| Course | AC504 Ethical Issues in Business and Accounting |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 8 |
| Paper type | Seminar reflection |
| Length | About 810 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MS in Accounting |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for AC504 Unit 8
Fees Should Never Bend an Answer, Until Two Jobs Were Attached: A Unit 8 Seminar Reflection on Client Dependence
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
AC504: Ethical Issues in Business and Accounting
Unit 8 Seminar Reflection
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The firm, the dealership group, the classmates and every figure are composite; the code and textbooks cited are real.
The Principle and the Role
My pre-seminar post said: "A professional answer that bends to the size of a fee is not a professional answer." I believed it, and it is still the right principle. The facilitator then handed out roles. Mine was the managing partner of an eleven-person firm whose largest client, a group of four car dealerships, provides 38 percent of fees. The firm reviews the group's statements for its floor-plan lender. Auction data support writing down used-vehicle inventory by $610,000; the group's owner wants $290,000, and has said, calmly, that he is talking to another firm.
My First Answer
I answered quickly and with some pride: we report $610,000, and if the client leaves, we accept the loss. Principles that hold only when they are cheap are not principles.
The Question That Changed It
Hana asked who would actually pay for my principle. Not me, she said; I am a partner with savings. Losing 38 percent of revenue would mean letting two junior staff go, both recently hired, one supporting a family. She did not argue that I should take the $290,000. She asked whether I had earned the right to be proud of an answer whose cost fell on other people.
That question did not change the answer. It changed how I held it. I had treated the decision as a test of my character, when it was a decision with consequences for people who had no voice in it, and that made my confidence look more like vanity than integrity.
The principle survived, but my reason for it changed: I would still report the $610,000, not because refusing proves my integrity, but because a review report the lender relies on cannot carry a number the firm knows is wrong, whoever bears the cost of saying so.
What the Seminar Added
The discussion turned to what the firm should have done before the crisis. Ilse pointed out that 38 percent dependence on one client is itself a threat. The Code's conceptual framework treats significant fee dependence as a self-interest threat to be managed with safeguards (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, 2014). The firm's real failure was letting the dependence grow until a single disagreement could cost two jobs. A partner who cares about those jobs should be diversifying the client base years before this conversation, not discovering their importance in the middle of it.
We also discussed what can be done short of capitulation. The partner can show the owner the auction data in detail and offer to review any evidence the owner has for a higher value; perhaps some vehicles have been sold since year end at better prices. Evidence can change a number; pressure cannot. If the owner leaves, the partner can help the two juniors find work through the firm's network and be honest with them about why.
Why My First Answer Felt So Good
Looking back, my quick answer felt good because it cost me nothing in the room. I was playing a role, and the two juniors existed only as a line on the facilitator's handout. Hana made them real. A principle that is easy to state in a seminar can be held for the wrong reasons, as a way of feeling righteous, and the seminar showed me that I had started to enjoy that feeling.
I also realized that the owner's threat to change firms was a negotiating move as much as a decision. Many clients who threaten to leave stay when the firm explains its reasons calmly and shows its evidence, because a new firm would face the same auction data.
That thought did not excuse the pressure, but it made the choice less stark than I had played it.
Where I Ended Up
I still hold the principle. I hold it with less self-regard and more attention to the people around it. Ethics texts warn that the hardest pressures are the ones that come dressed as care for others (Mintz & Morris, 2020), and the seminar showed me that care for others is real and must be answered, not dismissed. The answer is to keep the number honest and to take responsibility for the consequences, including the ones that fall on people I did not ask.
Habits I Am Taking Away
I will watch fee concentration as a risk long before it becomes a dilemma, and I will separate my own pride from the reasons a decision is right (Arens et al., 2020).
References
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. (2014). AICPA code of professional conduct. AICPA.
Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J., Beasley, M. S., & Hogan, C. E. (2020). Auditing and assurance services (17th ed.). Pearson.
Mintz, S. M., & Morris, R. E. (2020). Ethical obligations and decision making in accounting: Text and cases (5th ed.). McGraw Hill.
Reading the AC 504 Unit 8 instructions
For AC504 Unit 8, you reflect on how a principle you stated before the seminar fared under pressure. Quote your pre-seminar position. Describe the role or case you argued, with the figures that made it hard. Give your first answer honestly, including the tone in which you delivered it. Record the question or argument that changed your view, in your classmate's words where you can. Explain exactly what changed: the conclusion, the reasons, or how you hold the principle. Discuss what the seminar added about preventing the dilemma before it arises. Finish with your final position and the habits you are keeping. Use I throughout and be candid about your earlier confidence. Reference the code, one ethics book and one auditing book in APA 7 style.
