|
CPAs
as Forensic Accountants in Divorce Engagements
By
Ron Marden and Tige Darner
MAY 2006 - Marriage
has become a delicate venture. According to the U.S. Census
bureau, about nine out of 10 people will marry sometime in
their lives, but about half of first marriages will end in
divorce. And while some marriages end peacefully, with both
sides agreeing to an equal and fair settlement, some do not,
and the ensuing process can get quite vicious. When ex-spouses
significantly distrust each other, it is advisable to engage
the services of a lawyer, especially if one or both do not
understand their household finances and the economic implications
of marital settlements. In turn, attorneys often hire CPAs
as forensic accountants to help represent the spouse who doesn’t
have access to the family’s financial information. In
these cases, the forensic analysis might include reviewing
financial data to determine its accuracy and reasonableness;
determining each spouse’s standard of living and disposable
income; locating hidden assets; and determining what property
may be considered separate from marital property, especially
if one of the spouses runs a closely held business. This type
of work has created a highly focused segment for the profession:
forensic accounting in divorce engagements. Marriage:
The Leading Cause of Divorce? Out of the more
than 2 million marriages performed last year, 60% were the
first marriage for both bride and groom. Unfortunately,
for those first marriages that do end in divorce, the average
length of a first marriage is only about eight years. The
median duration of second marriages that end in divorce
is only about seven years.
Most
newlyweds probably don’t think of their wedding day
as the beginning of a personal business partnership: making
money, budgeting, accumulating assets, and investing for
the future. Nevertheless, couples should still plan how
to divide this property at the blissful beginning, not the
bitter end. This planning could take the form of a premarital
agreement, which may not be a perfect document, but is generally
enforceable in all 50 states. This is why both spouses must
understand their household’s finances. It is not a
good idea to allow one spouse to run all the finances while
the other spouse knows nothing about it. After all, the
person you plan to spend the rest of your life with would
never try to hide something from you … or would they?
Locating
Hidden Assets
Most
marital assets are not hidden at all; it’s simply
a matter of knowing where to look. This is what Ron, a hypothetical
CPA and forensic accountant, told Mary, who has recently
filed for divorce from John, her husband of the past nine
years. Mary hired Ron as a CPA in her divorce engagement
because she knows nothing about the family finances and
no longer trusts John. Mary’s request to hire Ron
is not unusual. CPAs who are hired to perform forensic accounting
are often hired to represent the spouse who doesn’t
have knowledge about or access to the family financial information
and normally is not the breadwinner. The other spouse often
has the higher earnings and thus the opportunity and motive
to either hide assets or defer income. The reason is simply
greed. Some spouses believe that the income they earned
is theirs and theirs alone, especially in situations where
there is either generational family income or one spouse
earns a majority of the family income. John thought that,
by hiding assets or deferring income, he could reduce any
child support or alimony settlements Mary may be entitled
to.
Forensic
accounting in divorce engagements is a fairly new discipline,
and the process of locating hidden assets or deferred income
can be difficult. Many times the other spouse will go to
extreme lengths in order to hide the assets not only from
their spouse but from the IRS.
The
critical first step in Ron’s investigation was to
meet with Mary and her attorney and to obtain the following
information:
-
A complete education and employment history of John;
- A
list of all banks, brokerage firms, and other financial
institutions with which John has ever had a relationship,
including each account number and type;
- All
sources of income, whether earned or passive, including
pending litigation and insurance settlements, estate proceeds,
asset sales, and loans;
- Lifestyle
and expense levels for items such as entertainment, travel,
child care, interest, and property taxes; and
-
Detailed information on personal and business relationships,
such as the names of children, parents, any ex-spouses,
Mary’s maiden name, and the names of all current
and former business entities and partners.
This
checklist should familiarize Ron with John’s dealings
and provide a foundation for his investigation. Once Ron
has finished the interview process, he has several common
methods at his disposal to determine if John may be hiding
assets (Exhibit
1).
The
expenditure method is used by CPAs to prove the existence
of hidden assets and income by comparing total personal
expenditures to reported income. Reported income will often
come from tax returns, financial statements prepared for
bank loans, or financial statements prepared for the courts.
By analyzing this data, Ron can determine if the level of
reported income is sufficient to support the family, based
upon their spending habits. This will often lead to more-detailed
analysis and is a good first step to gauge whether assets
and income have been hidden. Another method is the net worth
method, in which CPAs compare net worth at the beginning
of the year (or period) to net worth at the end of the period.
The increase or decrease in net worth is then reconciled
to the reported income for the period, to help determine
the likelihood of hidden assets. A final method is the bank
deposit method, in which CPAs examine bank and investment
deposit activities. The bank deposit method is often used
when there are large amounts of deposits and very little
money is actually dispersed.
An
important item Ron can also look for is a premarital agreement,
if one exists. A properly executed premarital agreement
should be very detailed as to what assets existed before
the marriage. In this case, Ron focused on tracing the assets
that were listed on the premarital agreement to see if they
led to acquisitions of other, undisclosed assets.
