Accounting Scandal (Xerox)
5 November 2013
Xerox’s Accounting Scandal
Xerox Corporation is a multinational American document management corporation which sells and produces a wide variety of color and black-and-white printers, multifunction systems, photo copiers, scanners, fax, digital production printing presses, and related consulting services and supplies. Overall any type of printing equipment, more specifically office equipment. It is currently headquartered in Norwalk, Connecticut since 2007 when it moved from Stamford, Connecticut. Even though its largest population of employees is based around Rochester, New York, (city in which the company was founded). One of the company’s major steps in the last decade has been …show more content…
Berger “Manipulation of revenue and earnings through accounting devices has no place in the executive suite; the executive suite should be reserved for those who will tell the investing public the truth about the company's performance. That didn't happen here and Xerox's shareholders were deceived”. I totally agree with this statement because investors that invested a lot of their money during this time period were driven by the falsely idea that the company was performing at an outstanding rate, and amazingly fine, given its present conditions at the time. The SEC's complaint, was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
The outcome of this scandal was that the six executives all came to an agreement to pay $22 million in interest, penalties, and disgorgement. They did this without admitting or denying the SEC's allegations. The SEC wants to have these funds paid into a court account pursuant to the Fair Fund provisions of Section 308 and eventually distribute this funds to victims which were affected by the alleged fraud.
SEC. (2003, June 5). Six Former Senior Executives of Xerox Settle SEC Enforcement Action Charging Them With Fraud; Executives Agree to Pay Over $22 Million in Penalties, Disgorgement and Interest. Retrieved from: http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2003-70.htm
SEC. (2003, January 29). Plaintiff,