内部控制【外文翻译】
- 格式:doc
- 大小:58.50 KB
- 文档页数:11
Internal management, establish a sound internal control system, enterprises and the needs for enterprises to face market risks and challenges. Only in accordance with the actual situation of their own, developed to meet the needs of internal management control system, and strictly follow the implementation can be sustained, steady and healthy development.内部管理,建立健全内部控制制度,企业和企业面临的市场风险和挑战的需要。
只有按照自己的实际情况,开发出满足内部管理控制系统的需求,并严格遵照执行能够持续,稳定和健康的发展。
The so-called internal control, the means by the enterprises board of directors, managers and other staff implementation, in order to ensure the reliability of financial reporting, operating efficiency and effectiveness of existing laws and regulations to follow, and so provide reasonable assurance that the purpose of the course. Internal controls related to enterprise production and management of the control environment, risk assessment, supervision and decision-making, information and transfer and self-examination, from a business perspective on the whole in all aspects of production. Their effective implementation will undoubtedly promote enterprise production and management to a new level, to promote the rationalization of business processes and standardization.所谓内部控制,董事会的企业董事会,经理和其他员工实施的,为保证财务报告的可靠性,现有的法律法规,经营的效率和效果跟踪,并提供合理的保证,本课程的教学目的。
会计内部控制中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)内部控制透视:理论与概念摘要:内部控制是会计程序或控制系统,旨在促进效率或保证一个执行政策或保护资产或避免欺诈和错误。
内部是一个组织管理的重要组成部分。
它包括计划、方法和程序使用,以满足任务,目标和目的,并在这样做,支持基于业绩的管理。
内部控制是管理阶层的平等与控制可以帮助管理者实现资源的预期的有效管理的结果通过。
内部控制应减少或违规错误的风险关联未被发现的,但设计和建立有效的内部控制不是一个简单的任务,不可能是一个实现通过快速修复短套。
在此讨论了内部文件的概念的不同方面的内部控制和管制。
关键词:内部控制,管理控制,控制环境,控制活动,监督1、介绍环境需要新的业务控制变量不为任何潜在的股东和管理人士的响应因子为1,另外应执行/她组织了一个很大的控制权。
控制是管理活动的东西或以上施加控制。
思想的产生和近十年的发展需要有系统的商业资源和控制这种财富一个新的关注。
主题之一热一回合管制的商业资源是分析每个控制成本效益。
作为内部控制和欺诈的第一道防线,维护资产以及预防和侦查错误。
内部控制,我们可以说是一种控制整个系统的财务和其他方面的管理制定了为企业的顺利运行;它包括内部的脸颊,内部审计和其他形式的控制。
COSO的内部控制描述如下。
内部控制是一个客观的方法用来帮助确保实现。
在会计和组织理论,内部控制是指或目标目标的过程实施由组织的结构,工作和权力流动,人员和具体的管理信息系统,旨在帮助组织实现。
这是一种手段,其中一个组织的资源被定向,监控和测量。
它发挥着无形的(重要的作用,预防和侦查欺诈和保护组织的资源,包括生理(如,机械和财产)和乙二醇,声誉或知识产权,如商标)。
在组织水平,内部控制目标与可靠性的目标或战略的财务报告,及时反馈业务上的成就,并遵守法律,法规。
在具体的交易水平,内部控制是指第三方采取行动以实现一个具体目标(例如,如何确保本组织的款项,在申请服务提供有效的。
外文翻译原文Regulation by disclosure: the case of internal control Material:/content/351u43877v108j45/author:Laura F. Spira Michael Page…the subject of internal control, once a guaranteed remedy for sleeplessness, has made a spectacular entry onto political and regulatory agendas. (Power 1997: 57) In his analysis of the development of the role of audit, Power observes that internal control has become increasingly important as part of a system of regulation which relies on making internal mechanisms visible through forms of self-validation and disclosure. Corporate governance requirements have frequently been couched in the form of codes of practice on the principle of ‘comply or explain’ rat her than prescriptive legislation. The monitoring role of the board of directors, which forms the apex of the internal control system of an organisation, has been emphasised. The influence of particular interest groups has been important in the negotiation of these developments. Auditors, both internal and external, can claim expertise in internal control, advancing their organisational position in the case of internal auditors (Spira and Page 2003) and increasing the potential for sales of specialised services in the case of external auditors. Regulators and legislators have focused on internal control issues as a policy response to crises (Cunningham 2004).The use of internal control as a corporate governance device reflects a subtle but significant chang e in its conception, moving from the original ‘‘supportive’’ notion that internal control systems were an integral part of the structure of an organization which enabled its goals to be achieved, to the more recent view of internal control as a substantial ly ‘‘preventive’’ system, designed to minimise obstructions to goal achievement and carrying significantly greater expectations of the effectiveness of such systems. As Page and Spira (2004) note, companies have also increasingly taken ‘risk-based’ approac hes to internal control because of the increased pace of organizational change—control systems change too fast to be rigidly documented and companies may not even have full documentation relating to some of their IT based systems. For these reasons there has been an increase in‘delegation’ of control downwards in the organization and there is likely to be no central record of control systems.The emergence of risk-based approaches to internal control has resulted in a confluence of internal control and risk management to the point that an influential publication (Jones and Sutherland 1999) issued at the same time as the Turnbull guidance referred frequently to ‘‘internal control and risk management’’ as a single concept in providing practical assistance for boards in complying with the Turnbull disclosure requirements.The demonstration of ‘‘good’’ corporate governance is a challenge for boards of directors but describing structural mechanisms such as internal control processes may be one way of meeting demands for transparency. Thus, what was once an internal interest becomes a means of demonstrating regulatory compliance.Concerns about internal control in the US and the UK arose initially from a desire to establish the boundaries of external auditor responsibility. The difficulties of defining internal control are illustrated in the earliest US experience, as summarized in a lecture by Mautz (1980). He quotes the 1949 AICPA definition: Internal control comprises the plan of organization and all of the coordinate methods and measures adopted within a business to safeguard its assets, check the accuracy and reliability of its accounting data, promote operational efficiency, and encourage adherence to prescribed managerial policies.and describes the concern of fi rms’ legal counsel about the broadness of this definition. This concern led to a new definition issued in 1958 which split the four parts of the original defi nition between ‘‘accounting control’’ (safeguarding assets and checking reliability and accura cy of accounting data) and ‘‘administrative control’’ (promotion of operational ef ficiency and encouragement of adherence to prescribed management policies) and defi ned auditors’ responsibility as reviewing accounting controls only. A further narrowing took place in 1972 when the US auditing profession limited the two components of ‘‘accounting control’’ even more.Up to this point, the definition was really only of concern to companies and their auditors but the passing of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in 1977 changed this. The Act was passed in response to bribery scandals and for the rst time envisaged the use of internal control as regulation. It was based on a narrow conception of internal control newly described as ‘‘internal accounting control’’. It also changed the focus of internal control: whereas the concerns of ‘‘accounting control’’ had been at low organizational levels and clerical procedures, the Act nowshifted attention to controls at board level for the first time.A process for identifying, evaluating and managing the significant risks faced by the Group has been in place throughout the period and is reviewed regularly by the Board. The management of each business is responsible for establishing detailed controls which are embedded within operational and financial procedures in order to manage business risks on a day-to-day basis. Changes in key business objectives which may impact on the risk role of the Group and require changes to existing controls and procedures were monitored during the year by the Chief Executive and Group Finance Director through the established framework of monthly reviews with the Managing Directors and Financial Controllers of each of the business units. The findings and recommendations of internal audit work carried out during the 2004 financial year have been reported to the Audit Committee and a summary of the findings has been presented to the Board. The internal audit program focuses on the key risks inherent in the businesses and the system of control necessary to manage such risks. (Parity Plc)There is little surprise here: in fact it appears to be a series of statements of the obvious. The same impression is gained when reviewing the disclosures of Shaftsbury Plc.The key elements of the Company’s procedur es and internal financial control framework are:1. The close involvement of the executive Directors in all aspects of day-to-day operations, including regular meetings with senior staff to review all operational aspects of the business.2. Clearly defined responsibilities and limits of authority. The Board has responsibility for strategy and has adopted a schedule of matters which are required to be brought to it for decision.3. A comprehensive system of financial reporting and forecasting. Financial accounts are prepared quarterly and submitted to the Board. Profit and cash flow forecasts are prepared at least quarterly, approved by the Board and used to monitor actual performance.4. Regular meetings of the Board and Audit Committee at which financial information is reviewed and business risks are identified and monitored.The company seems to have the kinds of controls that could be expected in a public company. The only context in which ‘risk’ is mentioned is ‘identi fication and monitoring’ that occurs, (in some unexplained way) at regular board and auditcommittee meetings.Both these disclosures are largely ‘statements of the obvious’; while they are apparently company specific there is nothing that surprises, indeed, one would be very surprised if the opposite were stated.Other companies disclosures fall on a continuum of informativeness. For example Electrocomponents plc explains that risk management is ‘an integral part of the system of internal control’ and goes on to give a details of its c ontrol structure and risk processes within a report of average length.Substantive disclosures may include:●descriptions of company structure, particularly relating to committeescharged with risk management responsibilities and their relationship and communications with the board●the role of the audit committee and of the internal audit function, and therelationship between them and with the board●descriptions of risks identified as material●descriptions of risk events and action taken in responseNat ional Grid plc provides a lengthy section ‘‘Risk Factors’’ which identi fies a very extensive range of risks faced by the company.But as one Turnbull Review respondent observed, this is a historical record and current situations may differ.4.5 Effectiveness of internal control and dealing with weaknessesPara 38 of the Guidance sates:In relation to Code Provision D.2.1, the board should summarise the process it (where applicable, through its committees) has applied in reviewing the effectiveness of the system of internal control. It should also disclose the process it has applied to deal with material internal control aspects of any significant problems disclosed in the annual report and accounts.As mentioned previously, reporting on internal control effectiveness was the most contentious of the Cadbury recommendations and the compromise reached in the Combined Code was that companies should report the process that they had undertaken, but not necessarily the results. Only one company expressed a positive opinion on the quality of internal control.The guidance does not ask explicitly that boards indicate the conclusions drawn from the reviews undertaken and only one company does so in a positive fashion The board considers that the measures taken, including physical controls,segregation of duties and reviews by management, provide sufficient and objective assurance.Others tend to frame their conclusions in a negative way:In the opinion of the Board the review did not indicate that the system was ineffective or unsatisfactory.Having reviewed its effectiveness, the directors are not aware of any significant weakness or defi ciency in the Group’s system of internal controls during the year. (Mersey Docks and Harbour Company)Where such a statement is accompanied by a more detailed account of the review process, it appears to have been included as a formality within a substantive, company specific disclosure.In rare cases, actions taken as a result of reviews or incidents are described:Following the significant issues experienced within the implementation of the new supply chain system, the following additional processes have been put in place:●specific management teams were convened to examine the root causeof the supply problems, and to put in place new processes and controls to reduce and eliminate these issues;●management report weekly to the Executive Committee on the progresswith the stabilization of the system and the effectiveness of supply to our customers;●the risk management process outlined below was reviewed andenhanced with the emphasis on ownership, risk mitigation activities and improved monitoring activities to act as early warning indicators of risk occurrence.These activities are designed to strengthen the control environment. (MFIFurniture Group plc)This analysis using the headings derived from the Turnbull guidance (see above) demonstrates the superficiality of disclosures that appear to comply formally with the guidance.译文信息披露制度:内部控制资料来源:/content/351u43877v108j45/作者:Laura F. Spira Michael Page使用内部控制作为公司治理的一种策略,反映了公司治理中一个微妙但是重要的改变。
本科毕业论文外文文献及译文文献、资料题目:Problems and Countermeasures on CorporateInternal Audit in China文献、资料来源:Asian Social Science文献、资料发表日期:2011.01院(部):商学院专业:会计学班级:会计XX姓名:XXX学号:2008XXXXX指导教师:XXX翻译日期:2012.5.27外文文献:Problems and Countermeasures on Corporate Internal Audit inChinaRefers to internal control by the enterprise's board of directors, management and other personnel to impact on the following goals to provide reasonable assurance that the process of:1. The reliability of financial reporting;2. The effectiveness and efficiency of operation;3. Compliance with laws and regulations related to the situationThe definition of internal control highlighted internal control is a process, that is, a means to an end and not an end in itself. Internal control procedure is not only by policy regulations, the certificate forms and composition, but also by man-made factors. The definition of "reasonable assurance" concept, meaning that internal control in fact can not be goals for the organization to provide an absolute guarantee. Reasonable assurance that also means that the organization's internal control costs should not exceed the expected benefits received.Although the definition of internal control covers a wide range, but not all of the internal control measures associated with the audit of the financial statements. In general, audit-related and only the reliability of financial reporting and control measures, that is, those who report on the impact of external financial information prepared by control measures. However, if other control measures can affect the implementation of audit procedures auditors used by the reliability of data, these control measures may also be relevant. For example, auditors in the implementation of analytical procedures used by non-financial data (such as the production of statistical data) of the control measures associated with the audit.Internal control audit of internal control is a special form; this is an internal economic activities and management system of regulation, reasonable and effective independent rating agencies, in a sense to other internal controls to control. Internal audits in enterprises should maintain relative independence, should be independent of the other management departments, preferably by the Board or the Board under the leadership. OIA department is responsible for review of the internal control system of the implementation and results of the review board to the enterprise or the top management report to the authorities. Internal audit work more carefully, the sound internalcontrol system, the more internal controls to enhance the efficiency and reliability.Internal audit refers to an economic monitoring activity that sections or independent auditing organizations and persons inside enterprises, according to national laws, regulations and policies, apply special process and methods to audit the financial receipts and expenditures and economic activities of their own sections and enterprises, to find out their authenticity, legitimacy and validity, and to propose suggestions. The research on internal audit can promote the effectiveness and efficiency of internal audit, benefit effective running of corporate internal control system, improve the quality of accounting information, strengthen corporate internal management, increase business efficiency and effect, and ensure the security and integrity of corporate assets. Differently from western countries, China’s internal audit was established and developed under the Government’s help. However, compared to social audit and governmental audit, China’s internal audit obviously lags behind no matter on institution setup or on functional effect. Internal audit has developed for over two decades, but people still can’t be embedded inwardly, especially most of corporate directors, who think internal audit is dispensable, and has no direct relationship with corporate economic benefit. Some corporate directors consider internal audit restricts their self business rights and weakens their authority. Thus, they either do not set internal audit department, or deprive its rights even if it exists. The staffs in internal audit department are even excluded and isolated, and ca n’t play their roles as expected.With the development of market economy and embedded ness of reform, many new situations and problems have emerged continuously. However, China has no integrated internal audit laws yet so far. Present internal audit regu lation is “Audit Requirements for Internal Audit Work” which was issued in 1987 and can’t meet the requirement of current economic situation. China’s enterprises pay little attention to in ternal audit, and internal audit staff has a low quality of corporate, so it stays at low position inside enterprises. It is difficult to attract talents into internal audit team. Therefore, renewal of the team can’t be accomplish ed, which results in single knowledge structure of audit staff, especially lack of risk management knowledge and information technology knowledge.Firstly, they are lack of cultural knowledge, theoretical level and professional technique. At present, most of internal audit staffs change their profession from financial department or other departments, so their scarcity of knowledge disenable them get competent in internal audit work.Secondly, there are few full-time employees, but many part-time ones. The problems also represent as: lack of further education, unreasonable knowledge structure, shortage of systematic audit specialization knowledge and skill learning, poor mastery of modern audit means, vacancy of EDP internal audit and network information internal audit. Lastly, individual audit staffs are lack of professional ethics, influenced by unhealthy social ethos. They behave irregularly on audit and their audit style is not solid as well, which ruins their authority and image.China’s internal aud it staffs come form internal enterprises, who are guided directly by their own enterprises, so they hardly show the authority of internal audit.Being a significant characteristic, authority is as important as independence. As internal audit is lack of authority it should have had, it is hard to play monitoring roles.Modern enterprise system requires internal audit make pre-, interim, and post-monitor and evaluate. As internal audit exists inside audited organizations, its functions should be more inclined to pre-audit and interim auditing with increasing economic benefit as a target, and emphasize on accomplishing managerial functions.China’s audit means is sti ll manual audit, which greatly restricts the efficiency of internal audit monitoring. As for audit procedure, auditing risks increase due to incomplete consideration on audit scheme, imperfect audit evidence, non-detailed audit work division, non-standard operation of audit staffs, and so on.We need to make good use of efficient and effective internal audit, neither only depending on individual enterprise nor social restriction, but all efforts from the state, society and enterprises. Definitely speaking, we propose the following countermeasures.“No rules, no standards.” China is la ck of special laws and regulations on internal audit, which is the key reason why internal audit ca n’t guarantee its desired effect. Therefore, we suggest the government to fully study current economic trend on internal audit and issue feasible laws and regulations on internal audit in order to legally guarantee the necessity, work scope, authority and practice regulation of internal audit.According to the above discussion, the shortage of independence and authority is the key factor that internal audit can’t play its roles. However, if internal audit is charged by relevant staffs of audited organizations, and guided by the management of that as well, internal audit, in any case,can’t guarantee its independence and authority. If the government can qualify internal audit staffs, systematically manage qualified staffs, appoint them according to corporate practical needs, assess and monitor them and distribute salary to them by the government, and implement regular turn, the independence and authority of internal audit will be greatly promoted, at the same time, the quality of the staffs also will enormously increase.It is not enough for the state and society to regulate and define internal audit functions only. Corporate managers should change their minds, and make clear that internal audit staffs are friends but not enemies and more functions of internal audit are strengthening corporate management, therefore, they are the important force and specialists of corporate management. Only in this way, can managers play roles of internal audit forwardly, cooperate with internal audit staffs positively, eliminate interference mood, and strengthen internal audit work voluntarily.Internal audit should tra nsform from “monitoring dominant” to “service dominant”, strengthen service function, highlight the “introversion” of internal audit, base on the requirem ents of corporate management, and ensure the business target of corporate optimal value. Along with increasingly strengthening corporate internal control, gradual improvement of corporate governance structure, and continuous promotion of accounting information quality, regular audit target or beneficial audit target will be promoted to be main audit target, meanwhile, the focus of internal audit work will transfer as well. In the case of good opportunity, corporate internal audit should be adjusted on its working emphasis correspondingly. And working field also needs to be changed from financial audit to managerial audit. On the basis of effective development or proper ap pointment of external section’s engaging in financial au dit, internal audit department should focus on internal control audit, managerial (operative) audit, economic responsibility audit, contract (agreement) audit, engineering audit, environment internal audit, quality control audit, risks management audit, strategy management audit and management fraud audit.The so-called internal control, the means by the enterprises board of directors, managers and other staff implementation, in order to ensure the reliability of financial reporting, operating efficiency and effectiveness of existing laws and regulations to follow, and so provide reasonable assurance that the purpose of the course. Internal controls related to enterprise production and management of the control environment, risk assessment, supervision and decision-making,information and transfer and self-examination, from a business perspective on the whole in all aspects of production. Their effective implementation will undoubtedly promote enterprise production and management to a new level, to promote the rationalization of business processes and standardization.The construction of the internal control system and effective operation of enterprises depends on good corporate governance structure. Modern enterprise ownership and management rights of separation, on the objective need for a standardized corporate governance, strengthen internal controls to protect the owners, operators, creditors and other legitimate rights and interests. However, the current situation, most of the state-owned enterprise restructuring, although the formal establishment of the corporate governance structure, but since property rights are clear, investors are deficient, did not form an effective internal checks and balances of power, coupled with the inherent internal control Limitations, resulting in weakening the intensity of internal control.中文译文:中国企业内部审计存在的问题及对策内部控制是指受到企业的董事会、管理层和其他人员影响的,旨在对下列目标的实现提供合理保证的过程:1.财务报告的可靠性;2.经营效果和效率;3.遵守相关法律和法规的情况内部控制的定义强调了内部控制是一个程序,即达到目的的手段,而且其本身并不是目的。