The
initial interview with Mary and her attorney, the methods
for detecting hidden assets, and the review of the premarital
agreement should help Ron establish whether assets are being
hidden. The actual search for hidden assets will usually
require, as a first step, a public-records search. Public-records
searches are used to help identify unknown businesses and
real estate investments. When reviewing the public records,
Ron will also look out for any associates he learned about
from the interview process. A review of “frequent
flyer statements” may show a pattern of travel to
a particular city. Phone bills will be analyzed for toll
charges to unusual locations, and credit card statements
will be similarly examined for unusual expenditures, purchase
locations, and hotel, air travel, and rental car charges.
This information would lead to a search in any particular
location that suggests an unusual spending pattern.
Separate
Property Versus Marital Property
CPAs
are often asked in divorce proceedings to determine what
property may be considered separate property from marital
property and to identify “transmuted” property
(i.e., separate property that has subsequently been converted
into marital property). Property owned by either spouse
upon divorce is deemed to be marital property unless it
can be proven otherwise. Ron will either substantiate John’s
and Mary’s separate property from their marital property
or disprove that certain property is separate property,
often by tracing the ownership of the property of either
spouse back to the date it was received, in order to clearly
show that the property continued to qualify as separate
property until the divorce. Tracing premarital property
will involve reviewing documents that existed at the time
of the marriage, including a premarital agreement. If a
claim is made by one spouse that property was received by
gift or inheritance, then a review of gift and estate tax
returns for family members will often be required.
The
discussion of separate and marital property often centers
on transmuted property. The easiest way to think of transmuted
property would be to assume that one spouse had received
a gift of stock. The fact that the gift occurred during
the marriage would be irrelevant, as the stock would most
likely qualify as separate property. Now assume that the
spouse sells that stock and uses the proceeds to purchase
appliances for their marital home. In such a case, a CPA
would have to determine whether the separate property has
been transmuted into marital property.
Forensic
accountants have at their disposal several different methods
to determine proper ownership of property (Exhibit
2). In the first method, the specific identification
method, expenses that are tied to a specific item of separate
or marital property are thus characterized according to
that property.
The
second method, the family expense doctrine method, has been
variously applied by courts in divorce proceedings. One
application is that funds withdrawn from a commingled account
in order to pay living expenses of the family are deemed
to be marital funds and thus marital property. The other
application that some courts have used is when family expenses
exceed family income during the marriage. In this case,
any funds withdrawn from the account are deemed to be separate
funds and thus separate property.
A method
used when the first two cannot be is the marital-property-out-first
method. If separate and marital funds have been commingled
into one account, then all withdrawals from that account
are assumed to come first from marital property. For example,
assume Mary deposits $10,000 into a joint account with John.
Mary received the money as a gift and it is thus separate
property. Mary and John’s joint account already had
$4,000 in the account. If the spouses chose to withdraw
$5,000 from the account, under the marital-property-out-first
method, then the first $4,000 will be deemed to have been
withdrawn from the joint account and $1,000 will be deemed
to have been withdrawn from Mary’s separate property.
The remaining $9,000 will still be considered separate property
for Mary.
The
fourth method, the minimum balance method, is similar to
the marital-property-out-first method. Consider the previous
example: If the joint account never falls below $10,000,
then Ron could infer, by using the minimum balance method,
that the $10,000 remaining is separate property.
The
fifth method is the identical sum inference method. If one
spouse deposits separate funds into a commingled account
and shortly thereafter withdraws the same amount as was
deposited, then the withdrawal is considered to be separate
funds.
The
sixth and final method is the pro rata method. Withdrawals
from a commingled account are allocated between separate
and marital funds based on the balance in the account at
the time of the withdrawal. Based on the joint account above,
if $5,000 was removed from that account, then 71.43% ($10,000/$14,000)
of the $5,000 would be considered separate property and
28.57% ($4,000/$14,000) of the $5,000 would be considered
marital property.
Because
some courts have a precedence of allowing only certain methods
to be used in separate, marital, and transmuted property
determination, a forensic accountant must know what the
courts in the jurisdiction will permit.
Closely
Held Businesses
In
evaluating John and Mary’s dissolved marriage, Ron
would look at the level of suspicion and animosity in the
relationship. The more distrust and hostility exist, the
more likely that one spouse is or will be trying to hide
assets. Often the easiest way for a controlling spouse to
hide assets or income is in a closely held business, somewhere
the other spouse has no knowledge of. Because Mary had little
or no involvement in the business, the task of hiding assets
would be easy for John.
The
basic purpose of a forensic examination of a closely held
business is to analyze four important items (Exhibit
3). The first item Ron needs to analyze is whether John
has used business funds to acquire personal assets. The
second is to determine if business funds were used for John’s
personal expenses. The third is to uncover or identify unreported
business income. The fourth and final item is the gathering
of information necessary in order to determine the value
of John’s ownership interest.
