Jones & Associates, CPAs were recently hired to perform an audit of the financial statements of Heavy Metal Construction, Inc. (HMC). Upon completion of the audit engagement, HMC's Audit Committee identified the items below as discussion points for their upcoming meeting. Using the template below, identify whether the selected item/event is a violation of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct by selecting "Violation" or "No Violation" from the drop-down menu in the "Violation" column. If the item/event is a violation of the Code of Professional Conduct, use the drop-down menu in the "Rules Violated" column to further identify the rule violated.

Rules violation:

Accounting principles rule, confidential client information rule, acts discreditable rule, general standards rule, form of organization and name rule, independence rule.

Item/event	Violation Yes/NO	Rule violation
Prior to being hired by HMC the managing partner of the audit firm met the CEO of the company to discuss the potential audit engagement. At the start of the meeting, the managing partner explained that all of the professional auditors at Jones are members of the AICPA and that while the founder, William Jones recently passed away, the audit firm continues to be named Jones & Associates CPAs.
Management was so impressed by the preliminary audit work performed by the audit supervisor that they gave her a $20 gift certificate to be used for lunch at a local restaurant.
The wife of the partner-in-charge of the audit engagement recently inherited a large stock portfolio from her deceased relative that includes 50000 shares of HMC common stock. While aware of this, the partner-in-charge did not disclose this to the audit firm or client.
On January 15th, a junior auditor on the engagement requested and received documentation from the controller. Two months have since passed and while several requests have been made by the controller's group for this documentation over the past several weeks, the documentation has neither been returned nor has there been any follow-up communication made to the company by the audit team.
During his due diligence, the senior auditor determined that HMC did not follow U.S. GAAP regarding the use of acceptable depreciation methods. After discussions with HMC management and the partner-in-charge, the senior auditor concluded that the company's method of depreciation used was acceptable given the unique industry and to avoid misleading financial statements.
After year-end, a team of 4 auditors arrive at HMC to perform extensive audit work over the next 6 weeks. While the audit supervisor is involved in the preliminary audit planning phase she does not review the audit work papers during the rest of engagement due to the high level of confidence she has in her supporting audit staff
several months after the audit closing the partner in charge received a subpoena to testify regarding a lawsuit involving HMC. The partner in charge subsequently provided the HMC audit work papers to the legal defense team