文献出处:Lakis V, Giriūnas L. THE CONCEPT OF INTERNAL CONTROL SYSTEM: THEORETICAL ASPECT[J]. Ekonomika/Economics, 2012, 91(2).原文THE CONCEPT OF INTERNALCONTROLSYSTEM:THEORETICALASPECTVaclovas Lakis, Lukas Giriūnas*Vilnius University, LithuaniaIntroductionOne of the basic instruments of enterprise control, whose implementation in modern economic conditions provide conditions for achieving a competitive advantage over other enterprises is the creation of an effective internal control system. In the industry sector, the market is constantly changing, and this requires changing the attitude to internal control from treating it only in the financial aspect to the management of the control process. Internal control as such becomes an instrument and means of risk control, which helps the enterprise to achieve its goals and to perform its tasks. Only an effective internal control in the enterprise is able to help objectively assessing the potential development and tendencies of enterprise performance and thus to detect and eliminate the threats and risks in due time as well as to maintain a particular fixed level of risk and to provide for its reasonablesecurity .The increasing variety of concepts of internal control systems requires their detailed analysis. A detailed analysis of the conceptions might help find the main reasons for their increasing number. It may also help to elaborate a structural scheme of the generalized concept of internal control. Consequently, it may help decrease the number of mistakes and frauds in enterprises and to offer the precautionary means that might help to avoid mistakes and build an effective internal control system.The purpose of the study: to compile the definition of the concept of internal control system and to elaborate the structural scheme of the generalized conception for Lithuanian industrial enterprises.The object of the research: internal control.To achieve the aim, the following tasks were carried out:to examine the definitions of internal control;•to design a flowchart for the existing definitions of internal control;•to formulate a new internal control system definition;•to identify the place of the internal control system in a company’s objectives and • its management activities.Study methods: for the analysis of the conceptions of control, internal control, the concept of internal control system, systematic and comparative means of scietific methods of analysis were used.1. Research of control conceptionAccording to J. Walsh, J. Seward (1990), H. K. Chung, H. Lee Chong, H. K.Jung (1997), control may be divided into two types – internal and external controls those might help to equalize authority or concerned party‘s attitudes to some certain organization control. Internal control involves the supreme enterprise control apparatus and enterprise shareholders, whereas external control might be defined as the power in the market or branch, competitive environment or state business regulation. Such analytical division is essential when analysing industrial or other enterprises, because this attitude to control makes it more specific and properly defined.The identification of an appropriate primary theoretical base is an important task in forming the structure of knowledge about the study subject. Appropriately selected conceptions enable to elucidate the essence of the processes, to characterize them and to realize their interplays and interaction principles. Conceptions may be defined as a summation of empirical cognition which transforms practically achieved results into conceptions. The above ideas might be taken as abstractions and lead to an ungrounded conclusion, and through conceptions the reality might be lost. Operating with more than one conceptions allows to form a universal opinion about the reality. Noteworthy, when operating with conceptions an optimal agreement might be found between theory and practice: using the common point of contact –conceptions –a theorist and a practician will always find the way and understand one another.The main problem of internal control is related to the definition of control conception and the identification of the place of internal control in an organization. Constant changes of the extent, functions and roles of internal control enable to form acommon definition of internal control and to identify its place in an organization.Analysis of the concept of internal control and its interpretation are essential for assessing the internal control system, because the conception of control is widely used not only in scientific research, but also in the daily activities of an enterprise; therefore the same conception might have a lot of various meanings and interpretations. Analysis of the concept provides conditions for the further research, because it is impossible to form a model of internal control assessment if the research object is unknown. A lot of definitions and variations of control can be found in the publications by Lithuanian and foreign scientists and in public information sources. For example, in the Dictionary of International Words (2002), control is defined as: supervision, inspection of something; comparison of actual and required • conditions;an enterprise or a group of people that control the work and responsibility of other • enterprises or group s of people;maintenance of something.•On the other hand, in the specialized Dictionary of Economic Terms (2005), control is defined as a performance with a definite influence on the management of an enterprise, as rights based on laws and contracts that involve proprietary rights to the whole property or its part, or any other rights that enable to exert a significant influence on the management and performance of an enterprise, or state supervision. Even in common information sources the definitions of control are formulated differently, although the common meaning is quite similar. Analysis and practicalstudies of Lithuanian scientists’ works enable to state that there is no one solid concept, definition or description of control. For example, E. Bušk evičiūtė (2008) says that when control is more particularly defined, its rules and requirements are described in more detail, it becomes more effective, more specific, more psychologically suggestive, it gives more freedom limits of choice for supervisors and less possibilities of lawlessness for people under control when. Identifying the object of the research, it should be noted that different definitions of control are given in scientific studies by Sakalas, 2000; Navickas, 2011; Katkus, 1997; Buškevičiūtė, 2008; Drury, 2012; Bičiulaitis, 2001; Lee Summers, 1991; Patrick, Fardo, 2009; Spencer, Pickett, 2010; Gupta, 2010 and other Lithuanian and foreign scientists (see Fig. 1).The different conceptions and their interpretations indicate that there is no solid opinion about how to define control, and even scientists and practicians themselves do not agree upon a unified definition or description of control or the conception of internal control and its interpretations. In scientific literature, different interpretations of control conceptions are usually related to different aspects of this conception, and their meaning in different situations may be defined in different ways depending on the situation and other external factors. According to A. Katkus (1997), C. Drury (2009), R. Bičiulaitis (2001), D. R. Patrick, S. W. Fardo (2009), K. H. S. Pickett (2010), during a long-term period control is usually related to achieving the already settled goals, their improvement and insurance. In other information sources (D ictionary of International Words, 2002; Sakalas, 2000; Buškevičiūtė, 2008; Lee Summers, 1991) control is emphasized as a certain means of inspection whichprovides a possibility to regulate the planned and actual states and their performance. Despite these different opinions, control might be reasoned and revealed as a traditional function of any object of control, emphasized as one of the main self-defence means from the possible threats in the daily performance of an organization. There is also a more modern approach. For example, V. Navickas (2011) and P. Gupta (2010), presenting the concept of control, name it not only as one of the main factors that influence the organization’s performance and influences its management, but also as one of the assessment means of the taken decisions and achieved values. Such interpretation of the conception of control shows the main role of control. For example, R. Kanapickienė (2008) has analysed a big number of control definitions and says that only an effective and useful control should exist in an enterprise because each enterprise tries to implement its purposes and avoid the possible losses, i.e. mistakes and frauds. According to J.A. Pfister (2009), there are several types of control, and they can be grouped into strategic, management, and internal control. Thus, different researchers give different definitions of control, their descriptions have different goals, but different control definitions lead to numerous variations in the analysis of the conception of control. Thus, to create an effective control, the presence of its unified concept becomes a necessity and the basis for ensuring an effective control of the organization’s performance. The existence of different conceptions of control also indicates that there might be different types or kinds of control.2. The conception of internal controlHistorical development of internal control as individual enterprise system is not as broad as other management spheres in science directions. The definition of internal control was presented for the first time in 1949 by the American Institute of Certificated Accountants (AICPA). It defined internal control as a plan and other coordinated means and ways by the enterprise to keep safe its assets, check the covertness and reliability of data, to increase its effectiveness and to ensure the settled management politics. However, the presented definition of control concept has been constantly improved, and nowadays there is quite an extensive set of conceptions that indicates the system of internal control as one of the means of leadership to ensure safety of enterprise assets and its regular development. In 1992, the COSOmodel appeared; its analysis distinguished the concepts of risk and internal control. Nnow, the concept of internal control involved not only accounting mistakes and implementing means of their prevention, but also a modern attitude that might identify the spheres of control management and processes, and also a motivated development of their detailed analysis. The Worldwide known collapses of such companies as Enron, Worldcom, Ahold, Parmalat and others determined to issue in 2002 the Law of Sarbanes–Oxley in the USA, in which attention is focused on the effectiveness of the enterprise internal control system and its assessment. Such a significant law as that of Sarbanes–Oxley has dearly show that not only the internal control system must be concretized and clearly defined, but also the means of implementing the internal control system and assessing their effectiveness must be covered. The concept of internal control was further improved by such Lithuanian and foreign scientists as A.Сонин (2000), D. Robertson (1993), M.R. Simmons (1995), I. Toliatienė (2002), V. Lakis (2007), R. Bičiulaitis (2001), J. Mackevičius (2001) and the international scientific organizations COSO, INTOSAI, CICA, IT Governance Institute.A comparative analysis of the introduced concepts of internal control shows that the usage of the concept of internal control is quite broad as it is supposed to involve the performance not only of the state, but also of the private sector. Although the conception of internal control is defined in different ways emphasizing its different aspects, the essential term still remains the same in all authors’ defini tions: internal control is the inspection, observation, maintenance and regulation of the enterprise’s work (see Fig. 3.).It should be also be mentioned that the system of internal control may be defined in different ways every time. For example, R. T. Yeh and S. H. Yeh (2007) pay attention to the fact that usually such values as honesty, trust, respect, openness, skills, courage, economy, initiative, etc. are not pointed out, although they definitely can influence not only the understanding of the concept of internal control, but also its definition, because in different periods of time and in different situations it can obtain slightly different shades of meaning. Control and people, and values produced by people or their performance are tightly connected; consequently, internal control must be also oriented to the enterprise’s values, mission and vision; it does not matter how differently authors define the conception assessment limits: significant attention must be paid not to internal control itself, but to the identification of its functions and evaluation. Mostly internal control is concerned with authority management tools that help to control processes and achieve enterprise goals (COSO, 1992; Сонин, 2000; INTOSAI, 2004; CobiT, 2007; Toliatienė, 2002; Coco, 1995).C.J. Buck, J.B. Breuker (2008) declare internal control as a mistake detecting and correctingsystem; although J. Mackevičius (2001) and R. Bičiulaitis (2001a) state that internal control is defined as a summation of certain rules, norms and means, actually such definitions are identical, but internal control must be related to safety, the rational use of property and the reliability of financial accounting.Results of a comprehensive analysis of internal control enable to state that, although different authors give different definitions of internal control, there are still some general purposes of the system of internal control, aimed, to ensure reliable and comprehensive information, to protect the property and documents, to enssure an effective economic performance, observation of accounting principles and presentation of reliable financial records, obeying laws and executive acts, enterprise rules and the effective control of risk. Analysis of concept of internal control, presented in both foreign and Lithuanian literature enables to formulate its generalized definition: the system of internal control is part of enterprise management system, which ensures the implementation of its goals, effective economic and commercial performance, observance of accounting principles and an effective control of risks, which enables to minimize the number of intentional and unintentional mistakes and to avoid frauds in the process of enterprise performance, made by its authority or employees.The internal control system in a company must cover and help to properly organize and control the entire activity of the company; thus, according to majority of authors, internal control is all-inclusive activity in financial and management accounting, as well as in the strategic management of projects, operations, personneland the total quality management. However, the most important thing is that internal control should not only cover the entire activity of the company, but also take into account its objectives, goals and tasks in order to make its economic-commercial activity as effective as possible. Analysis of scientific literature in the field shows that it is important not only to predict the particular areas of internal control and interrelate them, but also to stress that the most important objective of internal control is the effective management of risk by identifying and eliminating errors and frauds inside the company. Therefore, the concept of internal control offered by the authors covers a company’s areas of activities, its tasks and objectives; also, it provides for the main goal – an effective risk management.Despite the quantitative indicators used for goal assessment, each enterprise and especially extractive industry enterprises where attention should be focused on avoiding mistakes and fraud should elaborate and introduce a really effective and optimal system of internal control and accounting so as to strengthen its position in the market and optimize profitability.ConclusionsThe analysis of control definitions has shown that rather wide variations of definitions and their interpretations prove control to be a wide concept, mainly due to the fact that control has quite many different aspects and its meaning in different situations may be also defined differently.Nevertheless, there are still some general aspects of the system of internal control, which include ensuring reliable and comprehensive information, protecting theproperty and documents, to ensure an effective economic performance, keeping to the principles of accounting and presenting reliable financial records, obeying laws and executive acts, enterprise rules and ensuring an effective control of risk.As a result of the study, the authors present an inclusive and generalizing definition of internal control: the system of internal control is part of the enterprise management system that ensures the implementation of the enterprise’s goals, its effective economic-commercial performance, observance of accounting principles and an effective control of work risks, which enables to minimize the number of intentional and unintentional mistakes, and to avoid frauds in the process of enterprise performance, made by its authority or employees.译文内部控制制度:理论研究拉基斯,卢卡斯维尔纽斯大学,立陶宛引言企业控制的基本工具之一,建立一个有效的内部控制制度,为现代经济条件下企业获得竞争优势提供了条件。
