Enron And The Collapse Of Enron

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 Act, also known as SOX Act, is a federal law that was passed on July 30, 2002, by Congress. This law was established to help set new or enhance laws for all United States accounting firms, management, and public company. The SOX Act would now make corporate executives accountable for their unethical behavior. This bill was passed due to the action of the Enron and Worldcom scandal, which cost their investors billions of dollars, caused their company to fold, and questioned the nations' securities markets.

In reaction to a number of corporate and accounting scandals which included Enron Congress passed The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) (Sarbox) also known as the "Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act” and the "Corporate and Auditing Accountability and Responsibility Act" was enacted July 30, 2002. The Sarbane-Oxley Act is a US federal law that created new and expanded laws regarding the requirements for all US public company boards, management, and accounting firms. The act has a number of provisions that apply to privately owned companies. The Act addresses the responsibilities of a public corporation’s Board of Directors, adds criminal penalties for misconduct, and requires the SEC to create regulations that define how public corporations are expected to comply with the law. The SOX increases the penalties a company pays for fraudulent financial activity, and requires top management to provide individual verification to certify the accuracy of financial information, while also increasing the oversight role of a company’s Board of Directors and the independence of outside auditors.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) was passed by U.S congress in 2002 to protect investors from fraudulent accounting activities by corporations. Whether the organization is big or small, the act mandates strict reforms to improve financial disclosures from corporations, helping to prevent accounting fraud. It is a federal law that established new and expanded requirements for all U.S. public company boards, management, public accounting firm's, as well as privately held companies. SOX requires top management individually certify the accuracy of financial information, and includes penalties for fraudulent financial activity. The bill was enacted in response to a large number of major corporate and accounting scandals the cost of investors

After major corporate and accounting scandals like those that affected Tyco, Worldcom and Enron the Federal government passed a law known as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 also known as the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act. This law was passed in hopes of thwarting illegal and misleading acts by financial reporters and putting a stop to the decline of public trust in accounting and reporting practices. Two important topics covered in Sarbanes-Oxley are auditor independence and the reporting and assessment of internal controls under section 404.

Companies such as Enron from approximately 1996 to 2001 were thriving and the stock price rising constantly. Such a move on the company’s stock was attracted millions of investors who wanted to invest in a stable company they could trust. Little did they know that the company with over 60 Billion dollars in market capitalization at one point, was about to collapse. The company’s stock reached a high of approximately 90 dollars per share in 2000, and the following year shares plummeted to less than one dollar. As one can imagine, investors were terrified, millions lost the entire retirement savings, and other were just afraid to trust the financial markets. Enron, and others were taking advantage of the loose accounting regulations to recognize revenue improperly, make use of special purpose entities to create “fake” revenue, and weak corporate governance.

The development of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was a result of public company scandals. The Enron and Worldcom scandals, for example, helped investor confidence in entities traded on the public markets weaken during 2001 and 2002. Congress was quick to respond to the political crisis and "enacted the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which was signed into law by President Bush on July 30" (Edward Jones, 1), to restore investor confidence. In reference to SOX, penalties would be issued to non-ethical or non-law-abiding public companies and their executives, directors, auditors, attorneys, and securities analysts (1). SOX significantly transformed the procedures in which public companies handle internal

According to an email sent February 6, 2001, Andersen considered dropping Enron as a client. In August, Enron Vice President Sherron Watkins wrote an anonymous memo to former Chairman Kenneth Lay, detailing reasons she thought Enron “might implode in a wave of accounting scandals.”

Power Failure: The Inside Story of the Collapse of Enron, Mimi Swartz and Sherron Watkins, 432 pages, March 25, 2003, Crown Publishing Group, ISBN: 978-0-767-91368-3

The case of Enron Corporation and Andersen, LLP can be noted as one of the most infamous fraud scandals in US history. Investors lost millions of dollars and ruined the public’s trust. Enron was once the seventh largest public company in the United States and Andersen LLP was the world’s largest and most respected business organizations. Enron’s stock prices soared to approximately $100 to less than $10 in 2001. How did these two big giants fall into oblivion and what could have been done to avoid the disaster of these companies?

In light of the recent scandals that rose around big multinationals such as Enron and WorldCom, it has become evident that reform in the traditional corporate operations and objectives was to be encompassed in the organisations corporate strategies. Indeed throughout the years, companies main objectives were defined primarily as being economic objectives, Multinationals developed with sight of profit maximisations regardless to the other incentives, Friedman considered that to be the foundation for a well-managed company, it was further considered that the financing of any other sort of social corporate activities rather unnecessary. The expenses were regarded as expenditures for the owners and investors; this was a time where shareholders rights were regarded as conflicting with other constituents namely the employees, creditors, customers or the community in general. However this interpretation is seen as rather inadequate due to the nature of the amalgamated relation between both constituents. Stakeholders in modern corporate doctrine are considered as a core apparatus for the well functioning of a business. It is however often argued that the only way for a corporation to achieve better results and maximise its profits is to include other people in the process, individuals or organisations with direct or indirect interest in the well performance of the company, that is the reason why modern regulations and codes include a number of stakeholders other than the

Sarbanes Oxley (also known as SOX) is legislation passed by the United States Congress in 2002, in the wake of a number of major corporate accounting scandals. Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, and others cost investors billions when their stock prices collapsed. As a result of SOX, top management must separately certify the accuracy of financial Furthermore, consequences for fraudulent financial activity are much more severe. Also, SOX intensified the management role of boards of directors and the independence of the external auditors who review the accuracy of corporate financial statements. The primary changes caused the formation of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the assessment of personal liability to auditors, executives and board members and creation of the Section 404, which recognized internal control events that had not existed before the legislation.

Most of the world has heard of Enron, the American, mega-energy company that “cooked their books” ( ) and cost their investors billions of dollars in lost earnings and retirement funds. While much of the controversy surrounding the Enron scandal focused on the losses of investors, unethical practices of executives and questionable accounting tactics, there were many others within close proximity to the turmoil. It begs the question- who was really at fault and what has been done to prevent it from happening again?

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) was enacted into law in 2002 in the wake of corporation financial reporting scandals involving large publicly held companies. SOX instituted new strict financial regulations with the intent of improving accounting practices and protecting investors from corporate misconduct. SOX requires corporate executives to vouch for the accuracy of financial statements, and to institute and monitor effective internal controls over financial reporting. The cost of implementing an effective internal control structure are onerous, and SOX inflicts opportunity costs upon an enterprise as executives have

a. Stockholders at first reaped tremendous gains from their investments in Enron stock, because the company’s value rose a lot of quicker than market averages throughout the late Nineteen Nineties. In 2001, because the stock value folded, investors lost $70 billion in value. Each individual and institutional shareholders were hurt. Significantly blasted were Enron workers whose 401(k) retirement plans were heavily endowed in their company’s stock. Even shareholders who failed to own any Enron stock were hurt, as stock costs fell across the board within the wake of the scandal as investors doubted the integrity of the many companies’ monetary reports.