Skip to Content

Blog

Category: Forensic Accounting

We have distilled decades of experience at the intersection of law, business and finance into a suite of articles to help our clients make sense of business valuation, forensic accounting, and litigation support. Please visit our site regularly for our latest content.

Occupational fraud continues to wreak havoc on businesses, with annual business losses reported to exceed $4.7 trillion worldwide. Fraud experts have long suggested that the presence of three conditions, known as the “fraud triangle,” greatly increases the likelihood that an organization will be defrauded. The classic fraud triangle, as conceived by criminologist Donald Cressey, consists of Pressure, Rationalization, and Opportunity. The Fraud Triangle, Cressey Pressure A perpetrator experiences some type of pressure that motivates fraud. Pressure can come from within the organization – for example, pressure to meet aggressive earnings or revenue growth targets. Alternatively, the pressure could be personal, such as the need to maintain a high standard of living, pay off debt, medical bills, or gambling. Rationalization Perpetrators often mentally justify their fraudulent conduct. They might tell themselves that they’ll pay back the money before anyone misses it, or reason that: They’re underpaid and deserve the stolen funds, Their employers can afford the financial loss, They’ll lose everything (or someone) if they don’t commit fraud, “Everybody” does it, or No other solution or help is available for their problems. Most employees who commit fraud are first-time offenders who don’t view themselves as criminals, but as honest people caught up by circumstances beyond their control. By rationalizing, perpetrators overcome ethical barriers that generally guide their conduct. Opportunity Without opportunity, even motivated and rationalized perpetrators can’t commit fraud. Occupational thieves exploit perceived opportunities that they believe will allow them to go undetected. Weak internal controls, oversight, and auditing create opportunities […]


Analytical Tools For Attorneys

Posted in Business Valuation, on Sep 2020, By: Mark S. Gottlieb

  For those of you familiar with our valuation and forensic reports, you know first-hand that we use various tools to analyze and illustrate the financial capacity of a subject company. To examine financial characteristics, we often compare the subjects’ financial ratios to their peer group. For example, the subject company may report travel and entertainment expenses as 5.0% of annual sales. If the subject company reports T&E at 15.0% of sales, further investigation may indicate that this category contains excess owners’ perquisites. To illustrate these and other financial trends, we use charts and other demonstratives. One of my favorite analytical tools is a SWOT analysis. SWOT is an acronym that stands for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Strengths and weaknesses generally refer to: • Financial resources (funding, sources of income, and investment opportunities) • Physical resources (location, facilities, and equipment) • Human resources (employees, volunteers, and target audiences) • Access to natural resources, trademarks, patents, and copyrights, and • Current processes (employee programs, department hierarchies, and software systems) While opportunities and threats consider: • Market trends (new products, technology advancements, and shifts in audience needs) • Economic trends (local, national, and international financial trends) • Funding (donations, legislature, and other sources) • Demographics • Relationships with suppliers and partners • Political, environmental, and economic regulation We commonly illustrate the SWOT analysis in chart form, which draws the reader’s attention to those areas of greatest significance. Another tool we frequently use is Michael Porter’s Five Forces theory. For those of […]


  Many law firms and their clients have applied for the available federal and local loan and grant programs. Despite the promise for quick financial assistance, many businesses (including law firms) still face financial difficulties due to the Coronavirus Pandemic.  The Payroll Protection Program (“PPP”) was established to provide immediate financial assistance to businesses that employ five hundred employees or less. The money set aside for the PPP was entirely distributed within days after the application process began.  We are now hoping that the government replenishes the program. As it turned out, a significant amount of this money was disbursed to businesses that technically meet the SBA’s criteria, but are actually much larger companies, which are not intended to benefit from this stimulus package. Companies, such as Shake Shack, are returning the $10 million it received in the hopes that the money will be redistributed.  Shake Shack is not the only large company to have benefited from having the infrastructure to quickly get ahead of the line for this money earmarked for small businesses. The realization that our economy’s financial weaknesses are now being exposed.  Despite the prior peaks in the stock market, it is now clear that the adage: “What’s good for General Motors is good for America,” is just not true. Despite the current financial assistance being offered, tens of millions of workers are now unemployed, and many businesses are not expected to withstand the financial pressures caused by the current business interruption. Individuals and business owners are […]