外文翻译原文INTERNAL CONTROL – INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK Material Source:Addendum to “Reporting to External Parties” May 1994 Author:Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission Senior executives have long sought ways to better control the enterprises they run. Internal controls are put in place to keep the company on course toward profitability goals and achievement of its mission, and to minimize surprises along the way. They enable management to deal with rapidly changing economic and competitive environments, shifting customer demands and priorities, and restructuring for future growth. Internal controls promote efficiency, reduce risk of asset loss, and help ensure the reliability of financial statements and compliance with laws and regulations.Because internal control serves many important purposes, there are increasing calls for better internal control systems and report cards on them. Internal control is looked upon more and more as a solution to a variety of potential problems.What Internal Control IsInternal control means different things to different people. This causes confusion among businesspeople, legislators, regulators and others. Resulting miscommunication and different expectations cause problems within an enterprise. Problems are compounded when the term, if not clearly defined, is written into law, regulation or rule.This report deals with the needs and expectations of management and others. It defines and describes internal control to:(1)Establish a common definition serving the needs of different parties.(2)Provide a standard against which business and other entities —large or small, in the public or private sector, for profit or not —can assess their control systems and determine how to improve them.Internal control is broadly defined as a process, effected by an entity’s board of directors, management and other personnel, designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories:(1)Effectiveness and efficiency of operations.(2)Reliability of financial reporting.(3)Compliance with applicable laws and regulations.The first category addresses an entity’s basic business objectives, including performance and profitability goals and safeguarding of resources. The second relates to the preparation of reliable published financial statements, including interim and condensed financial statements and selected financial data derived from such statements, such as earnings releases, reported publicly. The third deals with complying with those laws and regulations to which the entity is subject. These distinct but overlapping categories address different needs and allow a directed focus to meet the separate needs.Internal control systems operate at different levels of effectiveness. Internal control can be judged effective in each of the three categories, respectively, if the board of directors and management have reasonable assurance that:(1)They understand the extent to which the enti ty’s operations objectives are being achieved.(2)Published financial statements are being prepared reliably.(3)Applicable laws and regulations are being complied with.While internal control is a process, its effectiveness is a state or condition of the process at one or more points in time.Internal control consists of five interrelated components. These are derived from the way management runs a business, and are integrated with the management process. The components are:(1)Control Environment —The control environment sets the tone of an organization, influencing the control consciousness of its people. It is the foundation for all other components of internal control, providing discipline and structure. Control environment factors include the integrity, ethical values and competence of the entity’s people; management’s philosophy and operating style; the way management assigns authority and responsibility, and organizes and develops its people; and the attention and direction provided by the board of directors.(2)Risk Assessment — Every entity faces a variety of risks from external and internal sources that must be assessed. A precondition to risk assessment is establishment of objectives, linked at different levels and internally consistent. Risk assessment is the identification and analysis of relevant risks to achievement of the objectives, forming a basis for determining how the risks should be managed.Because economic, industry, regulatory and operating conditions will continue to change, mechanisms are needed to identify and deal with the special risks associated with change.(3)Control Activities — Control activities are the policies and procedures that help ensure management directives are carried out. They help ensure that necessary acti ons are taken to address risks to achievement of the entity’s objectives. Control activities occur throughout the organization, at all levels and in all functions. They include a range of activities as diverse as approvals, authorizations, verifications, reconciliations, reviews of operating performance, security of assets and segregation of duties.(4)Information and Communication — Pertinent information must be identified, captured and communicated in a form and timeframe that enable people to carry out their responsibilities. Information systems produce reports, containing operational, financial and compliance-related information, that make it possible to run and control the business. They deal not only with internally generated data, but also information about external events, activities and conditions necessary to informed business decision-making and external reporting. Effective communication also must occur in a broader sense, flowing down, across and up the organization. All personnel must receive a clear message from top management that control responsibilities must be taken seriously. They must understand their own role in the internal control system, as well as how individual activities relate to the work of others. They must have a means of communicating significant information upstream. There also needs to be effective communication with external parties, such as customers, suppliers, regulators and shareholders.(5)Monitoring — Internal control systems need to be monitored–a process that assess es the quality of the system’s performance over time. This is accomplished through ongoing monitoring activities, separate evaluations or a combination of the two. Ongoing monitoring occurs in the course of operations. It includes regular management and supervisory activities, and other actions personnel take in performing their duties. The scope and frequency of separate evaluations will depend primarily on an assessment of risks and the effectiveness of ongoing monitoring procedures. Internal control deficiencies should be reported upstream, with serious matters reported to top management and the board.There is synergy and linkage among these components, forming an integrated system that reacts dynamically to changing conditions.There is a direct relationship between the three categories of objectives, which are what an entity strives to achieve, and components, which represent what is needed to achieve the objectives. All components are relevant to each objectives category. When looking at any one category — the effectiveness and efficiency of operations, for instance —all five components must be present and functioning effectively to conclude that internal control over operations is effective.What Internal Control Can DoInternal control can help an entity achieve its performance and profitability targets, and prevent loss of resources. It can help ensure reliable financial reporting. And it can help ensure that the enterprise complies with laws and regulations, avoiding damage to its reputation and other consequences. In sum, it can help an entity get to where it wants to go, and avoid pitfalls and surprises along the way.What Internal Control Cannot DoUnfortunately, some people have greater, and unrealistic, expectations. They look for absolutes, believing that:(1)Internal control can ensure an entity’s success —that is, it will ensure achievement of basic business objectives or will, at the least, ensure survival. Even effective internal control can only help an entity achieve these objectives. It can provide management information about the entity’s progress, or lack of it, toward their achievement. But internal control cannot change an inherently poor manager into a good one. And, shifts in government policy or programs, competitors’ actio ns or economic conditions can be beyond management’s control. Internal control cannot ensure success, or even survival.(2)Internal control can ensure the reliability of financial reporting and compliance with laws and regulations.This belief is also unwarranted. An internal control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable — not absolute — assurance to management and the board regarding achievement of an entity’s objectives. The likelihood of achievement is affected by limitations inherent in all internal control systems. These include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the collusion of two or more people, and management has the ability to override the system. Another limiting factor is that the design of an internal control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs.Thus, while internal control can help an entity achieve its objectives, it is not a panacea.What to DoActions that might be taken as a result of this report depend on the position and role of the parties involved:(1)Senior Management — Most senior executives who contributed to this study believe they are basically “in control” of their organizations. Many said, however, that there are areas of their company —a division, a department or a control component that cuts across activities —where controls are in early stages of development or otherwise need to be strengthened. They do not like surprises. This study suggests that the chief executive initiate a self-assessment of the control system. Using this framework, a CEO, together with key operating and financial executives, can focus attention where needed.(2)Board Members — Members of the board of directors should discuss with senior management the state of the entity’s internal control system and provide oversight as needed. They should seek input from the internal and external auditors.(3)Other Personnel — Managers and other personnel should consider how their control responsibilities are being conducted in light of this framework, and discuss with more senior personnel ideas for strengthening control. Internal auditors should consider the breadth of their focus on the internal control system, and may wish to compare their evaluation materials to the evaluation tools.(4)Legislators and Regulators —Government officials who write or enforce laws recognize that there can be misconceptions and different expectations about virtually any issue. Expectations for internal control vary widely in two respects. First, they differ regarding what control systems can accomplish. As noted, some observers believe internal control systems will, or should, prevent economic loss, or at least prevent companies from going out of business. Second, even when there is agreement about what internal control systems can and can’t do, and abo ut the validity of the “reasonable assurance” concept, there can be disparate views of what that concept means and how it will be applied.(5)Professional Organizations —Rule-making and other professional organizations providing guidance on financial management, auditing and related topics should consider their standards and guidance in light of this framework. To the extent diversity in concept and terminology is eliminated, all parties will benefit.(6)Educators —This framework should be the subject of academic researchand analysis, to see where future enhancements can be made.With the presumption that this report becomes accepted as a common ground for understanding, its concepts and terms should find their way into university curricula.We believe this report offers a number of benefits. With this foundation for mutual understanding, all parties will be able to speak a common language and communicate more effectively. Business executives will be positioned to assess control systems against a standard, and strengthen the systems and move their enterprises toward established goals. Future research can be leveraged off an established base. Legislators and regulators will be able to gain an increased understanding of internal control, its benefits and limitations. With all parties utilizing a common internal control framework, these benefits will be realized.译文内部控制——整体构架资料来源:美国全美反舞弊性财务报告委员会著1994年第二版作者:C o m m i t t e e o f S p o n s o r i n g O r g a n i z a t i o n s委员会高层管理人员一直在探求更好的企业经营控制之道。
中文4500字本科生毕业设计(论文)外文原文及译文所在系管理系学生姓名郭淼专业会计学班级学号指导教师2013年6月外文文献原文及译文Internal ControlEmergence and development of the theory of the evolution of the internal controlInternal control in Western countries have a long history of development, according to the internal control characteristics at different stages of development, the development of internal control can be divided into four stages, namely the internal containment phase, the internal control system phase, the internal control structure phase, overall internal control framework stage.Internal check stages: infancy internal controlBefore the 1940s, people used to use the concept of internal check. This is the embryonic stage of internal control. "Keshi Accounting Dictionary" definition of internal check is "to provide effective organization and mode of operation, business process design errors and prevent illegal activities occur. Whose main characteristic is any individual or department alone can not control any part of one or the right way to conduct business on the division of responsibility for the organization, each business through the normal functioning of other individuals or departments for cross-examination or cross-control. designing effective internal check to ensure that all businesses can complete correctly after a specified handler in the process of these provisions, the internal containment function is always an integral part. "The late 1940s, the internal containment theory become important management methods and concepts. Internal check on a "troubleshooting a variety of measures" for the purpose of separation of duties and account reconciliation as a means to money and accounting matters and accounts as the main control object primary control measures. Its characteristics are account reconciliation and segregation of duties as the main content and thus cross-examination or cross-control. In general, the implementation of internal check function can be roughly divided into the following four categories: physical containment; mechanical containment; institutional containment; bookkeeping contain. The basic idea is to contain the internal "security is the result of checks and balances," which is based on two assumptions: First: two or more persons1西安交通大学城市学院本科毕业设计(论文)or departments making the same mistake unconsciously chance is very small; Second: Two or more the possibility of a person or department consciously partnership possibility of fraud is much lower than a single person or department fraud. Practice has proved that these assumptions are reasonable, internal check mechanism for organizations to control, segregation of duties control is the foundation of the modern theory of internal control.Internal control system phases:generating of internal controlThe late1940s to the early1970s, based on the idea of internal check, resulting in the concept of the internal control system, which is the stage in the modern sense of internal control generated. Industrial Revolution has greatly promoted the major change relations of production, joint-stock company has gradually become the main form of business organization of Western countries, in order to meet the requirements of prevailing socio-economic relations,to protect the economic interests of investors and creditors, the Western countries have legal requirements in the form of strengthen the corporate financial and accounting information as well as internal management of this economic activity.In 1934, the "securities and exchange act" issued by the U.S. government for the first time puts forward the concept of "internal accounting control", the implementation of general and special authorization book records, trading records, and compared different remedial measures such as transaction assets. In 1949, the American institute of certified public accountants (AICPA) belongs to the audit procedures of the committee (CPA) in the essential element of internal control: the system coordination, and its importance to management department and the independence of certified public accountants' report, the first official put forward the definition of internal control: "the design of the internal control includes the organization and enterprise to take all of the methods and measures to coordinate with each other. All of these methods and measures used to protect the property of the enterprise, to check the accuracy of accounting information, improve the efficiency of management, promote enterprise stick to established management guidelines." The definition from the formulation and perfecting the inner control of the organization, plan, method and measures such as rules and regulations to implement internal control, break through the limitation of control related to the financial and accounting department directly, the four objectives of internal control, namely the enterprise in commercial2外文文献原文及译文activities to protect assets, check the veracity and reliability of financial data, improve the work efficiency, and promote to management regulations. The definition of positive significance is to help management authorities to strengthen its management, but the scope of limitation is too broad. In 1958, the commission issued no. 29 audit procedures bulletin "independent auditors evaluate the scope of internal control", according to the requirements of the audit responsibility, internal control can be divided into two aspects, namely, the internal accounting control and internal management control. The former is mainly related to the first two of the internal control goal, the latter mainly relates to the internal control after two goals. This is the origin of the internal control system of "dichotomy". Because the concept of management control is vague and fuzzy, in the actual business line between internal control and internal accounting control is difficult to draw. In order to clear the relations between the two, in 1972 the American institute of certified public accountants in the auditing standards announcement no. 1, this paper expounds the internal management control and internal accounting control: the definition of "internal management control including, but not limited to organization plan, and the administrative department of the authorized approval of economic business decision-making steps on the relevant procedures and records. This authorization of items approved activities is the responsibility of management, it is directly related to the management department to perform the organization's business objectives, is the starting point of the economic business accounting control." At the same time, the important content of internal accounting control degree and protect assets, to ensure that the financial records credibility related institutions plans, procedures and records. After a series of changes and redefine the meaning of the internal control is more clear than before and the specification, increasingly broad scope, and introduces the concept of internal audit, has received recognition around the world and references, the internal control system is made.The internal control structure stage: development of the internal controlTheory of internal control structure formed in the 90 s to the 1980 s, this phase of western accounting audit of internal control research focus gradually from the general meaning to specific content to deepen. During this period, the system management theory has become the new management idea, it says: no physical objects in the world are composed of elements of3西安交通大学城市学院本科毕业设计(论文)system, due to the factors, there exists a complicated nonlinear relationship between system must have elements do not have new features, therefore, should be based on the whole the relationship between elements. System management theory will enterprise as a organic system composed of subsystems on management, pay attention to the coordination between the subsystems and the interaction with the environment. In the modern company system and system management theory, under the concept of early already cannot satisfy the need of internal control systems. In 1988, the American institute of certified public accountants issued "auditing standards announcement no. 55", in the announcement, for the first time with the word "internal control structure" to replace the original "internal control", and points out that: "the enterprise's internal control structure including provide for specific target reasonable assurance of the company set up all kinds of policies and procedures". The announcement that the internal control structure consists of control environment, accounting system (accounting system), the control program "three components, the internal control as a organic whole composed of these three elements, raised to the attention of the internal control environment.The control environment, reflecting the board of directors, managers, owners, and other personnel to control the attitude and behavior. Specific include: management philosophy and operating style, organizational structure, the function of the board of directors and the audit committee, personnel policies and procedures, the way to determine the authority and responsibility, managers control method used in the monitoring and inspection work, including business planning, budgeting, forecasting, profit plans, responsibility accounting and internal audit, etc.Accounting systems, regulations of various economic business confirmation, the collection, classification, analysis, registration and preparing method. An effective accounting system includes the following content: identification and registration of all legitimate economic business; Classifying the various economic business appropriate, as the basis of preparation of statements; Measuring the value of economic business to make its currency's value can be recorded in the financial statements; Determine the economic business events, to ensure that it recorded in the proper accounting period; Describe properly in the financial statements of4外文文献原文及译文economic business and related content.The control program, refers to the management policies and procedures, to ensure to achieve certain purpose. It includes economic business and activity approval; Clear division of the responsibility of each employee; Adequate vouchers and bills setting and records; The contact of assets and records control; The business of independent audit, etc. Internal structure of control system management theory as the main control thought, attaches great importance to the environmental factors as an important part of internal control, the control environment, accounting system and control program three elements into the category of internal control; No longer distinguish between accounting control and management control, and uniform in elements describe the internal control, think the two are inseparable and contact each other.Overall internal control framework stages: stage of internal controlAfter entering the 1990 s, the study of internal control into a new stage. With the improvement of the corporate governance institutions, the development of electronic information technology, in order to adapt to the new economic and organizational form, using the new management thinking, "internal control structure" for the development of "internal control to control the overall framework". In 1992, the famous research institutions internal control "by organization committee" (COSO) issued a