Dan works for a large firm, Baker Greenleaf, and he has been very in tune with the ethics in his profession. Dan was chosen to be part of a special audit team and the project senior placed Dan with a real estate subsidiary to audit. Dan’s job on this audit was to come out with a “clean opinion” of the Sub by the end of the month. When Dan finished with his files and submitted them to Oliver Freeman, the project senior, for review he found a few mistakes. The one mistake that was found that started Dan’s ethical dilemma was that the Sub’s biggest real estate property showed on the balance sheet to have value of $2 million. Dan estimated this property to be worth no more than $100,000. Dan spoke to the Sub’s managers about writing down the property by $1.9 million, but they saw renting potential and refused. Since the write down would have a seven percent impact on the Sub’s net income Dan decided to submit a recommendation for “subject to opinion”. When Oliver saw this he wanted Dan to change his “subject to opinion” to a “clean opinion”. Dan held his ground stating that the write down was definitely a material difference. With Dan’s words and files in mind when Oliver turned the audit in he took out Dan’s analysis and also gave Dan a negative evaluation on the audit.

5 pages!
1,200 words!
APA formatted!
A+