Aundrea Kay Guess and Carolyn Conn
For four years, Valerie Thorpe was Director of Accounting for Taurus Construction. She was fired by the company's owner, Vic Bullard, when she refused to falsify accounting…
Abstract
Synopsis
For four years, Valerie Thorpe was Director of Accounting for Taurus Construction. She was fired by the company's owner, Vic Bullard, when she refused to falsify accounting entries. Bullard's directive would have lowered profits, thereby deceiving his business partner and committing tax evasion. Until her firing late in the spring of 2011, Valerie had a few concerns about Bullard's lack of ethics in his business dealings. However, she has not questioned him previously because of her own emotional condition after the unexpected death of her husband. During the spring 2011 semester in graduate school, Valerie was inspired when her classmates recounted their own experiences of resigning from jobs because of unethical managers and owners. Valerie had thought of resigning from Taurus; but, Bullard fired her first. Six months after her firing, Valerie is seriously contemplating whether she should report Bullard's tax evasion to the Internal Revenue Service.
Research methodology
Field Based Research. Interviews with the case protagonist.
Relevant courses and levels
The case is suitable for graduate and undergraduate courses in business ethics, accounting ethics, entrepreneurship, income tax accounting and an undergraduate auditing class.
Theoretical basis
This is a real-life case applying ethical frameworks coverage of which can be challenging as students perceive those theories and frameworks as “dry.”
Details
Keywords
Aundrea Kay Guess, Lowell Broom and James Reburn
Jefferson County was in a financial crisis as the commissioners faced a decision concerning whether the County should file for bankruptcy. The County was under an EPA mandate to…
Abstract
Synopsis
Jefferson County was in a financial crisis as the commissioners faced a decision concerning whether the County should file for bankruptcy. The County was under an EPA mandate to update an outdated and overrunning sewer system. Estimates to do the work ranged from $250 million to $1.2 billion. The situation led to graft, corruption, bribery and illegal activities. More than 20 people were prosecuted in association with the illegal activities involved in financing and construction of the sewer system and four of the five commissioners were sentenced for their involvement in the corruption. Five new commissioners were elected and had to determine what to do after the down-grade of the County's bonds and warrants; the reduced revenues; and the corruption had put the County in a situation where funds were not available to continue to operate the County and provide services to its citizens. Should they declare bankruptcy or choose other paths open to them?
Research methodology
Data sources – this case is based on field research and interviews with a commissioner, court documents and from many other public sources. Extent of disguise – the case is not disguised.
Relevant courses and levels
The case can be used in graduate or upper division undergraduate courses in accounting, strategy, public administration or finance. There are several topics in the case that could be addressed: governance; economics, government and political issues, ethics, accounting, financial instruments, and strategy.