landmark project - "internal control - the whole framework", also known as the COSO report, made the unification of the internal control system framework. In 1994, the report on the supplement, the international community and various professional bodies widely acknowledged, has wide applicability. The COSO report is a historical breakthrough in the research of internal control theory, it will first put forward the concept of internal control system of the internal control by the original planar structure for the development of space frame model, represents the highest level of the studies on the internal control in the world.The COSO report defines internal control as: "designed by enterprise management, to achieve the effect and efficiency of the business, reliable financial reporting and legal compliance goals to provide reasonable assurance, by the board of directors, managers and other staff to5西安交通大学城市学院本科毕业设计(论文)implement a process." By defining it can be seen that the COSO report that internal control is a process, will be affected by different personnel; At the same time, the internal control is a in order to achieve business objectives the group provides reasonable guarantee the design and implementation of the program. The COSO report put forward three goals and the five elements of internal control. The three major target is a target business objectives, information and compliance. Among them, the management goal is to ensure business efficiency and effectiveness of the internal control; Information goal is refers to the internal control to ensure the reliability of the enterprise financial report; Compliance goal refers to the internal controls should abide by corresponding laws and regulations and the rules and regulations of the enterprise.COSO report that internal control consists of five elements contact each other and form an integral system, which is composed of five elements: control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, monitoring and review.Control Environment: It refers to the control staff to fulfill its obligation to carry out business activities in which the atmosphere. Including staff of honesty and ethics, staff competence, board of directors or audit committee, management philosophy and management style, organizational structure, rights and responsibilities granted to the way human resources policies and implementation.Risk assessment: It refers to the management to identify and take appropriate action to manage operations, financial reporting, internal or external risks affecting compliance objectives, including risk identification and risk analysis. Risk identification including external factors (such as technological development, competition, changes in the economy) and internal factors (such as the quality of the staff, the company nature of activities, information systems handling characteristics) to be checked. Risk analysis involves a significant degree of risk estimates to assess the likelihood of the risk occurring, consider how to manage risk.Control activities: it refers to companies to develop and implement policies and procedures, and 6外文文献原文及译文to take the necessary measures against the risks identified in order to ensure the unit's objectives are achieved. In practice, control activities in various forms, usually following categories: performance evaluation, information processing, physical controls, segregation of duties.Information and communication: it refers to enable staff to perform their duties, to provide staff with the exchange and dissemination of information as well as information required in the implementation, management and control operations process, companies must identify, capture, exchange of external and internal information. External information, including market share, regulatory requirements and customer complaints and other information. The method of internal information including accounting system that records created by the regulatory authorities and reporting of business and economic matters, maintenance of assets, liabilities and owners' equity and recorded. Communication is so that employees understand their responsibilities to maintain control over financial reporting. There are ways to communicate policy manuals, financial reporting manuals, reference books, as well as examples such as verbal communication or management.Monitoring: It refers to the evaluation of internal controls operation of the quality of the process, namely the reform of internal control, operation and improvement activities evaluated. Including internal and external audits, external exchanges.Five elements of internal control system is actually wide-ranging, interrelated influence each other. Control environment is the basis for the implementation of other control elements; control activities must be based on the risks faced by companies may have a detailed understanding and assessment basis; while risk assessment and control activities within the enterprise must use effective communication of information; Finally, effective monitoring the implementation of internal control is a means to protect the quality. Three goals and five elements for the formation and development of the internal control system theory laid the foundation, which fully reflects the guiding ideology of the modern enterprise management idea that security is the result of systems management. COSO report emphasizes the integration framework and internal control system composed of five elements, the framework for the7西安交通大学城市学院本科毕业设计(论文)establishment of an internal control system, operation and maintenance of the foundation.In summary,because of social, economic and environmental change management, internal control functions along with the changes, in order to guide the evolution of the internal control theory. As can be seen from the history of the development of internal control theory, often derived from the internal control organizational change management requirements, from an agricultural economy to an industrial economy, innovation management methods and tools for the development of the power to bring internal controls.From the internal containment center,controlled by the internal organization of the mutual relations between the internal control of various subsystems and went to COSO as the representative to the prevention and management loopholes to prevent the goal, through the organization of control and information systems,to achieve the overall system optimization of modern internal sense of control theory, from Admiral time, corresponding to the two economic revolution.Therefore, in the analysis of foreign internal control theory and Its Evolution, requires a combination of prevailing socio-economic environment and business organization and management requirements, so as to understand the nature of a deeper internal control theory of development.8外文文献原文及译文译文:内部控制Ge.McVay一、内部控制理论的产生与发展演进内部控制在西方国家已经有比较长的发展历史,根据内部控制在不同发展阶段的特征,可以将内部控制的发展分为四个阶段,即内部牵制阶段、内部控制制度阶段、内部控制结构阶段、内部控制整体框架阶段。
外文翻译原文来源:R e s e a r c h P a p e r, J u l y2009,S o c i a l S c i e n c e R e s e a r c hN e t w o r k中文译文:内部控制透视:理论与概念学院专业姓名学号指导教师年月日内部控制透视:理论与概念环境需要新的业务控制变量不为任何潜在的股东和管理人士的响应因子为1,另外应执行/她组织了一个很大的控制权。
控制是管理活动的东西或以上施加控制。
思想的产生和近十年的发展需要有系统的商业资源和控制这种财富一个新的关注。
主题之一热一回合管制的商业资源是分析每个控制成本效益。
作为内部控制和欺诈的第一道防线,维护资产以及预防和侦查错误。
内部控制,我们可以说是一种控制整个系统的财务和其他方面的管理制定了为企业的顺利运行;它包括内部的脸颊,内部审计和其他形式的控制。
COSO的内部控制描述如下。
内部控制是一个客观的方法用来帮助确保实现。
在会计和组织理论,内部控制是指或目标目标的过程实施由组织的结构,工作和权力流动,人员和具体的管理信息系统,旨在帮助组织实现。
这是一种手段,其中一个组织的资源被定向,监控和测量。
它发挥着无形的(重要的作用,预防和侦查欺诈和保护组织的资源,包括生理(如,机械和财产)和乙二醇,声誉或知识产权,如商标)。
在组织水平,内部控制目标与可靠性的目标或战略的财务报告,及时反馈业务上的成就,并遵守法律,法规。
在具体的交易水平,内部控制是指第三方采取行动以实现一个具体目标(例如,如何确保本组织的款项,在申请服务提供有效的。
)内部控制程序reduce程变异,导致更加具有可预见性outcomes。
在业务实体内部控制也被称为业务控制。
它们是日常的工具使用的经理。
所有管理人员使用的内部控制,以帮助确保他们的经营单位,按照计划,他们使用的方法-政策、程序、组织设计和身体的障碍构成。
内部控制是对以下组合: 1、财务控制 2、其他控件。
LNTU---Acc附录A关于内部控制的意见 如果要证明功能扩展到包含内部控制的有效性,那么报告准则则必须制定,若干基本问题必须被解决。
随着日益频繁增长,审计员听取了他们应该发表的一个效力于客户的内部控制制度建议的意见。
这一证明功能扩展的主张者迅速指出,目前已经有了实例如独立审计师的报告公开他们的客户的内部控制制度和一些政府机构的成效,包括一些空置中的美国证券和交易委员会,都需要一个报告。
这些证实类型的反对者公布了任何关于内部控制的有效性,他们认为,目前有显着性差异监管机构的报告要求和提出意见的内部控制将会误导公众。
本文综述了目前报告的做法,考虑到理想状态相关的危害的特点,并最后提出了一些在任何给与最后判决之前必要的予以回答的问题。
现状报告 虽然审计员的报告中的一些情况提及了内部控制的性质,但作出的本质陈述还有很大不同的效应。
大型银行。
关于对内部控制的观点事实上出现在一些大型银行和看法发行的年度报告中。
有时这些意见是被董事会要求的。
例如,下面的主张出现在1969年年度报告的一个大型纽约银行中,作为第3款的独立会计师的标准短形式的报告: 我们的审核工作包括评价有效性,大块的内部会计控制,其中还包括内部审计。
我们认为,在于程序的影响下,再加上银行内部审计工作人员所进行的审核,这些构成一个有效的系统的内部会计控制。
意见被提供给几个其他银行,但它们基本上引用的意见是一样的。
美国证券交易委员会的规定。
美国证券交易委员会表格X-17A-5,要求独立审计师作出某些有关的内部控制陈述,并必须在每年的大多数成员国家与每一个证券经纪或注册的交易商根据1934年证券交易法第15条进行交流时。
此外,美国证券交易委员会的第17a-5(g)规定要求独立的核数师的报告要包含“一份如,是否会计师审查了程序,要安全措施保障客户的证券的声明中”此外,许多股票交易所要求该报告要表明审查已取得的“会计制度,内部会计控制和程序,是为维护证券,包括适当的测试它们对以后的期间,检验日期前”,很显然,美国证券交易委员会的工作人员更倾向于考虑,会计师包括了语言相似,所要求的所有报告的交流提交给证券交易委员会。
Appendix:Disclosure on Internal Control SystemsAs a Substitute of Alternative GovernanceMechanismsAccording to agency theory, various governance mechanisms reduce the agency problem between investors and management (Jensen and Meckling, 1976; Gillan, 2006). Traditionally, governance mechanisms have been identified as internal or external. Internal mechanisms include the board of directors, its role, structure and composition (Fama, 1980; Fama and Jensen, 1983), managerial share ownership (Jensen and Meckling, 1976) and incentives, the supervisory role played by large shareholders (Demsetz and Lehn, 1985), the internal control system (Bushman and Smith, 2001), bylaw and charter provisions (anti-takeover measures) and the use of debt financing (Jensen, 1993). External control is exerted by the market for corporate control (Grossman and Hart, 1980), the managerial labor market (Fama, 1980) and the product market (Hart, 1983).After the various financial scandals that have shaken investors worldwide, corporate governance best practices have stressed in particular the key role played by the internal control system (ICS) in the governance of the firm. Internal control systems contribute to the protection of investors’ interests both by promoting and giving assu rance on the reliability of financial reporting, and by addressing the boards’ attention on the timely identification, evaluation and management of risks that may compromise the attainment of corporate goals. These functions have been widely recognized by the most diffused frameworks for the design of ICS that have stated the centrality of internal control systems in providing reasonable assurance to investors regarding the achievement of objectives concerning the effectiveness and efficiency of operations, the reliability of financial reporting and the compliance with laws and regulations (COSO, 1992; 2004).Notwithstanding their relevance, investors cannot directly observe ICSs and therefore cannot get information on their design and functioning because they areinternal mechanisms, activities and processes put in place within the organization (Deumes and Knechel, 2008).As investors take into account the costs they sustain to monitor management when pricing their claims (Jensen and Meckling 1976), management have incentives to communicate information on the characteristics of the ICS in order to inform investors on the effectiveness of ICS when other monitoring mechanisms (the ownership structure of the firm and the board of directors) are weak, and thereby providing them with the convenient level of monitoring (Leftwich et al., 1981). The possible existence of substitution among different mechanisms has been debated in corporate governance literature (Rediker and Seth, 1995; Fernandez and Arrondo, 2005) based on Williamson’s (1983) substitute hypothesis, which argues that the marginal role of a particular control mechanism depends upon its relative importance in the governance system of the firm.In this paper, we contend that disclosure on the characteristics of ICS is a relevant alternative governance mechanism in the monitoring package selected by the management. According to Leftwich et al. (1981) “managers select a monitoring package, and the composition of the chosen package depends on the costs and benefits of the various monitoring devices” (p. 59).In particular, we focus particular on the relationship between ICS disclosure and two other mechanisms of the monitoring package ( the ownership structure of the firm and the board of directors) that according to literature (Jensen and Meckling, 1976; Fernandez and Arrondo,2005; Gillan, 2006) play a relevant role in monitoring management’s behavior. We posit that incentives for reporting on the ch aracteristics of ICS depend on the supervisory role played by t he firms’ ownership structure and board of directors.We therefore examine the contents and extent of ICS disclosure of 160 European firms listed in four different stock exchanges (London, Paris, Frankfurt and Milan) on a three-year period (2003 - 2005). By using this international sample, we are able to the depict some features of different institutional environments.We find evidence that disclosure on ICS is a substitute for the monitoring role played by other governance mechanisms as ownership concentration, institutional ownership, the proportion of independent directors sitting on the board and the proportion of accounting expert members on the audit committee.We add to previous literature on the governance role played by disclosure on ICS by adopting a complete disclosure framework that allows us to consider in detail the content and extent of information the management discretionarily communicates on the ICS of the firm. While corporate governance best practices ask for the disclosure on the characteristics of the ICS, they do not provide instructions on whatmanagement should disclose and on the extent of such disclosure. Such lack of instructions leaves management with a discretionary choice on the narrative content of ICS disclosure.This paper off ers empirical support for Williamson’s (1983) substitute hypothesis among different governance mechanisms and it has relevant policy implications.While most corporate governance studies consider disclosure as a complementary mechanism management adopts to reinforce the governance system of the firm (Chen and Jaggi, 2000; Eng and Mak, 2003; Barako et al., 2006) and indeed provide contrasting results, in this study we show that disclosure on ICS substitutes for other governance mechanisms. This means that not necessarily better governance implies greater transparency and disclosure. Firms adhere to corporate governance best practices by disclosing information on the ICS and such disclosure is more extensive when investors need more assurance about the protection of their interests, when other governance mechanisms are weak. On the other side, when the governance system is sound, management have less incentives to extensively disclose information on the ICS, as this is a costly activity and its benefits are overwhelmed by the other governance mechanisms.The evidence provided by the empirical research has important policy implications, because it offers insights to firms and practitioners on the relevance of disclosure on internal control systems as a monitoring mechanism for investors. The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. The next section reviews the theoretical background and develops the research hypotheses. The research method isdescribed in section 3, followed by results discussed in section 4. Concluding remarks are presented in the last section.Theoretical Background and Hypotheses DevelopmentAccording to corporate governance literature, the main internal monitoring mechanisms are the board of directors, the ownership structure of the firm, and the internal control system (Gillan, 2006). In particular, ICSs play a central role in the protection of investors’ interests both assuring the reliability of financial reporting and promoting the timely identification, assessment and management of relevant risks that encumber upon the business. The centrality of ICS in corporate governance has been widely recognized by the vast majority of codes of best practice1.In order to express their concerns and price their claims, investors need to get information on the design and functioning of monitoring mechanisms. In the cases of mechanisms like the ownership structure and the board of directors, information concerning structure and composition, type and composition ofcommittees in place, number of meetings and so on, is publicly available. In some other cases, the enforcement of reporting on ICS weaknesses or material deficiencies - like those required by the SOX - provide investors with relevant information about possible gaps in the functioning of the ICS (Leone, 2007).Nevertheless, specific information on the characteristics of the ICS is indeed more difficult and expensive to gather because ICSs are complex sets of activities and processes carried out internally to the firm (Deumes and Knechel, 2008; Bronson et al., 2006). Indeed, while corporate governance best practices require to disclose information on the ICS, they do not provide instruction on the narrative contents of ICS disclosure. Therefore, investors are unlikely to be informed about the nature, extent, processes and quality of internal controls, unless disclosure on the characteristics of the ICS is provided by the management. The content and extent of such disclosure will depend on the existing monitoring package (Leftwich et al., 1981; Williamson, 1983) of the firm.At the best of our knowledge, disclosure on the specific characteristics and functioning of ICS has been deserved poor attention. While the introduction of theSOX in the USA, and the related requirement for disclosure on ICS deficiencies or material weaknesses has increasingly attracted academic interest in recent times (among the others see Ash Baugh et al., 2007; Doyle et al., 2007; Leone, 2007), only few studies focused on the specific characteristics of ICS disclosure.Bronson et al. (2006) examine firm characteristics associated to disclosure on ICS before it was made mandatory by SOX. They find a positive association between the likelihood of issuing a management report on internal control and corporate governance variables like the number of audit committee meetings and the percentage of institutional shareholders. Deumes and Knechel (2008) identify a list of six disclosure items that capture the ICS information generally available in the annual reports of firms analyzed. They find that the disclosure index on ICS is significantly associated to variables that proxy for the agency costs of equity and with variables that proxy for agency costs of debt.According to our theoretical framework, if disclosure on ICS acts as an alternative governance mechanism, when the pricing of claims is high (Jensen and Meckling, 1976) -due to the fact that the other various monitoring devices already in place are not effective enough to limit the costs of the agency relationship - we expect that disclosure on ICS acts as substitute for other monitoring mechanisms in order to reduce the overall intensity of agency conflicts (Williamson, 1983, Fernandez and Arrondo, 2005).In order to test this hypothesis, we focus on two fundamental elements of the monitoring package,besides the disclosure on ICS: the ownership structure and the board of directors. Corporate governance studies identify three proxies for the supervisory role of the ownership structure: i) the supervisory role of large investors, ii) the monitoring role of institutional investors and iii) the alignment effect of managerial ownership. We expect that the incentives for management to disclose information on the firm’s ICS will be higher for those firms where the monitoring r played by the owners is weaker.Literature and empirical evidences attribute to large shareholders a key supervisory role. Kang and Shivdasani (1995) detected a positive association between the presence of large shareholders and management’s turnover in underperforming firms. On the other side, a disperse ownership is usually associated to a lower monitoring ability and greater information symmetries (Shleifer and Vishny, 1986; Zeckhauser and Pound, 1990; Barako et al. 2006).Alternatively said, the direct supervision performed by large shareholders reduces the need for alternative monitoring mechanisms. Consequently, we expect that incentives to disclose on ICS are higher when the ownership is diffused.Institutional investors also play a relevant supervisory role. While individual investors in public firms have little incentive to monitor management as they are exposed to private costs against which there are public benefits (Grossman and Hart, 1980), institutional investors have higher incentives to play an active monitoring role on the management because of their large voting power (Milgrom and Roberts, 1992). Moreover, institutional investors can access to management through privileged information channels, in order to get disclosure on the firm’s operations (S chadewitz and Blevins, 1998). Thus we expect that in presence of institutional investors, management have lower incentives to disclose on ICS.The last proxy for the supervisory role of the ownership structure is the managerial ownership. It is generally accepted that management’s stock ownership contributes to the alignment of managerial and shareholders’ interes ts (Jensen and Meckling, 1976; Bronson etal., 2006; Deumes and Knechel, 2008), thus reducing the agency conflicts inside the firm (Eng and Mak, 2003; Fernandez and Arrondo, 2005 Cheng and Courtenay, 2006). As managerial stock ownership reduces the need for monitoring, we expect that incentives to disclose on ICS are higher when the level of managerial ownership is lower.Boards of directors play a crucial role in monitoring management as shareholders delegate to them the power to control managerial decisions. Previous literature (Carcelo and Neal, 2000;Fernandez and Arrondo, 2005; Krishan, 2005) identifies different proxies for the capability of the board to monitor managerial behavior : i) the proportion of independent directors, ii) the presence of CEO duality, iii) the presence of accounting experts and iv) the monitoring ability of the audit committee. We expect that the more powerfulthe monitoring role of the board of directors, the lower the incentives for management to disclose information on ICS. Independent directors are expected to monitor the activities of the board and to limit managerial opportunism (Fama, 1980; Fama and Jensen, 1983). Empirical evidences support this expectation. Rosenstein and Wyatt (1990) explain the positive stock price effects associated to the appointment of a new independent director in terms of positive reaction signals of the markets to the monitoring role played by the outsiders. A number of studies document a positive relationship between the proportion of independent directors on the board and firms’ performance (Baysinger and Butler, 1985; Goodstein and Boeker, 1991; Pearce and Zahra, 1992): the proportion of independent directors of the board is considered a proxy of the capability of the board to control managerial actions (Fernandez and Arrondo, 2005) thus supporting a positive association between the proportion of independent members of the board and effectiveness of their monitoring role. Therefore, we expect that the higher the presence of independent directors, the lower incentives for management to voluntarily disclose on ICS.-- Sergio Beretta. Disclosure on Internal Control Systems-As a Substitute ofAlternative Governance Mechanisms, Bocconi University,Press.2009.附录:内部控制系统披露—一种可替代的管理机制根据代理理论,各种治理机制减少了投资者和管理者之间的代理问题(Jensen and Meckling, 1976; Gillan, 2006)。
