Jessica is a senior accountant at ZephyrTech, a company that recently underwent a highprofile merger with another tech giant, CompuGlobal. In her due diligence, she discovers irregularities in the accounting records: assets from CompuGlobal were significantly overvalued, while liabilities were underreported, affecting the merger terms favorably for CompuGlobal shareholders at the expense of ZephyrTech's financial health. Jessica knows the inflated asset values and hidden liabilities could lead to a disastrous financial situation for the newly merged company, potentially affecting stock prices and investor trust.

She initially reports her findings to her direct supervisor, who dismisses her concerns, suggesting that these are just "temporary adjustments" and will be "smoothed out" over time. Unconvinced by this explanation and aware of the potential fallout, Jessica considers her next steps. She recalls that ZephyrTech has a confidential hotline for reporting such issues, as mandated by the Sarbanes$-$Oxley Act. She also remembers that external reporting channels, such as the SEC, could be an option, especially since past internal concerns have been ignored.

Assuming Jessica's concerns are valid and the company's internal response remains inadequate, which factor would best justify her decision to report to an external entity like the SEC?

The supervisor's casual dismissal of Jessica's findings without a proper investigation.

Jessica's concern about the personal repercussions of being associated with the company's potential downfall.

The risk of ZephyrTech's stock price being artificially inflated due to the merger inaccuracies, creating time pressure and immediate impact on investors.

Jessica's suspicion that the CFO of ZephyrTech was aware of the inaccuracies during the merger process.

Jessica's belief that the internal hotline might not be confidential.