The Enron scandal resulted in other new compliance measures. Additionally, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) substantially raised its levels of ethical conduct. Moreover, company 's boards of directors became more independent, monitoring the audit companies and quickly replacing bad managers. These new measures are important mechanisms to spot and close the loopholes that companies have used, as a way to avoid
As noted earlier, the main purposes of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was to restore investor confidence in publically traded companies in addition to preventing any large future fraud scandals from occurring as they had prior to the enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Amongst the sources who praised the Sarbanes-Oxley was The Financial Executives International. In 2007, the Financial Executives International conducted a survey of 185 to research the effects of the enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. These studies concluded that 50.3% of the companies believed the accuracy of their financial reports has increased while 56% believed that these reports are more reliable. Amongst the 185 companies, 43.6% of them stated that they felt the Sarbanes-Oxley provisions helped reduce fraud and 69.1% of the companies stated that investor confidence has increased in their financial reports (financialexecutives.org). For example, the new provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley led to the discovery of the fraudulent scandal involving Value Line. When a manager was required to sign the company’s Business Code of Ethics, he realized fraudulent activity and reported it. Without the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, this act o...
Sarbanes-Oxley consisted of 11 different titles or sections. Title I is Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. It created a five member panel known as the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, overseen and appointed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (Sarbanes-Oxley). The Board is to consist of two CPAs and three people that are not CPAs, but the chairman must be a CPA. The Board is to provide oversight of auditing of public companies while establishing auditing, quality control, independence, ethical standards (Arens 32-33). Public accounting firms that work on audits must register with the Board and pay a fee. Title I also included new auditing rules. Auditors must now retain paper work for seven years, have a second partner review and approval of audit reports, evaluate whether internal controls accurately show transactions as well as sales of assets, and describe any weaknesses or noncompliant internal controls. Public accounting firms that issue auditing reports for more than 100 companies are to be inspected every year. Accounting firms that issue audit reports for less than 100 companies must be inspected very three years. The Board can discipline or sanction accounting firms for what it deems to be negligent conduct (Conference of State Bankers Online).
While fraud and financial scandal have occurred since before the inception of the United States, the late 1990s and early 2000s saw the problem become much more prevalent and wide spread than ever before. The overarching goal of providing assurance that financial statements accurately reflect a business was in place before SOX. What SOX changed was the way businesses must go about providing that assurance. Prior to SOX, while the Securities and Exchange Commission required the publication of annual audited financial statements, how a business and audit firm determined what measures they would take to achieve a necessary level of assurance was largely left up for them to de...
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, (SOX), was signed into law on July 30, 2002 by President Bush. Considered to be one of the most significant changes to securities law since the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, SOX calls for new procedures to fight accounting fraud and an array of new penalties to protect the employee from unethical behavior within the corporation. Currently, provisions of the Act are being enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which has been responsible for setting the rules and parameters. The effects of the Act are far reach...
The securities act of 1934 has empowered the SEC to do periodic evaluation of reports from companies that publicly trade their securities. The securities act also gives the SEC disciplinary powers as well. The SEC has authority over banks and financial institutions, and is allowed to make new rules that have to be followed by all institutions by law. For example if I owned a bank called Harris Community once the SEC creates a new rule or regulation it is my duty as a bank owner to ensure that my company as well as my employees are following the new guidelines or it can result in various discipline actions. The disciplinary actions could include anything from a simple fine, closure of my financial institute, or in some cases possible jail time. The SEC also oversees inspections of financial institutes which means they can conduct an inspection of the facility or after the inspection is conducted by another agency they have the right to review the results for any file play. If anything seems suspect they have the right to investigate, and if you refuse to cooperate with the investigations disciplinary measures will be used.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was ratified on July 30, 2002 (Shaw and Terando,177). This act came after the financial crises during the early 2000’s. According to Bolton, following these corporate scandals in the early 2000’s, the government took a hard look at the different regulations on companies and how we can prevent what happened from happening again. Thus, came the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. SOX was created to decrease corporate fraud. This act especially looked at the role of accounting in corporations and thus also formed the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) to supervise the accounting industry. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act also strengthened the independence of corporate boards (Bolton, 83). All of this regulation is imperative in the effect that SOX has today on corporations. The regulations that SOX requires and the cost of implementing them has a large impact on the managers’ and auditors’ incentives to follow SOX, thereby lessening the
In the eyes of Congress and the SEC, the new rules resulting from the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOA) were designed to restore investor confidence. Several regulations were designed to increase transparency of corporate information by providing a more accurate picture of a company's value and to restore confidence in the accuracy of financial information reported to the SEC. But from an investor's perspective, more information is not necessarily better information.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act created new standards for the accountability of businesses and corporations and it includes penalties for acts of misconduct. The Act stipulates new financial reporting obligations, including the adherence to internal controls and procedures which are to certify the validity of their financial records. These accounting controls put into place were meant to reduce unethical/ illegal actions within an organization (Mathis & Jackson, 2011, p. 16).
The purpose of the SEC report compiled by SEC staff is to consider the application of the International Financial Reporting System and its standards in the United States. Currently the United States utilizes the U.S. GAAP accounting standards. The difference between U.S. GAAP and IFRS accounting standards the U.S. GAAP standards are rules based, while the IFRS standards are principles-based. This means that U.S. GAAP standards provide clarity in application and IFRS standards which are clearly defined allow users the opportunity to interpret the principles and determine the best way to account for a given transaction (Which is better, 2011). The following is a summary of key points from the SEC Report.
Private and public accounting has long been discussed and disputed in regards to financial reporting. Since the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) was created in 1973, accountants have called for different accounting regulations for private and public accounting sectors, as private companies do not have the resources to meet the complex requirements of public companies. Private companies currently are not required by law to issue annual or quarterly financial statements (James, 2012). Private companies do, however, have the option to apply the U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), cash basis, or accrual accounting to their financial statements (James, 2012).
Throughout the past several years major corporate scandals have rocked the economy and hurt investor confidence. The largest bankruptcies in history have resulted from greedy executives that “cook the books” to gain the numbers they want. These scandals typically involve complex methods for misusing or misdirecting funds, overstating revenues, understating expenses, overstating the value of assets or underreporting of liabilities, sometimes with the cooperation of officials in other corporations (Medura 1-3). In response to the increasing number of scandals the US government amended the Sarbanes Oxley act of 2002 to mitigate these problems. Sarbanes Oxley has extensive regulations that hold the CEO and top executives responsible for the numbers they report but problems still occur. To ensure proper accounting standards have been used Sarbanes Oxley also requires that public companies be audited by accounting firms (Livingstone). The problem is that the accounting firms are also public companies that also have to look after their bottom line while still remaining objective with the corporations they audit. When an accounting firm is hired the company that hired them has the power in the relationship. When the company has the power they can bully the firm into doing what they tell them to do. The accounting firm then loses its objectivity and independence making their job ineffective and not accomplishing their goal of honest accounting (Gerard). Their have been 379 convictions of fraud to date, and 3 to 6 new cases opening per month. The problem has clearly not been solved (Ulinski).