Internal ControlIntroductionInternal control refers to the policies, procedures, and practices implemented by an organization to ensure the achievement of its objectives, safeguard its assets, and prevent fraud and errors. It involves the establishment of a control environment and the implementation of control activities to mitigate risks and improve operational efficiency. Effective internal control is essential for maintaining the integrity of financial reporting and ensuring compliance with laws and regulations.Key Components of Internal Control1.Control Environment: The control environment sets the tone for theorganization’s internal control system. It encompasses factors such asmanagement’s commitment to integrity and ethical values, the organizational structure, and the assignment of authority and responsibility.2.Risk Assessment: Risk assessment involves the identification andanalysis of potential risks that could hinder the achievement of organizational objectives. This includes assessing the likelihood and impact of risks anddetermining appropriate risk responses.3.Control Activities: Control activities are the policies and proceduresestablished by management to address identified risks. These activities aredesigned to ensure that objectives are achieved and that the organiz ation’sassets are protected. Examples of control activities include segregation ofduties, authorization and approval processes, and physical safeguards.rmation and Communication: Internal control requires the timelyand accurate communication of information both within the organization and to external parties. This includes the establishment of effective communication channels and the provision of relevant and reliable information.5.Monitoring: Monitoring is the ongoing assessment of internal controlto ensure its effectiveness. It involves conducting periodic evaluations, internal audits, and management reviews to identify and address control deficiencies.Benefits of Effective Internal Control1.Enhanced Financial Reporting: Effective internal control providesassurance that the organization’s financial statements are accurate and reliable.This helps to build trust among stakeholders and maintain the organization’s reputation.2.Fraud Prevention: Internal control measures help to deter and detectfraudulent activities. By implementing segregation of duties and regularmonitoring, organizations can reduce the risk of fraud and ensure that financial resources are used appropriately.3.Regulatory Compliance: Internal control systems help organizationscomply with laws and regulations. By implementing control activities anddocumenting processes, organizations can provide evidence of complianceduring audits and inspections.4.Operational Efficiency: Strong internal controls streamline processesand improve operational efficiency. By minimizing errors and inefficiencies,organizations can optimize resource allocation and reduce costs.5.Risk Mitigation: Internal control identifies and addresses risks thatcould hinder the achievement of organizational objectives. By implementing control activities and risk responses, organizations can mitigate the impact of risks and protect their assets.Challenges in Implementing Internal Control1.Cost: Implementing an effective internal control system can be costly,requiring investment in staff, technology, and training. Organizations need to balance the costs of control activities with the benefits they provide.2.Resistance to Change: Implementing internal control measures mayface resistance from employees who are accustomed to existing processes. This requires effective change management to communicate the benefits of internal control and address employees’ concerns.plexity: As organizations grow and their operations become morecomplex, implementing internal control can become challenging. Organizations need to ensure that control activities are designed to address the unique risks and requirements of their specific operations.4.Human Error: Internal control is ultimately dependent on humanperformance. Even with well-designed control activities, human error can still occur. Organizations need to provide training and ongoing monitoring tominimize the risk of errors.ConclusionInternal control is a critical component of organizational governance, providing assurance that objectives are achieved, risks are mitigated, and assets are safeguarded. By establishing a control environment, implementing control activities, and regularly monitoring their effectiveness, organizations can enhance financial reporting, prevent fraud, ensure regulatory compliance, improve operational efficiency, and mitigate risks. While implementation challenges exist, the benefits of effective internal control justify the investment.。
外文翻译原文:Internal Control –Integrated FrameworkRisksThe process of identifying and analyzing risk is an ongoing iterative process and is a critical component of an effective internal control system. Managements must focus carefully on risks at all levels of the entity and take the necessary actions to manage them.Risk IdentificationAn entity’s performance can be at risk due to internal or external factors. These factors, in turn, can affect either stated or implied objectives. Risk increases as objectives increasingly differ from past performance. In a number of areas of performance, an entity often does not set explicit entity-wide objectives because it considers its performance to be acceptable. Although there might not be an explicit or written objective in these circumstances, there is an implied objective of “no change” or “as is.” This does not mean that an implied objective is without either internal or external risk. For example, an entity might view its service to customers as acceptable, yet, due to a change in a competitor’s practices, its service, as viewed by its customers, might deteriorate.Regardless of whether an objective is stated or implied, an entity’s risk-assessment process should consider risks that may occur. It is important that risk identification be comprehensive. It should consider all significant interactions — of goods, services and information —between an entity and relevant external parties. These external parties include potential and current suppliers, investors, creditors, shareholders, employees, customers, buyers, intermediaries and competitors, as well as public bodies and news media.Risk identification is an iterative process and often is integrated with the planning process. It also is useful to consider risk from a “clean sheet of paper” approach, and not merely relate the risk to the previous review.Entity Level. Risks at the entity-wide level can arise from external or internal factors. Examples include:External Factors●Technological developments can affect the nature and timing of research and development, or lead to changes in procurement.●Changing customer needs or expectations can affect product development, production process, customer service, pricing or warranties.●Competition can alter marketing or service activities.●New legislation and regulation can force changes in operating policies and strategies.●Natural catastrophes can lead to changes in operations or information systems and highlight the need for contingency planning.●Economic changes can have an impact on decisions related to financing, capital expenditures and expansion.Internal Factors●A disruption in information systems processing can adversely affect the entity’s operations.●The quality of personnel hired and methods of training and motivation can influence the level of control consciousness within the entity.● A change in management responsibilities can affect the way certain controls are effected.●The nature of the entity’s activities, and employee accessibility to assets, can contribute to misappropriation of resources.●An unassertive or ineffective board or audit committee can provide opportunities for indiscretions.Many techniques have been developed to identify risks. The majority —particularly those developed by internal and external auditors to determine the scope of their activities —involve qualitative or quantitative methods to prioritize and identify higher-risk activities. Other practices include: periodic reviews of economic and industry factors affecting the business, senior management business-planningconferences and meetings with industry analysts. Risks may be identified in connection with short- and long-range forecasting and strategic planning. Which methods an entity selects to identify risks is not particularly important. What is important is that management considers carefully the factors that may contribute to or increase risk. Some factors to consider include: past experiences of failure to meet objectives; quality of personnel; changes affecting the entity such as competition, regulations, personnel, and the like; existence of geographically distributed, particularly foreign, activities; significance of an activity to the entity; and complexity of an activity.To illustrate, an importer of apparel and footwear established an entity-wide objective of becoming an industry leader in high-quality fashion merchandise. Risks considered at the entity-wide level included: supply sources, including the quality, number and stability of foreign manufacturers; exposures to fluctuations in the value of foreign currencies; timeliness of receiving shipments and effect of delays in customs inspections; availability and reliability of shipping companies and costs; likelihood of international hostilities and trade embargoes; and pressures from customers and investors to boycott doing business in a foreign country whose government adopts unacceptable policies. These were in addition to the more generic risks considered, such as the impact of a deterioration in economic conditions, market acceptance of products, new competitors in the entity’s market, and changes in environmental or regulatory laws and regulations.Identifying external and internal factors that contribute to risk at an entity-wide level is critical to effective risk assessment. Once the major contributing factors have been identified, management can then consider their significance and, where possible, link risk factors to business activities.Activity Level. In addition to identifying risk at the entity level, risks should be identified at the activity level. Dealing with risks at this level helps focus risk assessment on major business units or functions such as sales, production, marketing, technology development, and research and development. Successfully assessing activity-level risk also contributes to maintaining acceptable levels at the entity-widelevel.In most instances, for any stated or implied objective, many different risks can be identified. In a procurement process, for example, an entity may have an objective related to maintaining adequate raw materials inventory. The risks to not achieving the activity objective might include goods not meeting specifications, or not being delivered in needed quantities, on time or at acceptable prices. These risks might affect the way specifications for purchased goods are communicated to vendors, the use and appropriateness of production forecasts, identification of alternative supply sources and negotiation practices.Potential causes of failing to achieve an objective range from the obvious to the obscure and from the significant to the insignificant in potential effect. Certainly, readily apparent risks that significantly affect the entity should be identified. To avoid overlooking relevant risks, this identification is best made apart from assessment of the likelihood of the risk occurring. There are, however, practical limitations to the identification process, and often it is difficult to determine where to draw the line. It doesn’t make much sense to consider the risk of a meteor falling from space onto a company’s production facility, while it may be reasonable to consider the risk of an airplane crash for a facility located near an airport runway.Risk AnalysisAfter the entity has identified entity-wide and activity risks, a risk analysis needs to be performed.The methodology for analyzing risks can vary, largely because many risks are difficult to quantify.Nonetheless, the process —which may be more or less formal —usually includes:●Estimating the significance of a risk;●Assessing the likelihood (or frequency) of the risk occurring;●Considering how the risk should be managed —that is, an assessment of what actions need to be taken.A risk that does not have a significant effect on the entity and that has a lowlikelihood of occurrence generally does not warrant serious concern. A significant risk with a high likelihood of occurrence, on the other hand, usually demands considerable attention. Circumstances in between these extremes usually require difficult judgments. It is important that the analysis be rational and careful.There are numerous methods for estimating the cost of a loss from an identified risk. Management should be aware of them and apply them as appropriate. However, many risks are indeterminate in size. At best they can be described as “large,” “moderate” or “small.”Once the significance and likelihood of risk have been assessed, management needs to consider how the risk should be managed. This involves judgment based on assumptions about the risk, and reasonable analysis of costs associated with reducing the level of risk. Actions that can be taken to reduce the significance or likelihood of the risk occurring include a myriad of decisions management may make every day. These range from identifying alternative supply sources or expanding product lines to obtaining more relevant operating reports or improving training programs. Sometimes actions can virtually eliminate the risk, or offset its effect if it does occur. Examples are vertical integration to reduce supplier risk, hedging financial exposures and obtaining adequate insurance coverage.Note that there is a distinction between risk assessment, which is part of internal control, and the resulting plans, programs or other actions deemed necessary by management to address the risks. The actions undertaken, as discussed in the prior paragraph, are a key part of the larger management process, but not an element of the internal control system.Along with actions for managing risk is the establishment of procedures to enable management to track the implementation and effectiveness of the actions. For example, one action an organization might take to manage the risk of loss of critical computer services is to formulate a disaster recovery plan. Procedures then would be affected to ensure that the plan is appropriately designed and implemented. Those procedures represent “control activities”, discussed in Chapter 4.Before installing additional procedures, management should consider carefullywhether existing ones may be suitable for addressing identified risks. Because procedures may satisfy multiple objectives, management may discover that additional actions are not warranted; existing procedures may be sufficient or may need to be performed better.Management also should recognize that it is likely some level of residual risk will always exist not only because resources are always limited, but also because of other limitations inherent in every internal control system. These are discussed in Chapter 7.Risk analysis is not a theoretical exercise. It is often critical to the entity’s success. It is most effective when it includes identification of all key business processes where potential exposures of some consequence exist. It might involve process analysis, such as identification of key dependencies and significant control nodes, and establishing clear responsibility and accountability. Effective process analysis directs special attention to cross-organizational dependencies, identifying, for example: where data originate, where they are stored, how they are converted to useful information and who uses the information. Large organizations usually need to be particularly vigilant in addressing intracompany and intercompany transactions and key dependencies. These processes can be positively affected by quality programs which, with a “buy-in”by employees, can be an important element in risk containment.Unfortunately, the importance of risk analysis is sometimes recognized too late, as in the case of a major financial services firm where a senior executive offered what amounted to a wistful epitaph: “We just didn’t think we faced so much risk.”Managing ChangeEconomic, industry and regulatory environments change, and entities’ ac tivities evolve. Internal control effective under one set of conditions will not necessarily be effective under another. Fundamental to risk assessment is a process to identify changed conditions and take actions as necessary.Thus, every entity needs to have a process, formal or informal, to identify conditions that can significantly affect its ability to achieve its objectives. Asdiscussed further in Chapter 5, a key part of that process involves information systems that capture, process and report information about events, activities and conditions that indicate changes to which the entity needs to react. Such information may involve changes in customer preferences or other factors affecting demand for the company’s products or services. Or, it may involve new technology affecting production processes or other business activities, or competitive or legislative or regulatory developments. With the requisite information systems in place, the process to identify and respond to changing conditions can be established.This process will parallel, or be a part of, the entity’s regular risk assessment process described above. It involves identifying the changed condition — this requires having mechanisms in place to identify and communicate events or activities that affect the entity’s objectives —and analyzing the associated opportunities or risks. Such analysis includes identifying potential causes of achieving or failing to achieve an objective, assessing the likelihood that such causes will occur, evaluating the probable effect on achievement of the objectives and considering the degree to which the risk can be controlled or the opportunity exploited.Although the process by which an entity manages change is similar to, if not a part of, its regular risk-assessment process, it is discussed separately. This is because of its critical importance to effective internal control and because it can too easily be overlooked or given insufficient attention in the course of dealing with everyday issues.Source: Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), Internal Control–Integrated Framework, 1992:P39-44译文:内部控制-整体框架风险识别和分析风险的过程是一个重复不断的过称,并且是有效内部控制制度的关键组成部分。
外文翻译原文来源:Hammed Arad (philac). A Clear Look at Internal Controls [D].Theory and Concepts Research Paper, 2009内部控制透视:理论与概念环境需要新的业务控制变量不为任何潜在的股东和管理人士的响应因子为1,另外应执行/她组织了一个很大的控制权。
控制是管理活动的东西或以上施加控制。
思想的产生和近十年的发展需要有系统的商业资源和控制这种财富一个新的关注。
主题之一热一回合管制的商业资源是分析每个控制成本效益。
作为内部控制和欺诈的第一道防线,维护资产以及预防和侦查错误。
内部控制,我们可以说是一种控制整个系统的财务和其他方面的管理制定了为企业的顺利运行;它包括内部的脸颊,内部审计和其他形式的控制。
COSO的内部控制描述如下。
内部控制是一个客观的方法用来帮助确保实现。
在会计和组织理论,内部控制是指或目标目标的过程实施由组织的结构,工作和权力流动,人员和具体的管理信息系统,旨在帮助组织实现。
这是一种手段,其中一个组织的资源被定向,监控和测量。
它发挥着无形的(重要的作用,预防和侦查欺诈和保护组织的资源,包括生理(如,机械和财产)和乙二醇,声誉或知识产权,如商标)。
在组织水平,内部控制目标与可靠性的目标或战略的财务报告,及时反馈业务上的成就,并遵守法律,法规。
在具体的交易水平,内部控制是指第三方采取行动以实现一个具体目标(例如,如何确保本组织的款项,在申请服务提供有效的。
)内部控制程序reduce程变异,导致更加具有可预见性outcomes。
在业务实体内部控制也被称为业务控制。
它们是日常的工具使用的经理。
所有管理人员使用的内部控制,以帮助确保他们的经营单位,按照计划,他们使用的方法-政策、程序、组织设计和身体的障碍构成。
内部控制是对以下组合: 1、财务控制 2、其他控件。
根据内部控制研究所印度特许会计师是该组织计划和所有的方法和程序,通过了包括一个由管理机构,以协助实现业务管理的目的是确保尽可能高效有序进行可能的坚持管理政策,对资产的安全护卫预防和信息检测欺诈行为和错误的准确性和完整性的财务会计的可靠记录,及时编制,控制系统内部的事务以外延伸涉及到会计系统的功能。
