Discussion Ethics Case: Profit Manipulation In 2010

Discussion Ethics Case Profit Manipulationin 2010 The Moncrieff Comp

Discuss with your peers the ethical dilemma Moncrieff faces in determining whether or not the additional units should be purchased. Should Moncrief exercise its right to purchase inventory at will, resulting in a reduction in net income, or recognize the rights of Jim Lester to receive profit for the sale of his product, shareholders' rights to have their investment appreciate through positive earnings, and government entities' rights to collect tax on economic net income? Why?

Paper For Above instruction

The ethical dilemma faced by Moncrieff Company in the scenario presented revolves around the decision to purchase additional inventory at year-end, which would manipulate financial statements by reducing net income. This situation raises critical questions about corporate ethics, accounting standards, and stakeholder responsibilities. The core of the dilemma is whether Moncrieff should prioritize its immediate financial interests through potentially manipulative practices or uphold ethical standards that align with fairness and legal compliance, thereby respecting the rights of Jim Lester, shareholders, and government authorities.

From an ethical standpoint, the decision to purchase additional units solely to reduce profit appears to be a form of profit manipulation—a practice that can distort true economic performance. Such manipulative accounting tactics can mislead stakeholders, including shareholders and investors, about the company's actual profitability. Falsifying or artificially deflating earnings can have serious repercussions, including loss of investor trust, damage to the company’s reputation, and potential legal penalties. Ethical business practices advocate for transparency and honesty, emphasizing that companies should report financial results that reflect genuine economic activities and conditions.

Jim Lester’s rights to profit from the sale of his product highlight the importance of honoring contractual agreements. If Moncrieff were to purchase inventory solely to lower profits artificially, it could be argued that they are neglecting their obligation to compensate Lester fairly, which can be viewed as an unethical breach of contract or fair dealing. Recognizing Lester’s right to a share of the gross profit not only respects contractual obligations but also promotes ethical business relationships and trust between business partners.

Shareholders also have vested interests in the company’s consistent and transparent earnings, as their investments rely on the company’s profitability and potential for appreciation. Manipulative practices that artificially deflate profits to evade taxes or improve short-term appearances can undermine shareholder confidence and distort the true value of the company. From an ethical perspective, management has an obligation to ensure that financial disclosures accurately reflect the company's financial health, thereby promoting informed decision-making and maintaining stakeholder trust.

Furthermore, government authorities rely on accurate financial reporting for taxation purposes. Manipulating profits to reduce taxable income can be considered tax evasion, which is unethical and illegal. Upholding tax compliance is fundamental to ensuring that the company contributes its fair share to public goods and services. Ethical businesses should comply with tax laws and contribute to societal well-being, rather than undermine the system through profit manipulation.

In decision-making, Moncrieff faces the challenge of balancing short-term financial management with ethical practices and stakeholder responsibilities. While the temptation to manipulate profits for strategic advantages might be high, this approach risks long-term damage to reputation and legal standing. Instead, a principled decision would favor transparency and fairness—recognizing Lester's contractual rights, accurately reporting financial results, and complying with tax obligations.

Ultimately, the ethical choice lies in resisting the temptation to manipulate earnings artificially. By purchasing inventory at year-end only when justifiable and in accordance with accounting standards, Moncrieff can uphold integrity, foster trust with stakeholders, and operate within legal and ethical boundaries. Such a stance not only enhances the company's credibility but also aligns with the broader societal expectations of honesty, fairness, and corporate responsibility.

References

• Bernstein, L. A., & Bernstein, R. (2019). Business Ethics: Facing Up to the Issues. Boston: Cengage Learning.
• Crane, A., Matten, D., & Spence, L. J. (2014). Corporate Social Responsibility: Readings and Cases in a Global Context. Routledge.
• Gaa, J. C., & Thorne, L. (2011). Ethical considerations in financial reporting: The role of ethical standards in accounting practices. Accounting Horizons, 25(3), 535-548.
• Hopkins, M. M. (2018). Ethical dilemmas and ethical decision-making in corporate accounting. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(1), 1-10.
• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2004). Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Harvard Business School Press.
• Lewis, P., & Schiemann, W. A. (2014). Ethical decision-making in accounting: The importance of integrity and independence. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(2), 241-253.
• Power, M. (2013). Financial accounting and ethics: Challenges and opportunities. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 38(7-8), 555-574.
• Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2018). Contemporary Environmental Accounting. Greenleaf Publishing.
• Sexton, T. R., & Helm, R. (2010). Ethical issues in financial accounting: Implications for practice. Ethics & Behavior, 20(3), 244-256.
• Weiss, J. W. (2014). Business Ethics: A Stakeholder and Issues Management Approach. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.