Relying on a simple tally of register totals against the cash in the drawer isn’t enough to catch cashier skimming. A cashier can skim cash and still have the till appear to balance by using adjustments such as voids, refunds, or no-sale entries that shift money back into the till or offset the theft in ways that aren’t obvious in the end‑of‑day count. In other words, the drawer can come out correct even while theft is occurring, because the fraudulent activity is masked by how transactions are recorded or adjusted. To improve detection, rely on additional controls beyond just reconciliation: scrutinize unusual patterns in voids and refunds, monitor no‑sale keys, use independent cash counts or surprise cash audits, and pair these with surveillance or CCTV and supervisory review of cash handling. This combination makes skimming harder to hide and increases the chance of catching it.

Factoring groups finance telemarketing by purchasing the right to collect future credit-card receipts at a discount. They advance cash to the telemarketer up front and then take over the responsibility (and the timing) of collecting those card payments. The factor earns money from the discount and any fees for handling the collection, which is why this arrangement is appealing for campaigns needing quick cash. It’s different from banks—factoring is not about banks processing payments, but about a third-party financer buying receivables. It’s also not tied to a geographic price difference, and factoring isn’t illegal in all jurisdictions, though it does involve regulatory considerations.

Current assets are resources the company expects to convert to cash or use up within a year (or the operating cycle, if longer). Cash and equivalents are the most liquid, so they clearly belong here. Inventory also fits, since it’s held for sale in the near term. Accounts payable, however, is a current liability—the obligation to pay suppliers—not an asset. Because one item is a liability, the list containing all items isn’t correct. The items that are truly current assets are cash and equivalents and inventory.

Using variance analysis to detect expense reimbursement schemes involves comparing actual expenses to both historical patterns and budgeted amounts. By checking current period expenses against historical spend, you can spot anomalies such as sudden spikes, new vendors, or unusual frequencies that don’t align with past behavior. Comparing to the budgeted amounts adds a planning dimension, highlighting any expenditures that exceed approved limits or fall outside what was authorized. Together, these comparisons provide a clearer view of inconsistencies: the historical comparison flags unusual trends, while the budget comparison flags deviations from policy or approved plans. This dual approach strengthens the ability to identify potential fraud or noncompliance in expense reimbursements.