1 2001-06-19 SEC ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 110703
26 pages
TXT
Total Documents: 1 document , 26 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . SEC ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
PRACTICES
AUDIT
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
COMMISSION
MISSTATEMENTS
WASTE MANAGEMENT
PARTNER
ENGAGEMENT TEAM
FIRM
PAJES
AUDIT REPORT
AUDITING
ALLGYER
PURSUANT
INCOME
EXCHANGE ACT
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
PRIOR PERIOD
ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
OPERATING EXPENSES
UNQUALIFIED AUDIT REPORT
GAAP
UNITED STATES
SANCTIONS PURSUANT
RESPONSIBILITIES
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MANAGING PARTNER
RESTATEMENT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before The
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Release No. 44444 / June 19, 2001

   ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING ENFORCEMENT
   Release No. 1405 / June 19, 2001

   ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
   File No. 3-10513
     _________________________________________________________________

   In the Matter of

   ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

     Respondent.
     _________________________________________________________________

   ORDER INSTITUTING PUBLIC
   ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS, MAKING
   FINDINGS AND IMPOSING REMEDIAL
   SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO RULE 102(e) OF
   THE COMMISSION'S RULES OF PRACTICE

                                     I.

   The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") deems it
   appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative
   proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted against Arthur Andersen LLP
   ("Andersen," the "Firm" or "Respondent") pursuant to paragraphs (1)
   and (3) of Rule 102(e) of the Commission's Rules of Practice (17
   C.F.R. § 201.102(e)(1) and (3)) ("Rule 102(e)").

                                    II.

   In anticipation of the institution of these administrative
   proceedings, Respondent has submitted an Offer of Settlement
   ("Offer"), which the Commission has determined to accept. Solely for
   the purpose of these proceedings, and any other proceeding brought by
   or on behalf of the Commission or in which the Commission is a party,
   and prior to a hearing and without admitting or denying the
   Commission's findings contained herein, except for the jurisdiction of
   the Commission over it and over the subject matter of these
   proceedings, which Respondent admits, Respondent consents to the entry
   of the findings and the imposition of the remedial sanctions set forth
SNIPPETS:
  • SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
  • ORDER INSTITUTING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS,
  • SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO RULE 102OF
  • The Securities and Exchange Commission deems it appropriate and in the public interest that
  • Solely for the purpose of these proceedings, and any other proceeding brought by or on behalf rder Instituting Public Administrative Proceedings, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial
  • This action arises out of Andersen's issuance of materially false and misleading audit
  • the Company engaged Andersen to audit its financial statements included in its Annual Reports
  • For each year 1993 through 1996, Andersen issued an audit report on Waste Management's
  • The Company used improper accounting to inflate its operating income and other measures of
  • For each year 1993 through 1996, Andersen, as a result of the conduct of certain of its
  • the Restatement is the largest in the Commission's history.
  • The Andersen engagement teams that performed audits of the Company's financial statements in
  • In the course of its original audits for 1993 through 1996, the engagement team had
  • Between 1988 and the time he became the engagement partner on the Waste Management engagement
  • As reported to the audit committee, between 1991 and 1997, Andersen billed Waste Management
  • The engagement team also identified accounting practices that gave rise to other known and
  • United States v. Arthur Young, 465 U.S. 805, 817-818.
  •    |