In an article from CFO.com dated June 2, 2010, Diebold, the maker of ATM and voting machines was under SEC investigation of it's financials. The allegations are that Diebold did not properly record revenues and used hold and delay tactics to change it's financials to the tune of $127M. While not admitting to any wrongdoing, the company's former CEO has agreed to pay the company back for compensation and bonuses and stock options during the period that the company was allegedly committing fraud. The payback is called a "clawback" and is one of the provisions of Sarbanes Oxley.
So, why would a CFO commit fraud? Is it not enough to achieve the level of success it takes to be appointed CFO? Why not quit when you are asked to do something that is totally unethical? How valued is ethics to an organization looking to hire a new CFO?
No comments:
Post a Comment