Family-controlled retailer: governance, fraud risk and internal audit independence
Lanka Retail Ltd operates 12 outlets and has revenue of LKR 2.8 billion. It is 80% owned by the founding family. The board has five directors, all family members; there is no independent non-executive director. The audit committee comprises the CEO's brother and the finance director, and meets once a year for 30 minutes. The CFO also acts as company secretary. A company owned by a director's spouse supplies 12% of purchases; the contract was renewed without competitive tender. Internal audit is outsourced to a firm that also prepares the company's tax returns. Finance staff turnover is 40% and outlet cash reconciliations are prepared manually by shop supervisors. Inventory shrinkage is 3.5% of sales, compared with 1.2% for similar retailers. The bank has imposed a covenant requiring audited accounts within 90 days and a debt-to-equity ratio below 2.0; the actual ratio is 1.9. The CEO says governance changes can wait until after the peak season.
1. Identify the main corporate governance weaknesses and recommend improvements.
Read the worked answer
The board is not independent: all five directors are family members and there is no independent non-executive director. The audit committee is not independent because it includes the CEO's brother and the finance director, and a 30-minute annual meeting is not enough to discharge its role. Combining CFO and company secretary concentrates power and weakens checks. The related-party supply contract was renewed without tender, which creates a conflict of interest and possible overcharging.
Recommendations: appoint independent non-executive directors, with at least a majority independent audit committee chaired by an independent director with financial expertise; separate the CFO and company secretary roles; adopt a related-party policy requiring disclosure, competitive tender and abstention by conflicted directors; hold more frequent audit committee meetings; and document board decisions. The CEO's proposal to delay until after the peak season is not acceptable given the covenant and shrinkage indicators.
2. Assess the fraud risk indicators and recommend specific controls.
Read the worked answer
Fraud risk is high in cash and inventory. Shrinkage of 3.5% of sales is nearly three times the 1.2% benchmark, indicating possible theft, supplier collusion or poor inventory records. Manual cash reconciliation by shop supervisors creates an opportunity to conceal cash shortages. A 40% finance staff turnover weakens supervision and institutional knowledge. The related-party supply arrangement creates a risk of inflated prices or kickbacks.
Controls: daily cash counts and independent reconciliation by someone outside the outlet; segregation of custody, recording and reconciliation; surprise cash counts and stock counts; perpetual inventory records and variance investigation; CCTV and exception reports; competitive tendering for all significant purchases; a related-party register and disclosure to the board; whistleblowing arrangements; and targeted internal audit reviews of high-shrinkage outlets.
3. Evaluate the independence of the outsourced internal audit function and the effectiveness of the audit committee.
Read the worked answer
The internal audit firm also prepares the company's tax returns. This creates a self-review threat: the firm may review tax balances or judgements it prepared. The threat can be reduced if separate teams are used, the tax work is not significant, and the audit committee approves the engagement and safeguards. But the audit committee is not independent and meets only briefly, so it cannot provide effective oversight.
Internal audit should report functionally to the audit committee, not to the CFO, and should have direct access to the external auditor. The audit committee should include independent members, meet at least quarterly, review the internal audit plan and related-party transactions, and hold private sessions with both internal and external auditors. Given the bank covenant and high shrinkage, delaying governance changes is risky and could threaten the audit timeline.