SUE WAS PUZZLED AS TO WHAT COURSE O

SUE WAS PUZZLED AS TO WHAT COURSE OF ACTION TO TAKE. SHE HAD RECENTLY STARTED her job
with a national CPA firm, and she was already confronted with a problem that could affect
her future with the firm. On an audit, she encountered a client who had been treating payments
to a large number, but by no means a majority, of its workers as payments to independent
contractors. This practice saves the client the payroll taxes that would otherwise
be due on the payments if the workers were classified as employees. In Sue’s judgment
this was improper as well as illegal and should have been noted in the audit. She raised the
issue with John, the senior accountant to whom she reported. He thought it was a possible
problem but did not seem willing to do anything about it. He encouraged her to talk to the partner
in charge if she didn’t feel satisfied.
She thought about the problem for a considerable time before approaching the partner in
charge. The ongoing professional education classes she had received from her employer emphasized
the ethical responsibilities that she had as a CPA and the fact that her firm endorsed
adherence to high ethical standards. This finally swayed her to pursue the issue with the partner
in charge of the audit. The visit was most unsatisfactory. Paul, the partner, virtually confirmed
her initial reaction that the practice was wrong, but he said that many other companies
in the industry follow such a practice. He went on to say that if an issue was made of it, Sue
would lose the account, and he was not about to take such action. She came away from the
meeting with the distinct feeling that had she chosen to pursue the issue, she would have created
an enemy.
Sue still felt disturbed and decided to discuss the problem with some of her co-workers.
She approached Bill and Mike, both of whom had been working for the firm for a couple of
years. They were familiar with the problem because they had encountered the same issue when
doing the audit the previous year. They expressed considerable concern that if she went over
the head of the partner in charge of the audit, they could be in big trouble since they had failed
to question the practice during the previous audit. They said that they realized it was probably
wrong, but they went ahead because it had been ignored in previous years, and they knew their
supervisor wanted them to ignore it again this year. They didn’t want to cause problems. They
encouraged Sue to be a “team player” and drop the issue.

Results (English) 3:

苏对采取什么行动的过程感到困惑。她最近已经开始了她的工作，与一个国家的会计师事务所，她已经面临的问题，可能会影响她未来的公司。在审核过程中，她遇到了一个客户，他一直在处理付款，但绝大多数人，但不意味着它的工作人员为独立的承包商付款。这种做法可以节省客户的工资税，否则将是由于支付，如果工人被列为员工。在苏的判决中，这是不正当的，也是非法的，应该在审计中被注意到。她提出了与John的问题，她报告的高级会计。他认为这是一个可能的问题，但似乎并不愿意做任何事情。他鼓励她和合伙人谈话，如果她不满意，她想在接近对方的情况之前，有一段相当长的时间。她从她的雇主收到的职业教育课程强调了她作为一名注册会计师的道德责任，以及她坚定支持高道德标准的事实。这最终动摇了她与合伙人在审计中的合作问题。访问最不令人满意。保罗，合伙人，几乎证实了她最初的反应，这种做法是错误的，但他说，许多其他公司在业界遵循这样的做法。他接着说，如果一个问题被提出，苏，将失去帐户，他不打算采取这种行动。她离开有不同的感觉，她选择追求问题的
会议，她带来了
敌人。
苏仍然感到不安，决定讨论与她的一些同事的问题。
她走近账单和迈克，他们都是几
年公司工作。他们很熟悉这个问题，因为他们在做审计的前一年遇到了同样的问题。他们表达了相当的关注，如果她去了主管审计的合作伙伴，他们可能会在很大的麻烦，因为他们在过去的审计实践中的做法，在过去的审计。他们说，他们意识到这可能是错误的，但他们继续向前，因为这在过去几年中被忽略了，他们知道他们的导师希望他们今年再忽略它。他们不想引起问题。他们鼓励苏是一个“团队球员”，并放弃这个问题。