How this AC504 Unit 8 example is built
The sample quotes the writer's post that an answer bent by a fee is not a professional answer. The role follows: an eleven-person firm reviewing a dealership group's statements for its floor-plan lender, $610,000 of supported write-down against the owner's $290,000, and a threat to change firms. The writer's first answer, report the full amount and accept the loss, is recorded with its pride. Hana's question about the two juniors follows, then the writer's realization. The highlighted sentence explains how the reasons changed while the conclusion held. A section explains why the first answer felt good, then Ilse's point about fee concentration as a threat, and the writer's two new habits.
Reading the AC504 Unit 8 grading rubric
AC504 reflections earn points for honesty about how a view changed and precision about what changed. Graders reward students who separate what they concluded from why they concluded it, and who explain the difference. The rubric credits engagement with the classmate's point on its merits and attention to prevention, such as managing fee concentration under the conceptual framework. A clear final position and practical habits show the reflection had consequences. Reflections that simply report the seminar, or that claim no effect, score low. Moralizing about the client or the classmates loses credit. Your own voice is expected, along with APA 7 references to the code and the two texts.
Common AC504 Unit 8 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Weak Unit 8 reflections recount the seminar but never quote the writer's original position, so no change can be measured. Some treat the classmate's question as an attack and defend the first answer. Others overcorrect and abandon the principle without explaining why. Fee concentration is discussed only as a fact of the case rather than as a threat the firm should have managed. The ending is a vague resolution to be more thoughtful. If your seminar debated a different pressure, such as a client threatening litigation, our team can draft yours around your notes and the argument that moved you.
Get an AC504 Unit 8 example written to your instructions
Describe the principle you carried to seminar in Unit 8, the role or case you drew and what shifted your view, plus the rubric; written-alternative prompts are welcome too. The reflection places the turn at its center, credits the exchange behind it and ends on what survived, returned in 24-48h. A first sample is yours without charge. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More AC504 papers and MS in Accounting samples
- AC504 Unit 1: Accounting Ethics Pressure Discussion
- AC504 Unit 2: Virtue Ethics Framework Analysis
- AC504 Unit 3: AICPA Code of Conduct Review
- AC504 Unit 4: Auditor Independence Scenario Response
- AC504 Unit 5: Nonprofit Ethics Case Analysis
- AC504 Unit 6: Stakeholder Analysis Memo
- AC504 Unit 7: Whistleblowing Case Study
- AC504 Unit 9: Governance Critique
- AC504 Unit 10: Professional Judgment Paper
- AC503 Unit 8: Control Deficiency Seminar Reflection
- AC502 Unit 8: Accountant Confidentiality Reflection
- AC501 Unit 8: Principal vs Agent Seminar Reflection
AC504 Unit 8 questions, answered
Does the reflection have to show a change of mind?
It has to show the principle under pressure, and most strong reflections record some movement. Here the principle survives, but the author's reasons for holding it change from confidence to structure. A reflection that ends where it began can still work if it shows exactly why the costly application failed to move it.
Is there a rule on how much of a firm's revenue one client can be?
Not a fixed one in the AICPA Code for private clients. Fee concentration is treated as a self-interest and undue influence threat to be evaluated under the conceptual framework, with safeguards where needed. The international code used in many countries sets a percentage test for public interest entities, and the AC504 example mentions that contrast in one sentence.
Should the reflection name the classmate who changed the author's view?
By role or first name only, depending on your section's norms, and always with the point stated accurately. Crediting the exchange shows the change came from the seminar rather than from rereading notes afterward. The example attributes the question to a classmate and quotes it closely, since the precise wording is what turned the discussion.
Where can I find a free AC504 Unit 8 sample paper?
This page holds a full AC504 Unit 8 seminar reflection on fee pressure from a client paying 38 percent of a composite firm's revenue, with the original principle, the challenge, the changed reasons and APA 7 references.
What should the firm have done before the dilemma arose?
Managed its dependence on one client. The conceptual framework treats significant fee concentration as a self-interest threat, and a firm that diversifies early never faces a choice where one disagreement can cost two jobs.