  Like you, I woke up today to numerous news programs discussing the coronavirus. Aside from the health concerns, it has become apparent that businesses, large and small, national and local, are being affected.  Some have stated that this week’s events have the potential to be the most catastrophic economic challenge in generations. With no immediate correction anticipated, business owners may be considering filing a business interruption claim. Business interruption insurance can provide much-needed assistance when disaster strikes. But filing a claim requires detailed analysis and documentation to allow the business owner to focus on recovery efforts. What’s covered? Most business interruption policies require the insured to file a detailed “proof of loss” within a short period (30 days, for example) after a loss occurs. But before estimating losses, it’s critical to review the scope of coverage. Policies typically reimburse the insured for lost business income (profits) during the loss period. Some also offer more extensive coverage.  Here are just a few examples. Extraordinary expenses. Some policies will reimburse the insured for repairing damaged inventory and equipment, as well as the cost of operating the business at a temporary location until the original location is restored. “Denial of access” losses. This can occur when a natural disaster or other incident causes governmental authorities to block access to a company’s property for security reasons, even if the property isn’t damaged. Rebuilding costs. Depending on the policy language, some courts have found that the insured should be reimbursed for the extra cost […]


What Attorneys Need To Know About Fraud

Posted in Forensic Accounting, on Sep 2018, By: Mark S. Gottlieb

Looking At The Fraud Triangle & Beyond Occupational fraud continues to wreak havoc on businesses, with annual business losses reported to exceed 5% of revenues.  Fraud experts have long suggested that the presence of three conditions, known as the “fraud triangle,” greatly increases the likelihood that an organization will be defrauded. The classic fraud triangle, as conceived by criminologist Donald Cressey, consists of Pressure, Rationalization and Opportunity.  The following provides a short description of each. Pressure A perpetrator experiences some type of pressure that motivates the fraud. Pressure can come from within the organization – for example, pressure to meet aggressive earnings or revenue growth targets. Alternatively, the pressure could be personal, such as the need to maintain a high standard of living or pay off debt from credit cards, medical bills or gambling. Rationalization Perpetrators often mentally justify their fraudulent conduct. They might tell themselves that they’ll pay back the money before anyone misses it, or reason that: They’re underpaid and deserve the stolen funds, Their employers can afford the financial loss, They’ll lose everything (or someone) if they don’t commit fraud, “Everybody” does it, or No other solution or help is available for their problems. Most employees who commit fraud are first-time offenders who don’t view themselves as criminals but as honest people caught up by circumstances beyond their control. By rationalizing, perpetrators overcome ethical barriers that generally guide their conduct. Opportunity Without opportunity, even motivated and rationalizing would-be perpetrators can’t commit fraud. Occupational thieves exploit perceived opportunities […]


The Hunt For Hidden Cash and Unreported Income

Posted in Business Valuation, on Jun 2018, By: Mark S. Gottlieb

  Discussing hidden cash and unreported income is always a popular topic for both commercial litigators and family law attorneys.  Currently, we are working on a number of business valuation engagements that have developed into “full blown” forensic accounting and fraud exercises.  Since these issues are currently on my mind, I thought a quick review of some of these issues and techniques would be of interest. Hunt For Hidden Cash Contrary to conventional thinking, forensic accountants don’t automaitclly assume that every closely-held business owner hides cash.  Arguably, some business are more susceptible than others. However, when red flags appear, further due diligence is often required. Experts (as well as IRS investigators) typically rely on certain forensic accounting techniques to prove that cash is missing and to estimate how much income the business owner isn’t reporting. These methods include: Bank deposits. This method involves reconstructing income. In this instance we analyze the spouse’s bank deposits, canceled checks and currency transactions, accounting for cash payments made from undeposited currency receipts, as well as nonincome sources of cash. Nonincome cash sources might be loans, gifts, inheritances or insurance proceeds. Source and funds application. Here, the business owner’s personal sources and uses of cash are analyzed. This approach can be effective in determining where the owner’s income and other funds came from, and how they eventually were used. If the owner is spending more money than he or she is taking in, the excess represents unreported income. Net worth. An unsubstantiated increase in a […]