The
first two items, use of business funds for personal assets
and for personal expenses, go hand in hand. Ron focused
on a business fixed-asset schedule to determine if “company”
assets are actually John’s personal assets. Such assets
typically include cars, real estate, boats, and collectibles.
As far as personal expenses, closely held businesses often
pay common personal expenses such as utility bills, cellular
phone bills, insurance, home taxes, recreational club dues,
and vehicle expenses. These personal expenses reduce the
amount of John’s income and thus the “family”
income. This can have a direct effect on Mary’s eventual
divorce settlement and potential child support and alimony
payments.
Another
critical focal point in a divorce engagement that includes
a closely held business is the third item: evaluating and
searching for unreported income. This may be the most difficult
job for a forensic accountant, considering that this income
is often hidden from outside services, particularly the
IRS. Ron must consider what type of business John has, because
certain businesses—such as those with high volumes
of cash sales, like restaurants, gas stations, or convenience
stores—lend themselves more easily to hiding and underreporting
income.
Finding
Hidden Income
Internal
controls. The first step for a forensic accountant
is to review a business’s internal controls. The bigger
the business, the more likely that internal controls will
be present, especially if the business is a publicly traded
company. However, many businesses, like John’s, are
small businesses without the resources or personnel to fully
implement good internal controls. As in John’s case,
the person who is receiving deposits or cash is the same
person who is recording the deposit. Given that John will
have the ability to override any internal control functions,
Ron must carefully review the internal controls for weaknesses
and evaluate whether it is possible that John could divert
cash and underreport income.
Business
markup and profitability. After analyzing
internal controls, a forensic accountant will focus on two
reviews. The first review is the typical markup and profitability
of the business. By understanding the normal markup of a
business, either through historical comparison or industry
standards, one can infer the possibility that income has
been unreported. For example, if the average markup on cost
is 50% for John’s retail clothing store, and the cost
of clothing sold for the year is $1 million, then sales
should be around $1,500,000. If, on Ron’s review of
the books, the related sales are only $1,100,000, then a
review of the inventory records and turnover should indicate
that sales are underreported.
The
normal level of expenses. The second review
involves analyzing the normal level of expenses. Many times
certain businesses have expenses that have a direct relationship
to income. If a CPA can determine and understand the normal
level of expenses associated with the business, then she
should be able to estimate sales.
If
either review gives Ron the impression that sales are unreported
and thus cash has been diverted, then he has several methods
to confirm this. Ron would first look at the amount and
frequency of John’s deposits. Any inconsistencies
in the deposits should be evaluated and reviewed. If possible,
a comparison of deposits (or sales) from the same time period
in prior years should help in this review.
Additional
methods. Several other methods can be used
to detect unreported income and cash. One method would be
to compare the journal entries to the receivables accounts.
Any journal entries showing significant write-offs should
be reviewed for efforts to collect, such as letters or correspondence.
If no documentation exists, it is possible that John pocketed
the cash and subsequently wrote off the account. Another
method is to have spotters and surveillance. The surveillance
would be conducted by Ron, who would watch, from a distance,
cash transactions at the business while a spotter would
act as a normal customer. This would give Ron the ability
to see the business in action and determine if any “skimming”
is occurring.
Determining
the Value of the Business
A forensic
accountant must determine if a spouse is purposely trying
to minimize the value of a closely held business. This would
impact the value of the marital assets and thus affect the
ultimate settlement the other spouse is entitled to.
John
may try to transfer assets or income to other businesses,
especially one Mary is not aware of. Ron may be able to
find out information on the concealed company through corporate
filings. Correlating this information with data retrieved
from personal checkbooks, other public records, and tax
returns often can reveal where assets are being hidden.
John may also purposely try to reduce the profitability
of the company through discounted or inflated transactions
with related parties. Related parties typically include
other family members or personal friends. If Ron believes
that John is purposely reducing income, then he should investigate
any unexplained changes in revenue and expenses, investigate
customers and vendors for any related parties, evaluate
any related-party transactions, and review accounts payable
and receivables for unusual patterns. The two or three years
prior to a divorce filing is a critical time period when
a spouse may conspire with related parties.
Seek
Assistance
Mary
was wise to hire Ron as her CPA; she could never have done
this type of forensic investigation on her own. While there’s
an old saying that “everyone loses in a divorce,”
sadly, this is not always the case. It can be a complicated
matter of who gets the house versus the retirement assets,
or both. Quite often, the spouse who is not the primary
breadwinner will likely need to be particularly aggressive
in a divorce proceeding, and this is where a CPA can help.
CPAs can provide a valuable service that builds on their
existing expertise in tax, audit, and accounting services.
Ron
Marden, PhD, is an associate professor in the department
of accounting at Appalachian State University, Boone, N.C.
Tige Darner is a senior associate at Dixon
Hughes PLLC, Boone, N.C. |