Home Solutions How should Ott respond to Habbe’s remark about firing nonvested employees?
We write, we don’t plagiarise! Every answer is different no matter how many orders we get for the same assignment. Your answer will be 100% plagiarism-free, custom written, unique and different from every other student.
I agree to receive phone calls from you at night in case of emergency
Please share your assignment brief and supporting material (if any) via email here at: [email protected] after completing this order process.
The primary theme of the paper is How should Ott respond to Habbe’s remark about firing nonvested employees? in which you are required to emphasize its aspects in detail. The cost of the paper starts from $0 and it has been purchased and rated 4.9 points on the scale of 5 points by the students. To gain deeper insights into the paper and achieve fresh information, kindly contact our support.
(Nonvested Employees—An Ethical Dilemma) Thinken Technology recently merged with College Electronix (CE), a computer graphics company. In performing a comprehensive audit of CE’s accounting system, Gerald Ott, internal audit manager for Thinken Technology, discovered that the new subsidiary did not record pension assets and liabilities, subject to GAAP. The net present value of CE’s pension assets was $15.5 million, the vested benefit obligation was $12.9 million, and the projected benefit obligation was $17.4 million. Ott reported this audit finding to Julie Habbe, the newly appointed controller of CE. A few days later, Habbe called Ott for his advice on what to do. Habbe started her conversation by asking, “Can’t we eliminate the negative income effect of our pension dilemma simply by terminating the employment of nonvested employees before the end of our fiscal year?”
Answer the following question (# your response):
Read and reply to one student’s response. This is an automatic assigned peer review. Your reply should be a based on your analysis of the student’s response (min. 100 words). You may comment on why you agree or disagree with the response, what sort of evidence supports or refutes their position, or you may ask questions related to their response.