内部控制【外文翻译】外文文献翻译译文一、外文原文原文:Internal controlIntroductionThe system of internal control over financial reporting in Japan under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA) was implemented as of the fiscal year starting on April 1 2008.Under this system, executive officers of listed companies are obligated to evaluate their company's internal control over financial reporting and to file the results of such evaluation in the form of an internal audit report with the Financial Services Agency (FSA). In this report, executive officers should state material weakness if they judge any material weakness exists in the company's internal control over financial reporting. The report should also be audited by outside accounting auditors before being filed with the FSA. Since most Japanese companies have a fiscal year that ends in March, June 2009 will be the first time most companies file such a report.When the internal control system was introduced, it made reference to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of the US. Under the Japanese system, clear standards were set regarding the set-up of internal controls over financial reporting in an effort to prevent the creation of excessive documentation and to control costs, two issues which had occurred in the US. However, even with such standards, some uncertainty exists. In particular, uncertainty arises regarding the connection between this system under the FIEA and the rules of the Companies Act.Failure to submit the internal audit report or submission of false statements can lead to liabilities and criminal penalties under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA). However, if there is a material weakness in the company's internal controls over financial reporting and executive officers disclose such material weakness in theinternal audit report, no sanctions will be imposed under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, nor will it directly lead to the director's liabilities under the Companies Act. Rather, disclosure of such material weakness is thought to be desirable, because by disclosing such material weakness, a company can improve the quality of its internal control over financial reporting, which will enable the company to submit more accurate financial reports in the future.Internal control is a process-effected by an entity's board of directors, management, and other personnel--designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories: reliability of financial reporting, effectiveness and efficiency of operations, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Internal control consists of the following five interrelated components.1、Control environment sets the tone of an organization, influencing the control consciousness of its people. It is the foundation for all other components of internal control, providing discipline and structure.2、Risk assessment is the entity's identification and analysis of relevant risks to achievement of its objectives, forming a basis for determining how the risks should be managed.3、Control activities are the policies and procedures that help ensure that management directives are carried out.4、Information and communication are the identification, capture, and exchange of information in a form and time frame that enable people to carry out their responsibilities.5、Monitoring is a process that assesses the quality of internal control performance over time.The interlaced audit issue is as follows: under the internal control system of the Companies Act, company auditors must audit the method and the results of the accounting audit conducted by outside accounting auditors. On the other hand, the internal control system of the FIEA requires the outside accounting auditors to auditthe company auditors' monitoring of internal financial controls. Therefore, company auditors that audit outside accounting auditors under the Companies Act are audited by the same outside accounting auditors under the FIEA. This interlaced audit however is expected to make each audit more effective because the company auditor and the outside accounting auditor will each monitor the audit of the other.The time lag issue is expected to arise due to the timing of the submissions of the various audit reports required under the FIEA and the Companies Act. Company auditors will need to prepare and submit audit reports regarding the execution of duties by directors for the fiscal year as required by the Companies Act. However, it is expected that these audit reports will be submitted before the internal audit report required under the FIEA is submitted and audited by the outside accounting auditors. Thus, if the internal audit report points out a material weakness that was not referred to in the audit reports prepared by the company auditor, the company auditor will be placed in a difficult position and will need to decide whether to amend andmake changes to the audit reports as such audit reports should also disclose such weaknesses. However, if the directors, the company auditors, and the accounting auditors are cooperating properly, this issue would not arise.It is expected that the system of internal control over financial reporting will prompt companies to build better control systems through cooperation between the directors, company auditors and outside accounting auditors.Connection between the two internal control systemsOn the internal financial controls and internal accounting control the similarities and differences.A difference between monitoring and control objectives.Reason for the difference between the two, simply because of financial supervision and control of the target company's material flow and cash flow, and accounting internal control object is the information flow. Understanding of Marx's words, “the production and the production of bookkeeping records are two different things after all, just to ship the same loading and shipping order are two differentthings.” Corporate material production process is based on the currency as the leading material movement, production and operation of the currency as the beginning and the end result, is achieving its goal of expanding the value of value. And accounting control is passed that have occurred in the material flow, capital flow formed by the flow of information to be the recognition, measurement, reporting. The former to productivity gains, the latter objective, the real target. However, operation of the accounting value of enterprise assets, after all, subordinate to the overall objective, we should also ask for the overall objective of internal control should also be an asset value of its end. Whyis this request? This is because the production activities of financial decisions and accounting need to subordinate corporate financial activities, accounting control objectives are to be subject to financial control target.Internal accounting control system is now setting goals, still remain in traditional accounting supervision and legal, reasonable levels, while ignoring the principles of economic efficiency, not subordinated to the overall goal of corporate finance. We know that even if the security integrity of corporate assets and personnel compliance. However, poor economic efficiency of enterprises can not continue to exist, then such an accounting internal control system, despite the integrity of the specification how beneficial for them? Accounting supervision, internal accounting controls, is the business management of the important part, if not for the continued survival and development of enterprises play a useful role, it is indeed sad . Although the internal financial control and internal accounting control objectives differ, but the overall goal should always be consistent. Accounting control objectives should always be subject to financial supervision and corporate goals. Accounting internal controls for business expenses from their own legitimacy and rationality to make judgments, give expenditure or expenditure not to start. This is the person in charge of the accounting organization's powers. The specific operation is completed by the cashier. Economic business is completed, signed by the person in charge, after verification of the accounting charge, the decision to grant or not to grant reimbursement claims. Practices through review of the original certificate and found areas of doubt or vulnerability. In acheck, be controlled when reimbursement. Another majoraccounting internal control task is to ensure that the accounting information provided by an objective, true, complete and timely.Financial internal control is based on the financial accounts of enterprises as the main target of supervision, to consider the legality of the decision-making costs, reasonable, and consistent with the principles of economic interests. The right balance of enterprises in the enterprise legal person units, in determining the expenditure, the accounting bodies and accounting personnel to provide business only the amount of funds available for expenditure obligations, and no decision-making rights. Usually the meeting was the participation by the general accountant, accounting bodies and accounting personnel did not participate in conference events. Therefore, the financial supervision to monitor the main orientation is very necessary. Financial supervision should be in advance of supervision as well, so that you can not burn in prevention. Matter of course, need supervision in order to promptly correct the error.From a doctrinal perspective the Catholic Church is highly centralized under the authority of the pope and his bishops. However, from an administrative perspective the church is quite decentralized with each diocese and each parish within the diocese having a fair amount of autonomy. Dioceses have virtually no external or regulatory oversight of their financial statements. Unlike corporations which provide quarterly financial statements to the SEC and hold quarterly conference calls with outside analysts, the church is subject to almost no recurring outside financial scrutiny. Many dioceses voluntarily post their audited annual financial statements on their website at the conclusion of the year-end audit. Additionally, many dioceses provide parishioners with an annual financial and administrativenewsletter which provides a highly summarized view of the cash flows for the year and the results of social and spiritual programs offered by the diocese. But many other dioceses do neither. Since they are not required by law to be transparent and accountable in their finances, they choose to keep their finances private.Corporate Financial Controls。
1.Internal Control of AdministrationAmong the forms of control that apply to the administration of special importance is the internal control of the administration. The organization of this form of control, presents more detailed regulation of mutual relations within the administration and authority which as a rule have higher administrative organs toward lower administrative bodies. Internal administrative control sometimes is referred to as the hierarchical control, as derived from administrative systems that rely on pure principle of hierarchy, under whose administration the work is not primarily regulated by law (Stefan, Pavle, Marko, 2002, pg 396).Internal control, as part of system of a wider audit has close relation with it, as his recommendations and assessments serve as the basis to make necessary improvements in procedures and rules proclaimed as a legal obligation.This form of control means that the activity of public administration is subject to the constitution, laws and regulations and international standards and agreements ratified by the Republic of Macedonia.The essence of internal control is seen as this type of control that does not come outside the frames of administrative organization, but remains within the administration implemented in a way how an administrative body is overseeing the work of other administrative bodies. Due to the specific relations that have prevailed in the past between the administration bodies, this form of control is seen as the most importanton legal or technical terms (Ivo, 1997, p. 110).Internal controls means the organization and the methods used to assist and ensure that program managers are achieving their expected results ,that resources used to implement these programs are consistent with the purposes of a public entity and that they are obtained by fraud, abuse, etc.. The main objective of internal control is to express the responsibility of the administration. The objective of internal control in the public sector is that by building systems, design and implementation of rules1 Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu (1748). The Spirit of Laws.2 SIGMA Papers No. 27: European Principles for Public Administration2.From the administrative theory, administrative control means exercising influence over the senior administrative pendant body organs, related to the successful performance of their official duties. Administrative control, which is exercised over the work of administrative bodies, is adjusted by legal norms and laws of the higher bodies.There have been developed various forms of administrative control in order to ensure the operation and coordination between different administrative structures on vertical and horizontal line that ensure normal and lawful operation of state administration. Internal control is the kind of control that is exercised within a ministry, other central institutions, local government body, etc.., And the control exerted by them on the bodies, public entities and institutions subordinate to their area 1 .Republican government exercises control and supervision over the work and acts of ministries, with the right of abrogation and annulment of administrative acts of ministries and administrative organizations which have public authority, whereas under conditions prescribed by law, ministries supervise the work of other administrative state bodies and local self-governance bodies under the authority provided by law. Internal control aims at improving the method of work of every employee to realize his duties, as well as activation of versatile and smoothoperation of all levels within the body or institution.Its objective is to increase the efficiency of the control and improvement of control rules, to prevent or detect violations of law in the field of public administration, to combat deviant phenomena (corruption, bribery), which are prevalent in public administration with negative consequences for society as a whole. These rules intend preservation and utilization of human resources, as well as finance to increase social welfare.From comparative analysis of administrative systems in different countries, administrative control is done in two ways: a)l Instancional control and b) hierarchical control or official supervision.Instancional control - means control over administrative acts through unsatisfied parties with an administrative act in the first instance body, which means that without complaint there is no instancional control. The unsatisfied party could appeal an administrative decision which affects the body on the highest administrative level.An appeal is a critical element of instancional control (conditio sine qua non). Appeal is a regular legal tool by which an aggrieved party with attacks on the administrative decision will realize any right or obligation, and it represents the main institution of administrative proceedings, where enables interested parties to be protected from unlawful or arbitraries of state administration bodies.In the political and legal system of the Republic of Macedonia, the right of appeal is the right of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution of the country. It guarantees the right to appeal against individual legal acts adopted in the first instance proceedings before courts, administrative bodies or other organizations and institutions exercising public authority 2 .In the instancional control, object of supervision is the concrete administrative act, namely the decision to be issued in administrative matters in the direct implementation of the provisions, which will decide the rights and obligations or the public interest to individuals, legal persons and other parties 3.So , instancional control takes place in the general administrative procedure, with the filing of an aggrieved party. In accordance with the Law on general administrative procedure against the decision of first instance, an aggrieved party may appeal through the appeal to the body of second instance.1 Ermir D,( 2003), Administrative Law I, Tirana, p. 201.2 Constitution of Republic of Macedonia, 1991.3 Law of internal control in the public sector, (officiale gazete of RM, nr.69/04)Reforming Public Administration1003Powers of bodies that decide on the basis of complaints consist in the cancellation or cancellation of administrative act.The issue of administrative settlement (decisions) is one of the main issues of administrative reform. In developing the administrative procedures in the Republic of Macedonia, but also in other countries, European Union countries, applyadministrative law principles (rule of law, transparency, equality before the law, etc.). Principles of administrative procedure apply to all levels of administrative decisions.The effective functioning of the administrative procedures contributes to the legitimacy of administrative bodies in the exercise of its powers and ensures efficiency and legal certainty on providing of services to citizens.Hierarchical control - as a form of internal administrative control is carried out ex officio (ex officio), respectively, higher administrative organs have the right and both are also obliged to exercise control over the work of lower administrative organs. In the context of administrative oversight, it is observed that higher administrative bodies exercise supervision over lower administrative bodies on the implementation of laws and other acts, as well as the legality of the work and procedures of public administration bodies, in accordance with the law (the body by a decision of its own can cancel the decision of the lower body). Hierarchical control or hierarchical supervision may be exercised in different ways and forms. Thus, the control may be from individual concrete acts of lower bodies and may even belong to the overall work of one or more lower bodies. Supervision is done by the inspectorate and auditing.Important function of control is control by auditors. The purpose of audit is that to entity leaders it ensures objective evaluation, independent, with the aim of improving the performance of the entity and internal control effectiveness, respecting the principle of legality, independence, fairness, economy, effectiveness and efficiency etc. Control through audit is an independent and objective instrument, which verifies the data, gives advice in order to improve the work of the entity in achieving its objectives.The internal auditor has the right to see all financial statements, books, records and other documents and may request all information which he or she needs to perform control.3. Control within Municipal InstitutionsThe existence and functioning of control and supervision over the work of municipal authorities is evident, and it is usually carried out by the state government, administrative bodies and special bodies of local self-government.The procedure for controlling and monitoring includes equally all acts and regulations of the municipal authorities and subject to assessment are in legal Basis of the act, the operative part and process of adoption. The system of control and supervision of municipalities is established to build an effective system of control and supervision, over the work of the bodies of local self-government.The system of internal control and supervision is one of the basic preconditions for preventing certain irregularities in the functioning of all institutions. The data show that the system of internal control and supervision is not sufficiently established and accepted in the municipalities, which in itself speaks about the need for its establishment, in order to proactively influence regarding the elimination of certain irregularities.Most municipalities today have not appointed an internal auditor. This indicatesa violation of legal regulations in terms of establishing the system of internalcontrols and supervision in accordance with positive legal norms.European Integration - Realities and Perspectives 20121004In the context of rights and duties of the municipality established by law,supervision can be performed by the council, the mayor and authorities,organizational forms of municipal administration and managed clerks.The Municipal Council within their jurisdictions decides and adopts appropriatelegislation primarily in the area of the municipal budget, establishment of publicservices, adopts programs, plans and other authorities under their jurisdiction.In practice this can most vividly be presented with the possibility that thecouncil has for rejecting certain decisions or solutions offered by the mayor orthe relevant departments of the municipality, especially the most clear case is theabsence of the municipal budget, the rejection of the final bill of municipality,etc.Within the jurisdiction of the mayor, his power of supervision of the Councilcontrols the legal regulations of the council, publishes regulations of the councilin the official gazette of the municipality and ensures the implementation of Councildecisions, and others.4. Citizens as Supervisors of the Work of Public Administration BodiesCitizens in any democratic society enjoy the right to participate in theinstitutions of public character and to be informed about the work of governmentalinstitutions, parliamentary activity, courts, local self-government and allinstitutions of public character. Communication of public institutions withdifferent groups of citizens, the media and citizen participation in policy making,decision making and control process, are important elements of each society buildin a democratic way. Citizens have the right to directly participate in decisionmaking processes in public institutions and it is their right which cannot come intoquestion, it is also the right behind which stand and guarantee the internationalacts and those of the country (whether central or local). Freedom of informationis one of the fundamental human rights of citizen specified in the Constitution ofthe Republic of Macedonia (Article 16) and citizens are guaranteed access to gettingthe right information and the receiving and transmission of information. One of themost important international documents that provided, fixed and guaranteed the rightof citizens to directly participate in decision making processes in localauthorities, is undoubtedly the European Convention on Local Self-Government of theCouncil of Europe 1.Citizens’ access to existing institutions to oversee the issues of theirinterest, it is considered relatively low with many aspects to improve citizensaccess to bodies of public administration and should provide easier and moreappropriate access of citizens to the authorities of control and supervision.Without governance transparency there is no democratic society. The benefit istwofold because, citizens participate in setting priorities, and then the controlduring their realization; on the other hand the power verifies the correctness of its policy and strengthens the trust between citizens. Public assessment is the best way of control; yet it does not mean that supervision by competent authorities should be abandoned.5. Conclusions – Recommendations- Through the use of legal and political instruments of control is intended to preserve and advance the functioning of democratic institutions, democratic values and citizens in protecting the public and privat interests. - The purpose of exercising administrative control and taking measures is to apply legitimacy, to determine the responsibility of administrative bodies and officials who have violated the law. - Internal control aims to ensure that final decisions will be legal and administrative bodies in exercising their activities respected already established legal rules.1 European Convention on Local Self-Government of the Council of EuropeReforming Public Administration1005- The main objective of internal control is to increase the efficiency of the control and improvement of control rules, to prevent or detect violations of law in the field of public administration, to fight deviant phenomena that are prevalent in public administration with negative consequences for the society in general. - Administration bodies which develop administrative procedures should strengthen internal control system, including supervision of administrative decision-making process in the first instance and under the grievance procedure. - The managing bodies of public administration bodies in all levels of administration should receive reports and information for developing supervision of administrative procedures and this will be the basis for improving the quality of work of administrative bodies. - Administrative control of the Government towards the administration should be perceived only。
