Penn Square Bank & Down Corning Bankruptcy Essay Example for Free

Penn self-coloured believe Down Corning Bankruptcy Essay harmonise to Norm Bowie, sometimes being moral enhances the bottom line rather than reduces it (Hartman, 2005, p108). Unfortunately, in the instances of Penn Square Bank and the Dow Corning bankruptcy, that may not shed been the case. The following will examine the particulars of these situations and discuss the ethical issues confront for each.Penn Square BankPenn Square Bank was a small bank that played a large aim in the Oklahoma banking crisis of the early 1980s. In an effort to maximize on the profits of the booming oil color industry, the upper management of Penn Square Bank cut corners in several areas of its new lending division. rein multitudement to stick out million-dollar loans became lax. Col later onal valuation and revenue recognition was severely over estimated without verification of the accompaniment to support such claims. Loan contracts were with casual deals and unspecific terms. Credit was extended based upon unverified personal earn paid for by the client. These certification errors led to loans not properly secured (Caskey, 1985).In addition, Penn Square was to a greater extent and more money, which facilitated errors in revenue recognition as the bank accepted over estimated valuation claims without requiring loan or interest payments. Thus, on paper the bank looked successful without ever possessing the funds to support its lending endeavors. Finally, reliance was extended without true verification of asset valuation or proper documentation, and re-extended when the client could not enkindle the payments necessary to support the lofty loans (Caskey, 1985). Each of Penn Square Banks executions represents a form of fiscal statement fraud, which led to its downfall in 1982. According to Fraud Examination, there are three slipway to deter financial statement fraud (1) reduce the pressure to site the fraud, (2) reduce the opportunity to commit the fraud, and (3) reduce the rationalization of the fraud (Wells, 2005). However, in this instance, most if not all of the fraud committed canister be attributed to demanding goals set by Penn State Bank owner, Bill Jennings.As explained by Hartman, the driving force of profit maximization created a business environment to facilitate fraud (2005). Because profit was the sole motivator, documentation was inadequate, collateral valuation and revenue recognition was overstated, and conviction extension was unverified and inferior. Instead,Penn Square Bank should construct considered the following measuresAn oversight or review board should be been established to oversee verification of credit or collateral valuation and determine the risk associated with each loan.Documentation requirements should have been heavily implement and maintained by the review board.Contract and loan deals should have been regulated to the office with strict documentation requirements.Disclosures should have been made reg arding the lack of loan and interest payments.Asset valuation and revenue recognition should have been accurately portrayed to investors, clients, and potential buyers.Upper management should have established beau monde ethical standards and obligate these standards with strict consequences for violation without exception. Unfortunately, all the measures to deter fraud that should have been considered were undermined by the owners sweep over demand for success. Thus, Jennings need to maximize profits and increase gross revenue created the pressure, opportunity, and rationalization to commit each action of fraud.Dow Corning BankruptcyDow Corning Corporation is the big name in silicone and silicone-based material production. But in 1995, the companionship pointd for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to protect itself from lawsuits regarding their silicone-based bosom institutes. Some advocated that the action was an effort to avoid compensating women for their injuries (Book review, 1996, p7). However, according to Hartman, Chapter 11 bankruptcy is intended to protect companies from creditors while it undergoes restructuring in an effort to stave off liquidation. By doing so, the company continues business, pays taxes, and provide jobs but is allowed time to reorganize to triumph over its economic hardship (Hartman, 2005).The ethical altercate is to use Chapter 11 as it is intended as a restructuring tool to avoid losing everything rather than file for Chapter 11 as a way of cheating its creditors out of owed money. Hartman suggests that what is ethical in regard to bankruptcy is to go beyond what the laws require and uphold the debt agreements made with creditors (Hartman, 2005). Dow Corning seemed to have that same perspective. Nine old age later the company emerged from bankruptcy after settling the lawsuits for a payout of $3.3 billion over the next 15 years (Arndt, 2004).During the time under Chapter 11, the company reorganizeditself to refocus silicone produ ction to develop fabrics, materials, and pharmaceutical products (Arndt, 2004). These sales and expanding markets will help Dow Corning to pay its debts to the 300,000 women named in the settlement (Sissell, 2004). Thus, Dow Corning is Chapter 11 bankruptcy free but soothe upholding its ethical obligation to the wronged party and its creditors.Although Dow Cornings actions following the Chapter 11 emergence was ethically sound, its actions leading to the register was anything but. Problems with Dow Cornings silicone breast implants began as early as 1984 when they lost a lawsuit claiming the implant caused medical illness such as autoimmune disease.During the investigation for this lawsuit, lawyers found evidence showing Dow Corning executives were alive(predicate) of complaints from doctors, concerns about the lack of long-term testing, and cases of the implant bursting during surgery. In addition, the study that supposedly proved the effectiveness and guard of the product reve aled detrimental long-term effects on the animals under experimentation (Book review, 1996).However, throughout all the breast implant concerns, Down Corning continued to advocate the safety of their product going as far as to hire high profile and extremely expensive teams of legal and public relations specialists. In addition, allegations were present of executives attempting to destroy damning internal documents suggesting upper management was trying to cover up its liability in the claims. The 1984 lawsuit found Dow Corning guilty of fraud and deceit stating the company provided inferior and incomplete information by understating the risks to make an informed decision (Book review, 1996). More important, it revealed the unethical behavior of the executives and company as a whole.