The business valuation and forensic accounting disciplines often intersect when valuing a business for divorce or shareholder dispute. Controlling shareholders may try to hide assets or downplay cash flow to minimize buyouts of their spouses or minority shareholders. As valuation experts we know how to approach these situations to unearth and adjust for the common and uncommon financial misstatements.   Look Beyond The Financials Financial statements and tax returns are often the first source of information to analyze when valuing a business. But it’s also important to look for public sources of information, as well as to conduct site visits and management interviews. These steps can be especially important in adversarial situations to ensure that controlling shareholders (1) aren’t hiding assets, (2) underreporting income, or (3) overstating liabilities and expenses. Nowadays, a simple internet and/or social media search can help reveal financial misstatement. In a more traditional sense, a review of the detailed accounting general ledgers can provide valuable information.  In a recent shareholder dispute between two brothers we uncovered a fictitious foreign entity.  In this instance, payments to this entity were used by one brother to divert profits and funds from the other.  But for our analysis and inquiry to explain a sudden decrease in gross profit margins, this diversion many never had been discovered. Aside from the traditional financial review, there are three things you, the litigation attorney, should consider: Get your financial expert involved early on. Pay attention to warning signs. Don’t be hesitant to expand the […]


Unless you were buried alive during this week’s snowstorm, you probably heard that Donald Trump’s 2005 individual income tax return has been disclosed.  To date, no one has taken responsibility for its discovery, except for the journalist who found it on his doorstep.  Many of the talking heads and late night comedians have discussed and joked about the return, or more accurately its first two pages.  Few, if any, have discussed what the return partially states or even means in regards to President Trump’s reported income and/or assets.   Granted, this information is incomplete and may pose more questions than answers.  However, this exercise is not uncommon for a forensic accountant engaged in analyzing an individual income tax return in a business dispute or matrimonial action.  This discussion is non-partisan.  Truthfully, the subject matter could be about anyone.  But you are reading this blog post because it applies to the current President of the United States. Let this be a primer for those of you that are commercial or family law litigators. Form 1040 is the long form federal individual income tax return filed annually by individuals. You can obtain a full copy of this (blank) form and its instructions here. This particular filing is for the year 2005, which is 12 years prior to Mr. Trump becoming President.  It is fair to say that if President Trump voluntarily submitted his returns for public review, he probably would not have provided a return filed so many years ago. Here is […]


Fraud in the Workplace

Posted in Forensic Accounting, on Jan 2011, By: Mark S. Gottlieb

The popular media have devoted countless hours to storylines that portray fraud in the workplace as an important plot device. From the early TV series Perry Mason and Arrest and Trial to the ubiquitous “ripped from the headlines” stories of the Law and Order franchise, as well as new series on cable such as White Collar, we’ve never lost our fascination for stories that involve fraud and how the perpetrator is finally caught. What compels the senior level manager, the low level employee or the longtime middle manager to ultimately risk everything, convinced that their crimes will go undetected? The characters in  popular fiction, as in the real world, are frequently motivated by financial need caused by avarice, gambling debts, business reversals, poor investments or trying to maintain a lifestyle well beyond their means. Now it seems that almost every day in the business media there are new reports on workplace fraud in all its forms. The frequency of such reports now seem to be outpacing the tv episodes that draw from the “true stories,” and underscoring that truth is stranger than fiction. In a time of massive Ponzi schemes and burgeoning white-collar crime, one can understand why fraud is not uncommon in the business world. In fact, employee fraud costs businesses billions of dollars each year. Employee fraud is an ongoing, widespread and varied problem, one that comes in all sizes for all kinds of companies. It can significantly impact a company’s productivity and profitability. The reasons for fraud […]


Until this past summer, the idea that YouTube might turn a substantial profit at long last may have been as improbable as Jon Stewart friending Glenn Beck on Facebook. But a federal judge’s recent ruling in YouTube’s favor in the 3-year-long copyright dispute with Viacom, the owner of such profitable brands as Paramount, Nickelodeon and Comedy Central, is a major victory in what some are calling a landmark copyright case.The much-discussed suit revolved around Viacom’s allegations that YouTube only became the Internet’s most viewed video site by posting copyright-protected clips “stolen” from its shows. But in evoking a law that shields Internet services from claims of copyright infringement as long as the illegal content is removed,the Court noted that YouTube had removed about 100,000 videos the day after Viacom sent a mass takedown notice. If the Court in this case had agreed with Viacom, and ordered Google to pay the more than $ 1 billion in business damages the media conglomerate was seeking, the impact on YouTube’s future profitability could have been considerable.For a media conglomerate such as Viacom, however, copyright infringement on a site that might attract well over a billion visitors a day, could translate into lost revenue from DVD sales and rentals, worldwide TV syndication, and paid online distribution of their content. When copyrighted content is readily available for free on YouTube, for example, the Court may take into account what profits, if any, would have been generated by Viacom if not for the alleged copyright infringement. But is this a case of lost profits or lost business for a media conglomerate–or perhaps both?In […]