外文翻译原文Internal Control SystemsMaterial Source:Encyclopedia of Business Author:Audrey Gramling Internal control can be described as any action taken by an organization to help enhance the likelihood that the objectives of the organization will be achieved. The definition of internal control has evolved as different internal control models have been developed. This article will describe these models, present the definitions of internal control they provide, and indicate the components of internal control. Various parties responsible for and affected by internal control will also be discussed.THE COSO MODELIn the United States many organizations have adopted the internal control concepts presented in the report of the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Published in 1992, the COSO report defines internal control as:a process, effected by an entity's board of directors, management and other personnel, designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories:1.effectiveness and efficiency of operations2.reliability of financial reportingpliance with applicable laws and regulationsCOSO describes internal control as consisting of five essential components, include:1.The control environment2.Risk assessment3.Control activitiesrmation and communication5.MonitoringAs the base of the pyramid, the control environment is arguably the most important component because it sets the tone for the organization. Factors of thecontrol environment include employees' integrity, the organization's commitment to competence, management's philosophy and operating style, and the attention and direction of the board of directors and its audit committee.Risk assessment refers to the identification, analysis, and management of uncertainty facing the organization. Risk assessment focuses on the uncertainties in meeting the organization's financial and operational objectives. Changes in personnel, new product lines, or rapid expansion could affect an organization's risks.Control activities include the policies and procedures maintained by an organization to address risk-prone areas. An example of a control activity is a policy requiring approval by the board of directors for all purchases exceeding a predetermined amount. Control activities were once thought to be the most important element of internal control, but COSO suggests that the control environment is more critical since the control environment fosters the best actions, while control activities provide safeguards to prevent wrong actions from occurring.Information and communication encompasses the identification, capture, and exchange of financial, operational, and compliance information in a timely manner. People within an organization who have timely, reliable information are better able to conduct, manage, and control the organization's operations.Monitoring refers to the assessment of the quality of internal control. Monitoring activities provide information about potential and actual breakdowns in a control system that could make it difficult for an organization to accomplish its goals. Informal monitoring activities might include management's checking with subordinates to see if objectives are being met. A more formal monitoring activity would be an assessment of the internal control system by the organization's internal auditors.OTHER CONTROL MODELSSome users of the COSO report have found it difficult to read and understand.A model that some believe overcomes this difficulty is found in a report from the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, which was issued in 1995. The report presents a control model referred to as Criteria of Control (CoCo). The CoCo model, which builds on COSO, is thought to be more concrete and user-friendly. CoCo describes internal control as actions that foster the best result for an organization. These actions, which contribute to the achievement of the organization's objectives, center around:1.Effectiveness and efficiency of operations2.Reliability of internal and external reportingpliance with applicable laws and regulations and internal policiesCoCo indicates that control comprises:those elements of an organization (including its resources, systems, processes, culture, structure and tasks) that, taken together, support people in the achievement of the organization's objectives.CoCo model recognizes four interrelated elements of internal control, including purpose, capability, commitment, and monitoring and learning. An organization that performs a task is guided by an understanding of the purpose of the task and supported by capability (information, resources, supplies, and skills). To perform the task well over time, the organization needs a sense of commitment. Finally, the organization must monitor task performance to improve the task process. These elements of control, which include twenty specific control criteria, are seen as the steps an organization takes to foster the right action.In addition to the COSO and CoCo models, two other reports provide internal control models. One is the Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation's Systems Auditability and Control (SAC), which was issued in 1991 and revised in 1994. The other is the Information Systems Audit and Control Foundation's COBIT (Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology), which was issued in 1996.The Institute of Internal Auditors issued SAC to provide guidance to internal auditors on internal controls related to information systems and information technology (IT). The definition of internal control included in SAC is:a set of processes, functions, activities, sub-systems, and people who are grouped together or consciously segregated to ensure the effective achievement of objective and goals.COBIT focuses primarily on efficiently and effectively monitoring information systems. The report emphasizes the role and impact of IT control as it relates to business processes. This control model can be used by management to develop clear policy and good practice for control of IT. The following COBIT definition of internal control was adapted from COSO:The policies, procedures, practices, and organizational structures are designed to provide reasonable assurance that business objectives will be achieved and that undesired events will be prevented or detected and corrected.While the specific definition of internal control differs across the various models, a number of concepts are very similar across these models. In particular, themodels emphasize that internal control is not only policies and procedures to help an organization accomplish its objectives but also a system affected by people. In these models, people are perceived to be central to adequate internal control.These models also stress the concept of reasonable assurance as it relates to internal control. Internal control systems cannot guarantee that an organization will meet its objectives. Instead, internal control can only be expected to provide reason -able assurance that a company's objectives will be met. The effectiveness of internal controls depends on the competency and dependability of the organization's people. Limitations of internal control include faulty human judgment, misunder -standing of instructions, errors, management override of controls, and collusion. Further, because of cost-benefit considerations, not all possible controls will be implemented. Because of these inherent limitations, internal controls cannot guarantee that an organization will meet its objectives.PARTIES RESPONSIBLE FOR AND AFFECTED BY INTERNAL CONTROLWhile all of an organization's people are an integral part of internal control, certain parties merit special mention. These include management, the board of directors (including the audit committee), internal auditors, and external auditors.The primary responsibility for the development and maintenance of internal control rests with an organization's management. With increased significance placed on the control environment, the focus of internal control has changed from policies and procedures to an overriding philosophy and operating style within the organization. Emphasis on these intangible aspects highlights the importance of top management's involvement in the internal control system. If internal control is not a priority for management, then it will not be one for people within the organization either.As an indication of management's responsibility, top management at a publicly owned organization will include in the organization's annual financial report to the shareholders a statement indicating that management has established a system of internal control that management believes is effective. The statement may also provide specific details about the organization's internal control system.Internal control must be evaluated in order to provide management with some assurance regarding its effectiveness. Internal control evaluation involves everything management does to control the organization in the effort to achieve its objectives. Internal control would be judged as effective if its components are present andfunction effectively for operations, financial reporting. The board of directors and its audit committee have responsibility for making sure the internal control system within the organization is adequate. This responsibility includes determining the extent to which internal controls are evaluated. Two parties involved in the evaluation of internal control are the organization's internal auditors and their external auditors.Internal auditors' responsibilities typically include ensuring the adequacy of the system of internal control, the reliability of data, and the efficient use of the organization's resources. Internal auditors identify control problems and develop solutions for improving and strengthening internal controls. Internal auditors are concerned with the entire range of an organization's internal controls, including operational, financial, and compliance controls.Internal control will also be evaluated by the external auditors. External auditors assess the effectiveness of internal control within an organization to plan the financial statement audit. In contrast to internal auditors, external auditors focus primarily on controls that affect financial reporting. External auditors have a responsibility to report internal control weaknesses to the audit committee of the board of directors.译文内部控制制度资料来源:商业百科全书作者:奥德丽·格拉姆内部控制被认为是任何能够提高组织目标完成效率的措施。
The enterprise internal control theoryThe internal control is an important symbol of modern enterprise management, through the practice of the conclusion is: to control is strong, weak, without control is controlled, disorderly. The new regulations "accounting law 27 units shall establish and perfect the system of supervision unit interior accountant. Unit interior accountant controls on the execution, the internal control is.What is the internal controlThe internal control is the formation of a series of measures to control functions, procedures, methods, and standardized and systematized, make it become a rigorous, relatively complete system. According to the control of the internal control can be divided into different purpose accounting control and management control. Accounting control and protection of assets is safe, the accounting information authenticity and integrity and financial activities related to the legitimacy of control, Management control means to ensure operation policy decision, implementation of business activities and promote the efficiency and effectiveness, and the effect of the relevant management to achieve the goals of control. Accounting control and management control and not mutually exclusive, incompatible, some control measures can be used for accounting control, and can also be used to control.The goal is to ensure that the internal control unit operations efficiency and effect, safety, economic information of assets and financial reports of reliability. Its main functions: one is to achieve target management policy and management, Second is the assets of safety protection unit is complete, prevent loss of assets, Three is to guarantee the business and financial accounting information authenticity and integrity. In addition, the legitimacy of the financial activities within the unit is the internal control goals.Good, although the internal control to achieve these goals, but whether the internal control design and operation, it is not how to eliminate its inherent limitations. This limitation must also be clear and prevention. Main show is: (1) the limited by cost benefit principle, (2) if the employee has different responsibility ignore control program, misjudgment, even the collusion, inside and outside, often cause in fraud internal control malfunction, (3) management personnel abuse, and to set up or Passover control of internal control ignored, also can make the establishment of internal control non-existing.Second, the basic structure of internal controlThe basic structure of internal control. Mainly includes controlenvironment, accounting system and control procedures in three aspects:(a) control environment. Control environment refers to establish or implement a policy of various factors, which affect mainly reflects unit managers and other personnel to control the attitude, understanding and action. Specific include: management ideas and management style, unit organization structure, functions and managers of these functions, determine the powers and responsibilities of the manager monitoring and inspection method, the working personnel policy measures to control, and its implementation, this unit of various external business relations.(2) accounting system. Accounting system refers to establish accounting and accounting supervision procedure and method of business activities. Effective accounting system should do:1, confirmed and record all real business, timely and detailed description of economic business, so in the financial and accounting reports of economic business appropriately classified.2 and measurement value of economic business, so in the financial and accounting reports records in the appropriate monetary value.3 and determine the time, business to business records in the appropriate accounting period.4 in the financial and accounting reports, business and proper disclosure of expression related matters.(3) control procedures. Control program to formulate policy and managers to ensure a certain procedure. Specific include: business and economic activity approval, The relevant personnel division of responsibilities clear, and prevent fraud, The bill and certificates and use, should guarantee business activities and recorded properly, Property and its use to have documented exposure measures to protect, For registered business valuation, and to review, etc.Third, the basic way of internal controlThe basic way of internal control mainly has: organization planning control, authorized control, budget control, material control, cost control, risk control and audit control.(a) to organize the control. According to the internal control requirements, the unit in determining the organizational structure andimprove the process, incompatible duties shall follow the principle of separation, the so-called incompatible duties, refers to those if by a man or a department, and may cheat yourself concealing its position of frauds. The economic activity of the unit can usually divided into five stages: namely, the approval issued by authorized, execution, and records. Normally, if each step by the relatively independent researchers (or department), can guarantee the separation incompatible duties, facilitating the function of the internal control. Organize and control mainly includes two aspects:1 and incompatible duties of separation. If the accounting work of accountant and cashier incompatible duties, need to separate. Should be separate positions usually have an authorized: economic business duties to separation, Execute a business with the position of the post to review: Execution of an economic position and record the business to business position: Keep a record of the property of the position and position of property to separation etc. Incompatible duties separation is based on the assumption that two personal unconscious accomplice a possibility, but the possibility of a person gains more than two people. If this hypothesis, breakthrough incompatible duties of separation cannot play control function.2, the organization's control. A unit of economic activities according to the needs of different departments and institutions set, the organization's set of responsibilities and should reflect the mutual control requirements. Specific requirement is: the responsibility and authority of the organizations must be licensed and guarantee the authority within the scope of authority without intervention, Each business must pass in operation of the department and guarantee in different departments concerned to check each other, In every business, should belong to was not inspectors, in order to ensure that the inspectors check out the problem was solved quickly.(2) authorized control. The authorized department of internal control unit to handle business or staff access control. Some departments or units within a clerk in the treatment of economic business, must be authorized or approved to, no approval. Authorized control unit can guarantee the implementation course and abuse. Authorized are generally authorized and particular authorized two forms: general mandate is to deal with average economic business level and the approval of the right conditions stipulated in the unit, usually in the internal control of clarifying, Special authorization of special economic business processing is theright level and approval conditions, such as when a prescribed amount exceeds the economic business department, only after approval within specific authorized to handle. Authorized the basic control requirement is: first, must be clear and specific license authorization of the general line and responsibility, Secondly, to clear the authorized business each program, Again, to establish the necessary examination system, to ensure that the processing after the authorized business working quality. Some current unit executes leadership "pen", with the approval of the internal control principles and requirements, should reform. Practice has proved, rights should be restricted, lose the right to restrict the corruption which easily.(3) budget control. Budget control is an important aspect of internal control, including financing, financing, purchasing, production, sales, investment and management activities. The economic business units to prepare detailed budget and plan, and through the authorized by relevant departments, the budget or plan implementation control, the basic requirements: first, the unit budget must reflect the management goal, and clear responsibility. Second, the budget shall be permitted by the authorized to budget adjustments to budget and more practical. Third, it shall timely feedback or regular budget implementation.(4) physical assets control. Physical assets control mainly include restrictions to control inventory control and regular two, this is the real assets of unit of safety control measures. There are two main: first, to limit to strictly control, to physical assets and the relevant documents of the physical assets, such as cash and bank deposit, securities and inventory, warehouse, the warehouser except cashier personnel and other personnel is limited, contact, to ensure the safety of assets. Second, regular physical assets inventory, guarantee the physical assets conform with the actual amount recorded book, such as accounts inconsistent, should investigate the cause and treatment. In addition to the above, physical assets control say from broad sense, also include the physical assets of purchase, storage, and shipping and sales process control.