Prior to the advent of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, referred to herein as “SOX,” the board of directors’ pivotal role was to advise senior leaders on the organization’s strategy, business model, and succession planning (Larcker, 2011, p. 3). Additionally, the board had the responsibility for risk management identification and risk mitigation oversight, determining executive benefits, and approval of significant acquisitions (Larcker, 2011, p. 3). Furthermore, for many public organizations, audit committees existed before SOX and provided oversight of internal processes and controls. Melissa Maleske (2012) advised that the roles and responsibilities of the board were viewed “…from a perspective that the board serves management” (p. 2). In contrast, Maleske (2012) noted that SOX regulations altered the landscape “…to a perspective that management is working for the board” (p. 2). SOX expanded not only the duties of the board and the audit committee, but also the authority of these bodies (Maleske, 2012, p. 2).
With the induction of SOX, Section 301 dictates that the boards of directors for each publicly traded organization are required to fund and create an internal audit committee or have the entire board serve as the committee, with a minimum of three independent members, accountable for selecting and directing an external independent accounting firm responsible for confirming the integrity of the organization’s financial reports, and creating a process to address
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX), also known as the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act and the Auditing Accountability and Responsibility Act, was signed into law on July 30, 2002, by President George W. Bush as a direct response to the corporate financial scandals of Enron, WorldCom, and Tyco International (Arens & Elders, 2006; King & Case, 2014;Rezaee & Crumbley, 2007). Fraudulent financial activities and substantial audit failures like those of Arthur Andersen and Ernst and Young had destroyed public trust and investor confidence in the accounting profession. The debilitating consequences of these perpetrators and their crimes summoned a massive effort by the government and the accounting profession to fight all forms of corruption through regulatory, legal, auditing, and accounting changes.
The Sarbanes-Oxley is a U.S. federal law that has generated much controversy, and involved the response to the financial scandals of some large corporations such as Enron, Tyco International, WorldCom and Peregrine Systems. These scandals brought down the public confidence in auditing and accounting firms. The law is named after Senator Paul Sarbanes Democratic Party and GOP Congressman Michael G. Oxley. It was passed by large majorities in both Congress and the Senate and covers and sets new performance standards for boards of directors and managers of companies and accounting mechanisms of all publicly traded companies in America. It also introduces criminal liability for the board of directors and a requirement by
This memorandum discusses a brief history of Pat, his wrongdoings and related action, and the response by the related law enforcement agencies.
Senators Paul Sarbanes and Michael Oxley were the sponsors of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which represented a tremendous change to federal securities law. The act was signed into law by president George W. Bush who described it as “the most far reaching reforms of American business practices since the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt1.” After the financial scandals implicating Enron, WorldCom and Global Crossing, the public needed to restore their trust in the public financial statements of the companies and that’s where the SOX Act of 2002 came into place. The act is composed of eleven titles which require numerous reforms to prevent accounting fraud, increase corporate responsibilities, among others.
Numerous scandals broke out in the early 2000s, losing the trust of investors in the public
The act is also referred to as Sarbox or SOX. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is responsible for enforcement of the law. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) was created as a new auditor through SOX. Standards were stipulated for audit reports.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act has many provisions. A few of the major provisions include the creation of the Public Company Oversight Board (PCAOB), Section 201, 203, 204, 302, 404, 809, 902, and 906. The PCAOB was the first true oversight of the accounting industry. It oversees and creates regulations, and it will monitor and investigate audits and auditors of public companies. The PCAOB has the authority to sanction firms and individuals for violations of laws, regulations, and rules. Section 302 requires the CEO and CFO to certify that they reviewed the financial statements, and that they are presented fairly. Section 404 requires management to state whether internal control procedures are adequate and effective, and requires an auditor to attest to the accuracy of the statement. Section 902 states that “It is a crime for any person to corruptly alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal any document with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, is an act passed by U.S. Congress on July 30, 2002. The primary reason was to protect investors from the possibility of fraudulent accounting activities by corporations. The act is commonly known as SOX Act. The act is named after its cosponsors, U.S. Senator Paul Sarbanes and U.S. Representative Michael G. Oxley. It mandates strict reforms to improve financial disclosures from corporations and prevent accounting fraud. The Sarbanes Oxley Act is arranged into eleven titles. They are Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), Auditor Independence, Corporate Responsibility, Enhanced Financial Disclosures, Analyst Conflicts of Interest, Commission Resources and Authority, White Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement, Corporate Tax Returns, and Corporate Fraud Accountability. These titles provide the description of specific requirements and mandates for the financial reporting. The SOX Act monitors compliance through various sections. However, the most significant sections are 302 (Disclosure controls), 401 (Disclosures in periodic reports), 404 (Assessment of internal control), 802 (Criminal penalties for influencing US Agency investigation/proper administration). As a result of SOX Act, the top management must individually certify the accuracy of financial information. The Act increased the oversight role of board of directors and the independence of the outside
