Reflecting form over substance: The case of Enron Corp

Critical Perspectives on Accounting

Volumn 15, Issue 6-7, 2004, Pages 767-785

  Baker, C Richard ^a   Hayes, Rick ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS DARTMOUTH   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Accounting practice; Enron Corp.; GAAP

Indexed keywords

EID: 3142753428     PISSN: 10452354     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2002.08.001     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. AICPA. Accounting Principles Board Statement No. 4. New York: AICPA; 1968
2. ASB. Financial Reporting Standard No. 5: Reporting the Substance of Transactions. London: Accounting Standards Board; 1994
3. Barboza D. Enron offered management aid to companies. New York Times, April 10, 2002, p. C1.
4. Bass C.E. Andersen Memo, US House of Representatives. February 2000, http://energycommittee.house.gov.
5. Berenson A. Ex-workers say unit's earnings were illusory. New York Times, January 25, 2002.
6. Chastney J. True and fair view-history, meaning and impact of the fourth directive. London: Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales; 1975
7. Cohn L. Peter Fitzgerald's Different Drummer, Business Week, April 22, 2002, p. 91
8. Duncan D. Andersen Memo, US House of Representatives, October 15, 2001, http://energycommittee.house.gov
9. EITF. Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 90-15: Impact of Nonsubstantive Lessors, Residual Value Guarantees, and Other Provisions in Leasing Transactions. Norwalk, CT: Financial Accounting Standards Board; 1990
10. Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 96-21: Implementation Issues in Accounting for Leasing Transactions Involving Special-Purpose Entities. Norwalk, CT: Financial Accounting Standards Board; 1996.
11. Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. D-14: Transactions Involving Special-Purpose Entities. Norwalk, CT: Financial Accounting Standards Board; 2002
12. Emshwiller J.R. Smith R. Sidel R. Weil J. Enron cuts profit data of 4 years by 20%. Wall Street J 2001:A-3.
13. FASB. Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 1: Objectives of Financial Reporting for Business Enterprises. Norwalk, CT: Financial Accounting Standards Board; 1978.
14. FASB. Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 2: Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information. Norwalk, CT: Financial Accounting Standards Board; 1980
15. FASB. Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 140: Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities. Norwalk, CT: Financial Accounting Standards Board; 2000
16. FASB. Proposal for a New Agenda Project: Issues Related to The Recognition of Revenues and Liabilities. Norwalk, CT: Financial Accounting Standards Board; 2002.
17. Financial Accounting Standards Committee. Evaluating concepts-based vs. rules-based approaches to standard setting. Acc Horizons 2003;17(1):73-90.
18. Hecker J.A. Andersen memo subject client accounting inquiry, US House of Representatives, August 21, 2001, http://energycommittee.house.gov.
19. Hines R.D. Financial accounting: in communicating reality, we construct reality Acc. Organ. Society 13 3 1988 251-261
20. IASC. IAS Framework. London: International Accounting Standards Committee; 1989
21. IASC. International Accounting Standard No. 1: Presentation of Financial Statements (Revised) London: International Accounting Standards Committee; 1997a.
22. IASC. International Accounting Standard No. 3: Financial Reporting of Interests in Joint Ventures London: International Accounting Standards Committee; 1997b.
23. Jenkins E.L. Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection of the US House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce, US House of Representatives, February 14, 2002.
24. Largay J.L. Commentaries on principles vs. rules-based standards Acc. Horizons 17 1 2003 59-61
25. Nelson M. Behavioral evidence on the effects of principles and rules-based standards Acc. Horizons 17 1 2002 91-104
26. Norris F. Eichenwald K. Evidence proving fraud may turn out to be elusive. New York Times, January 30, 2002, http://www.nytimes.com/2002. . .30/business/30TIES.html?
27. Pentland B. Will auditors take over the world? Program, technique and the verification of everything Acc. Organ. Society 25 3 2000 307-312
28. Perry R. Accounting for securitizations Acc. Horizons 7 3 1993 71-92
29. Power M. The audit society: rituals of verification. London: Oxford University Press; 1997.
30. Power M. Auditing and the production of legitimacy, accounting, organizations and society. vol. 28 (4). p. 379-94.
31. Powers W.C. Troubh R.S. Winokur H.S. Report of investigation by the Special Investigative Committee of the Board of Directors of Enron Corp. Houston, TX: Enron Corp.; 2002.
32. Rutherford B.A. The true and fair view doctrine: a search for explication J. Bus. Finance Acc. 12 4 1985 483-492
33. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-204, 2002.
34. SEC. Study Pursuant to Section 108(d) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 on the Adoption by the United States Financial Reporting System of a Principles-Based Accounting System. Washington, DC: Securities and Exchange Commission; 2003.
35. Shipper K. Principles-based accounting standards Acc. Horizons 17 1 2003 61-72
36. Sprinzen S. Accounting abuses and proposed countermeasures. Standard & Poors: Ratings Direct, July 2 2002, http://wwww.stnadardandpoors.com/Forum/RatingsDirect.
37. Tauzin W.J. Dingell J.D. Greenwood J.C. Letter to Mr. Jeffrey Skilling c/o Bruce A. Hiler, Esq. O'Melveny & Myers, LLP, Committee on Energy and Commerce News Release, February 28, 2002, http://energycommittee.house.gov.
38. Weil J. Basic principles of accounting tripped Enron. Wall Street J, November 12, 2001, p. C-1.