THE TRAVEL EXPENSE BILLING

Act The Travel Expense Billing Controversy and False Claims Act
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC), a major accounting firm, was engaged in unethical billing practices that generated millions of dollars in additional revenue to the company. PwC was charging its clients the full price of airline tickets and other travel expenses, such as hotel rooms and car rentals, while it was actually expending only a small percentage of the full amount billed to its clients due to applied rebates and discounts it received under travel agencies and airline contracts and negotiations. Therefore, the company was “overcharging… clients and pocketing the difference without revealing the practice” (AccountingWeb). However, since Neal
A. Roberts, a PwC employee, discovered his employer’s travel billing practices, PwC found itself in a very difficult situation.
Mr. Roberts wasn’t in agreement with his company’s billing method and made several attempts to address the problem while working for his firm without much success. He reached out to the company’s ethics department and to an in-house PwC lawyer, but only managed to have the company’s policy revised, not corrected. A group of people (mostly the company’s partners) decided that under the new policy, PwC would have to disclose most of the discounts to its clients but still keep 8 percent of the rebates as a “cover our costs” fee while retaining the
“millions… collected previously on the earlier rebates” (Carroll and Buchholtz 630).
Despite these policy changes, Neil A. Roberts remained dissatisfied and decided (Carroll and Buchholtz 630). In December 2003, Mr. Roberts won the False Claims lawsuit

According to this case the pricewaterhouse coopers LLP (PwC) , a major accounting firm,was engaged in unethical billing practices that generate millions of dollars .Neil A Robert discovered the billing practice in the firm because the company was unethical activity by billing the clients the travelling expenses with hotels, air flights etcc..but the fact was that company was receiving rebate and discounts in travelling from the travelling companies.M r Robert tried a lot to explain this problem in the firm but that was not much of help or success .He was able to revise the policy but not able to make it correct.Even this was possible only when he managed to take this problem to in house Pwc lawyer and ethical department of the firm. According to the new change in the policy ,the firm need to disclose the discounts offered by transportation companies to the clents but still kept the eight percentage rebate to themselves as cover over costs ,these will help to make millions as before. But even after this change of rule Neil A Robert was not satisfied .So he filed a False Claim suit against PowerwaterCoopers LLP.The False Claim act was a government act for controlling the companies and according to this the companies who will be dishonest to government like claiming false taxs,false incomes etc.. can be sued.It was also known as whistle blower provisionsof act.The PWc has to face defeat against Mr Roberts and agreed to pay $54.5 million but did not accept the fraud allegations. The company was not efficient to maintain integrity and professionalism by running the company unethically for its own profits and benefits. Because of making profits as main thing to be obtained the firm lost its reputation in the market and also failed to elaborate important policies and regulations which keeps the employers from commiting unethical actions. The firm was not successful in maintain a good stakeholder relationship as the employees ,managers,clients ,ethics committee ,management committee ,travel company and federal government were the firms primary and secondary stakeholders.Now the firm need to develop strong stakeholder cultute and management capabilities ,so even can address the relationship between them.PWC has to be responsible company ethically and would able to identify strategies for dealing the stakeholders and stakeholder groups.The firm was only trying to be ethical through legitimation.Even though after this claims and questions faced by the firm for ethics ,still it was trying to make profits by modifying the policy to keep the eight percent of offer to themselves and this made Mr Robert to file the case against the firm. He could be using this act to gain financial gain as it was the act which allows the individual to file against the firm ,apart from PWC he also filed the case against IBM which was also settled .By amking constant allegations against firms which also gives a chance to think negative about Robert intentions. He might really worried about the ethics by which the companies runs or want to befianacially benefited from it. The firm could avoid these claims by following all laws and regulations and maintain good relationships with the consumers and other employees.