On July 30, 2002, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was signed into law by the acting President George W. Bush. The overall purpose of the Act was “to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures made pursuant to the securities laws, and for other purposes.” (SEC, 2013) This Act mandated multiple amendments to improve corporate responsibility, enhance financial disclosures, and combat corporate and accounting fraudulent practices. One requirement of the Act involves a management’s report on internal controls over financial reporting to be included in the annual financial reports of a company. On July 30, 2014, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced that CEO Marc Sherman and former CFO Edward L. Cummings of a computer equipment company named QSGI, Inc. are being charged with misrepresenting the state of its internal controls over financial reporting to external auditors and the investing public. Inadequate internal control within the company can be extremely detrimental because investors and lenders rely heavily on financial reports to make decisions. The incorrect records of QSGI enabled the company to maximize loans from their top creditor. This report will show how QSGI’s lack of internal controls hindered their ability to generate revenue and maintain one of the company’s operation centers.
Under Section 302 signing officer should be familiar with the report and are responsible for internal controls and have evaluated these internal controls within the previous ninety days and have reported on their findings. Also, report should not contain any material untrue statements or material omission or be considered misleading. Section 401 states that financial statements are published by issuers are required to be accurate and presented in a manner that does not contain incorrect statements or admit to state material information. Under section 404 issuers are required to publish information in their annual reports concerning the scope and adequacy of the internal control structure and procedures for financial reporting. Section 409 shapes that issuers are required to disclose to the public, on an urgent basis, information on material changes in their financial condition or operations. Finally Section 802 of SOX act imposes penalties of fines and/or up to 20 years imprisonment for altering, destroying, mutilating, concealing, falsifying records, documents or tangible objects with the intent to obstruct, impede or influence a legal investigation.
Due to SOX Act, Tens of thousands of companies face the task of ensuring their accounting operations of following the Sarbanes-Oxley Act section. Auditing departments typically first have a comprehensive external audit by a
This chart from the site “Chaos of Business” shows the large decline of the Enron stock when it was being investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. People who had shares of the stock had lost almost all of their money they invested into the company. This chart shows that the share price dropped from $84 per share to $0.01 per share in about ten months. It seems like not a big deal, but in reality people usually buy hundreds of shares in a company, so that loss of $84 can calculate to about $25,200 if a person has 300 shares lost. This chart shows how quickly the money was lost and how badly it affected the people who owned shares of Enron.
Trinity Industries made a very commendable effort in accommodating with what has now become one of the most important aspect of any public company, the SOX compliance, and as this case study illustrates, a good example of managing such big changes that can affect companies in the unforeseen future. After many renown cases mentioned, like Enron and Adelphia Communication, it was imperative that the government would take a much required action to curtail any such accounting scandals from happening again. Hence, the Sarbanes-Oxley law was enforced, that is analyzed as the SOX compliance in the case study.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was enacted in July 30, 2002, by Congress to protect shareholders and the general public from fraudulent corporate practices and accounting errors and to maintain auditor independence. In protecting the shareholders and the general public the SOX Act is intended to improve the transparency of the financial reporting. Financial reports are to be certified by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) creating increased responsibility and independence with auditing by independent audit firms. In discussing the SOX Act, we will focus on how this act affects the CEOs; CFOs; outside independent audit firms; the advantages and a
These changes were outlined in the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). SOX completely revolutionized financial reporting, requiring senior management of firms to sign off on each financial statement that the company issues. It also stipulated that wrongful doing can result in not only termination but also imprisonment. SOX amplified the requirement for companies, requiring firms to maintain proper levels of internal controls when it comes to operating activities. SOX also established the creation of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) which implemented stricter auditing standards for public accounting firms. Not only were accounting firms required to consider internal controls, but they were also required report any significant deficiency directly to the board of directors. SOX stressed the importance of internal controls, and within internal controls it established the need for segregation of duties. Since this time, there have been many additions to accounting policies regards segregations of duties, and many functions of the business process dedicated to it.