(5) cost control. Modern cost control can be divided into "extensive" and "intensive" two. Extensive cost control, refers to the production technology, product process under the condition of invariable, rely solely on reducing consumption materials, reasonable material to lower the cost of cost control, Intensive cost control, refers to raise the level of technology to improve the production technology, product process, thus reducing the cost control. These two kinds of methods, combining modern cost control.1, extensive cost control, the cost of raw materials procurement control from the final product sold throughout, and is one of the most fundamental and most main control method. First, the raw materials procurement cost control. For bulk materials generally used to open ZhaoBiaoFa or according to manufacturer direct purchasing. Second, the use of materials cost control. Generally, there are two ways: one is the objective cost control, it is through the "target cost price - goals profits target =", which is obtained by cost method to control costs. Veto Second, it is the cost control of various assignments, and through the analysis of cost drivers, costs and expenses of the collection, not only more reasonable truly computational cost, and thus find income and cost ratio or not only put no gains, so can largely reduce costs. Third, product sales, cost control. Mainly propaganda cost control, notable is, advertising, promotional role played only product quality is the foundation of the user's trust. Therefore, we should grasp investment and expenses of the matching principle. [NextPage]2 and intensive cost control. And can be divided into two types: one is to improve production technology by to reduce cost control. There are many ways to improve production technology, such as the introduction of new production line adopts high-tech products, etc. Two is improved by process to reduce the cost of cost control. Intensive cost control on intellectual achievements, it can make the excess profit achievements.(6) risk control. Risk is usually referred to as a result of the action, and the risk associated with another concept is uncertain. Some people only know beforehand action may result, but don't know they appear probability, or both all don't know, but only as a rough estimate. For example, enterprise test-manufacturing a new product, this product can certainly advance trial success or failure. But don't know these two consequences of possibility appeared. Business decisions are generally in uncertain circumstances. In practice, a result of action has many may not sure, risk, And as a result of the action, it is certainly not risk. The risk control is to prevent and avoid as far as possible adverse outcome. According to the reasons of the formation of risk and risk management can generally be divided into two categories: the financial risk,1, management risk. Risk management refers to the production and business operation reasons for corporate profits to the uncertainty. Due to the production and operation of enterprises will be derived from many aspects of the external and internal factors, thus greatly, and the uncertaintyof uncertainty, causes the enterprise profit margins or the changes, thus bringing risk. Operational risk changes from the external, nonetheless, enterprises should adopt the effective internal control measures to prevent.2, financial risk. Financial risk and risk, it is to because debt and the enterprise's financial results for uncertainty. Companies operating in the capital, debt all except the part of self-capital, borrowed funds for enterprise self-capital affect profitability, At the same time, borrowed money to repay captital with interest, if unable to repay debts that are due, the enterprise will into financial difficulties or bankruptcy. When the enterprise rate than pre-tax profit margins funds borrowed funds rate, use borrowed money earn profits and residual interest except compensation and thus make the self-capital profitability improve. However, if the enterprise income tax profit margins than money borrowed funds, at this moment, use borrowed money to finance the profits are not pay interest, still need to use their own funds to pay interest on the part of the profit margins, thereby reducing the self-capital, make enterprise losses incurred, even the bankruptcy of the danger. The risk for financing risk. The size of the risk degree of self-capital by borrowing money, borrowed money ratio, the greater the risk degree proportion with smaller proportion, borrowed funds, risk degree also decrease. For financial risk control, the key is to ensure a reasonable capital structure, maintain the appropriate level of debt, should make full use of the debt management skill gain financial leverage income, improve the self-capital profitability, To avoid excessive debt caused by the financial risk, which is the important link of the enterprise internal control, must take the necessary measures to prevent fundraising risk.(7) auditing control. Audit control mainly refers to the internal audit, internal audit and control of accounting is to supervise. Accounting information to internal audit, internal control is an integral part of the internal control is a kind of special form. Internal auditing is an organization in all kinds of activities and the internal control system of independent evaluation to determine whether the policy implementation, establish the procedure is in compliance with the standard of resources utilization, whether reasonable, effective and unit of objectives achieved. Internal audit content is very extensive, generally include internal financial audit and internal management audit. Internal audit supervision of accounting information, and is not only the internal control is effective means to ensure that the accounting information is true and complete. According to the basic principle of internal control and accounting work in our country actual situation, the new "law" regulation, the unit shall in internal accounting supervision system ofaccounting information in the regular internal audit methods and procedures, in order to make the internal audit institutions or internal auditors of accounting information system and procedure of audit work. In addition to the above seven internal control, and documentation control. Performance control and worker quality control, etc. The new system of accounting supervision system on the unit interior, the main contents of the internal control system. Including: responsibilities, and strict procedures, truthfully record, regular check, etc. In practice, establishing and implementing internal control should also consider: enterprise scale, organizational system and the owners' rights and interests; etc. Business property, diversity and complexity, Transfer, processing, and the methods to information, Applicable regulatory requirements, etc. At present many enterprise internal control was not good, except knowledge level, the main reasons of the administration is to establish and implement effective internal control of power, pressure, coerce, enough. This change of the accounting law depends on the implementation of new science and the modern enterprise system and the establishment of corporate governance structure. To help enterprises to establish internal control, can consult other countries and regions, by the relevant departments of the internal control of some important industry and points for each unit, reference, and learning to use gradually perfect the internal control system, in order to promote the comprehensive enterprise in our country, and in essence.企业内部控制理论内部控制是现代企业管理的重要标志,通过了结论的做法是:以控制强,弱,无控制的控制,无序。
内部控制外文翻译外文翻译原文来源:Research Paper, July XXXX年月日A Clear Look at Internal Controls: Theory and Concepts内部控制透视:理论与概念The necessity of control in new variable business environment is not latent for any person and managementas a response factor for stockholdersand another should implement a greatcontrol over his/her organization. 环境需要新的业务控制变量不为任何潜在的股东和管理人士的响应因子为1,另外应执行/她组织了一个很大的控制权。
控制是管理活动的东西或以上施加控制。
思想的产生和近十年的发展需要有系统的商业资源和控制这种财富一个新的关注。
One of the hot topic a boutcontrols over business resource is analyzingthe cost-benefit of each control. 主题之一热一回合管制的商业资源是分析每个控制成本效益。
作为内部控制和欺诈的第一道防线,维护资产以及预防和侦查错误。
内部控制,我们可以说是一种控制整个系统的财务和其他方面的管理制定了为企业的顺利运行;它包括内部的脸颊,内部审计和其他形式的控制。
COSOdescribe Internal Control as follow. Internalcontrols are the methods employed to help ensure the achievement of an objective. COSO的内部控制描述如下。
内部控制是一个客观的方法用来帮助确保实现。
会计内部控制中英文对照外文翻译文献n:Internal control is an accounting re or control system ___ policies。
protecting assets。
and preventing fraud and errors。
It is an important component of nal management that includes planning。
methods。
and res used to meet tasks。
goals。
and objectives。
and in doing so。
supports performance-based management。
Internal control is equal to management control and can help managers achieve the expected effective management of resources。
However。
designing and establishing effective internal control is not a simple task and cannot be achieved through quick fixes。
This article discusses the different aspects of the concept of internal control and management.Keywords: internal control。
management control。
control environment。
control activities。
n2.Internal Control Perspective: ___The environment requires new business control variables that are not responsive to any potential ___ control。
外文文献翻译译文一、外文原文原文:Internal controlIntroductionThe system of internal control over financial reporting in Japan under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA) was implemented as of the fiscal year starting on April 1 2008.Under this system, executive officers of listed companies are obligated to evaluate their company's internal control over financial reporting and to file the results of such evaluation in the form of an internal audit report with the Financial Services Agency (FSA). In this report, executive officers should state material weakness if they judge any material weakness exists in the company's internal control over financial reporting. The report should also be audited by outside accounting auditors before being filed with the FSA. Since most Japanese companies have a fiscal year that ends in March, June 2009 will be the first time most companies file such a report.When the internal control system was introduced, it made reference to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of the US. Under the Japanese system, clear standards were set regarding the set-up of internal controls over financial reporting in an effort to prevent the creation of excessive documentation and to control costs, two issues which had occurred in the US. However, even with such standards, some uncertainty exists. In particular, uncertainty arises regarding the connection between this system under the FIEA and the rules of the Companies Act.Failure to submit the internal audit report or submission of false statements can lead to liabilities and criminal penalties under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA). However, if there is a material weakness in the company's internal controls over financial reporting and executive officers disclose such material weakness in theinternal audit report, no sanctions will be imposed under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, nor will it directly lead to the director's liabilities under the Companies Act. Rather, disclosure of such material weakness is thought to be desirable, because by disclosing such material weakness, a company can improve the quality of its internal control over financial reporting, which will enable the company to submit more accurate financial reports in the future.Internal control is a process-effected by an entity's board of directors, management, and other personnel--designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories: reliability of financial reporting, effectiveness and efficiency of operations, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Internal control consists of the following five interrelated components.1、Control environment sets the tone of an organization, influencing the control consciousness of its people. It is the foundation for all other components of internal control, providing discipline and structure.2、Risk assessment is the entity's identification and analysis of relevant risks to achievement of its objectives, forming a basis for determining how the risks should be managed.3、Control activities are the policies and procedures that help ensure that management directives are carried out.4、Information and communication are the identification, capture, and exchange of information in a form and time frame that enable people to carry out their responsibilities.5、Monitoring is a process that assesses the quality of internal control performance over time.The interlaced audit issue is as follows: under the internal control system of the Companies Act, company auditors must audit the method and the results of the accounting audit conducted by outside accounting auditors. On the other hand, the internal control system of the FIEA requires the outside accounting auditors to auditthe company auditors' monitoring of internal financial controls. Therefore, company auditors that audit outside accounting auditors under the Companies Act are audited by the same outside accounting auditors under the FIEA. This interlaced audit however is expected to make each audit more effective because the company auditor and the outside accounting auditor will each monitor the audit of the other.The time lag issue is expected to arise due to the timing of the submissions of the various audit reports required under the FIEA and the Companies Act. Company auditors will need to prepare and submit audit reports regarding the execution of duties by directors for the fiscal year as required by the Companies Act. However, it is expected that these audit reports will be submitted before the internal audit report required under the FIEA is submitted and audited by the outside accounting auditors. Thus, if the internal audit report points out a material weakness that was not referred to in the audit reports prepared by the company auditor, the company auditor will be placed in a difficult position and will need to decide whether to amend and make changes to the audit reports as such audit reports should also disclose such weaknesses. However, if the directors, the company auditors, and the accounting auditors are cooperating properly, this issue would not arise.It is expected that the system of internal control over financial reporting will prompt companies to build better control systems through cooperation between the directors, company auditors and outside accounting auditors.Connection between the two internal control systemsOn the internal financial controls and internal accounting control the similarities and differences.A difference between monitoring and control objectives.Reason for the difference between the two, simply because of financial supervision and control of the target company's material flow and cash flow, and accounting internal control object is the information flow. Understanding of Marx's words, “the production and the production of bookkeeping records are two different things after all, just to ship the same loading and shipping order are two differentthings.” Corporate material production process is based on the currency as the leading material movement, production and operation of the currency as the beginning and the end result, is achieving its goal of expanding the value of value. And accounting control is passed that have occurred in the material flow, capital flow formed by the flow of information to be the recognition, measurement, reporting. The former to productivity gains, the latter objective, the real target. However, operation of the accounting value of enterprise assets, after all, subordinate to the overall objective, we should also ask for the overall objective of internal control should also be an asset value of its end. Why is this request? This is because the production activities of financial decisions and accounting need to subordinate corporate financial activities, accounting control objectives are to be subject to financial control target.Internal accounting control system is now setting goals, still remain in traditional accounting supervision and legal, reasonable levels, while ignoring the principles of economic efficiency, not subordinated to the overall goal of corporate finance. We know that even if the security integrity of corporate assets and personnel compliance. However, poor economic efficiency of enterprises can not continue to exist, then such an accounting internal control system, despite the integrity of the specification how beneficial for them? Accounting supervision, internal accounting controls, is the business management of the important part, if not for the continued survival and development of enterprises play a useful role, it is indeed sad . Although the internal financial control and internal accounting control objectives differ, but the overall goal should always be consistent. Accounting control objectives should always be subject to financial supervision and corporate goals. Accounting internal controls for business expenses from their own legitimacy and rationality to make judgments, give expenditure or expenditure not to start. This is the person in charge of the accounting organization's powers. The specific operation is completed by the cashier. Economic business is completed, signed by the person in charge, after verification of the accounting charge, the decision to grant or not to grant reimbursement claims. Practices through review of the original certificate and found areas of doubt or vulnerability. In acheck, be controlled when reimbursement. Another major accounting internal control task is to ensure that the accounting information provided by an objective, true, complete and timely.Financial internal control is based on the financial accounts of enterprises as the main target of supervision, to consider the legality of the decision-making costs, reasonable, and consistent with the principles of economic interests. The right balance of enterprises in the enterprise legal person units, in determining the expenditure, the accounting bodies and accounting personnel to provide business only the amount of funds available for expenditure obligations, and no decision-making rights. Usually the meeting was the participation by the general accountant, accounting bodies and accounting personnel did not participate in conference events. Therefore, the financial supervision to monitor the main orientation is very necessary. Financial supervision should be in advance of supervision as well, so that you can not burn in prevention. Matter of course, need supervision in order to promptly correct the error.From a doctrinal perspective the Catholic Church is highly centralized under the authority of the pope and his bishops. However, from an administrative perspective the church is quite decentralized with each diocese and each parish within the diocese having a fair amount of autonomy. Dioceses have virtually no external or regulatory oversight of their financial statements. Unlike corporations which provide quarterly financial statements to the SEC and hold quarterly conference calls with outside analysts, the church is subject to almost no recurring outside financial scrutiny. Many dioceses voluntarily post their audited annual financial statements on their website at the conclusion of the year-end audit. Additionally, many dioceses provide parishioners with an annual financial and administrative newsletter which provides a highly summarized view of the cash flows for the year and the results of social and spiritual programs offered by the diocese. But many other dioceses do neither. Since they are not required by law to be transparent and accountable in their finances, they choose to keep their finances private.Corporate Financial ControlsRecent scandals, such as the Enron and Tyco scandals, contributed to the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002. This has resulted in U.S. corporations undergoing intensive review, analysis, and testing of their internal control structures.The primary focus of the Sarbanes-Oxley bill is on fraudulent financial reporting. In a number of high-profile cases, management aggressively recognized revenue or manipulated (deferred) expenses to purposely make the company look better than it really was. This financial reporting chicanery had the impact of inflating the stock price which greatly benefited top management, holders of large blocks of the companies’ stock and stock options.Fraudulent financial reporting is much less of a concern for the dioceses and other not-for-profit entities. Safeguarding an entity’s assets is a bigger concern for not-for-profit entities. Revelations of embezzlements in not-for-profit entities are routinely reported in the media. Occasionally, those embezzlements occur at the highest levels of the organization. For example, the Orthodox Church of America recently fired its chancellor and began an audit. The chancellor is at the center of allegations brought by the former church treasurer of missing money, diverted cash, and un-audited accounts totaling millions of dollars. A pastor in the Bridgeport, Connecticut Catholic diocese was investigated on charges that he misspent $1.4 million of parish donations. Four purchasing agents for the archdiocese of New York allegedly extorted over two million dollars in a kickback scheme over eight years from various food vendors to maintain lavish lifestyles. The church lost over one million dollars by having to pay higher prices for the food being purchased for schools and parishes.There have been a number of studies that have documented the importance of and the general inadequacy of internal financial controls in churches. Others have focused on the relationship between the spiritual aspects of a church and its accounting practices.The objectives of the internal financial control structure of an entity are:1. Provide reliable financial statements and accounting records2. Safeguard the entity’s assets3. Promote operational efficiency and effectiveness4. Promote adherence to management’s policies and proceduresAn effective internal control structure consists of three levels:1. Control environment2. Accounting system3. Control proceduresRegardless of whether the entity is a Fortune 500 company or a diocese of the Catholic Church, the objectives of the internal control structure remain the same.They have difficulty separating duties and employees often have little supervision by a qualified financial manager. A fundamental tenet of internal accounting control is to keep the financial recordkeeping duties separate from those individuals that have access to assets, especially cash.Source: Jean C. Bedard, 2009 “Internal control”. T he Accounting Rreview.V ol.84,No.3.pp.839-867.二、翻译文章译文:内部控制介绍内部控制下的财务报告在日本的金融商品交易法(FIEA)下系统实施是从2008年4月1日开始的。