2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act Video Analysis

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.

This memorandum discusses a brief history of Pat, his wrongdoings and related action, and the response by the related law enforcement agencies.

It was Monday, August 22, 2010, my Sophomore year of high school that I first stepped foot in the classroom of Mr. Telsee’s Principles of Accounting course. I was overwhelmed with thoughts of intimidation, which blinded me from understanding my full potential. Mr. Telsee distinctively educated students on how to connect realistic situations to complex problems. After finally grasping the basic accounting concepts and cycles, I knew accounting was for me. I am a living testimony that success happens the moment you step out of your comfort zone.

|Preparation |Introductions and Definitions: Language of Accounting videos located in this week’s Electronic| | |

Depreciation and depletion are two models of computing financial reports. These techniques are used as adjustments when preparing statements of cash flow within the direct or indirect method. This paper will identify and examine the methods of depreciation and depletion, describe the difference between the methods, and compare and contrast depreciation and depletion as well using scholarly references to support the points.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002Introduction2001-2002 was marked by the Arthur Andersen accounting scandal and the collapse of Enron and WorldCom. Corporate reforms were demanded by the government, the investors and the American public to prevent similar future occurrences. Viewed to be largely a result of failed or poor governance, insufficient disclosure practices, and a lack of satisfactory internal controls, in 2002 George W. Bush signed into law the Sarbanes-Oxley Act that became effective on July 30, 2002. Congress was seeking to set standards and guarantee the accuracy of financial reports.

The United States has one of the biggest and fastest growing economies of the world. Our financial system has been affected by numerous crises throughout the years and as a result Congress has reacted in the most recent times and two well-known acts have been signed into laws by the presidents at the time to protect investors and consumers alike. A brief overview of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, a discussion of some of the provisions therein, opinions of others regarding the act and also my personal and professional opinion will be discussed below. The same will be examined about the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was signed into law on July 30, 2002 by President Bush. The new law came after major corporate scandals involving Enron, Arthur Anderson, WorldCom. Its goals are to protect investors by improving accuracy of and reliability of corporate disclosures and to restore investor confidence. The law is considered the most important change in securities and corporate law since the New Deal. The act is named after Senator Paul Sarbanes of Maryland and Representative Michael Oxley of Ohio (Wikipedia Online).

Sarbanes-Oxley is not intended, or required for nonprofit companies, audit agencies, and nonprofit trustees are expecting them to be as transparent as for-profit companies that are required to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.4.McGEEHAN, P. (2003, Jun 17). Most corporate ethics officials are critical of top officers' pay. New York Times, pp. C.8-C.8. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/432425436?accountid=32521Patrick McGeehan examines corporate ethics versus the paychecks that senior executives receive. He discuses how even “executives involved in serious violations of their companies' codes of ethics and compliance are paid severance” (McGeehan, 2003) He explains the effect that actions like this have on the rest of

Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed in 2002 by former president George Bush. Essentially to combat the Enron crisis. The Sox Act basically has regulatory control and creates an enviroment that is looking out for the public. Ideally this regulatory environment protects the public from fraud within corporations. Understanding, that while having this regulatory control at times the Sox requirements need to be tweaked or amended. Not only now but in the future as well. The main aspects of the Sox act are essentially looking out for our welfare as a consumer. Our government has the obligation to regulate

Descriptions of the main aspects of the regulatory environment which will protect the public from fraud within corporations are going to be provided in this paper. A special attention to the Sarbanes – Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) requirement; along with an evaluation of whether Sarbanes-Oxley Act will be effective in avoiding future frauds based on their implemented rules and regulations.

Being unfamiliar with accounting and accounting standards when I started my degree there were times when I was told, ‘this is just how it is’. Now, after taking several courses and knowing what I know, I have realized just how important it really is that we understand the concepts. This has been my same approach to Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement Number 34. I first learned what it is that Statement Number 34 required us to do and must now try to understand why it is that those requirements were included in the first place.

The monetary costs of compliance with the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 are difficult enough to quantify. However, there are other qualitative costs that are even more difficult to measure. Such as, the compliance costs the public accounting firms by increasing auditor workloads (Jahmani, Yousef; Dowling, William A., 2008). The government bureaucracy increases tax payer burdens due to increases in government regulating agencies.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was created and implemented specifically following the large corporate scandals involving Enron and WorldCom in 2002. The internal auditing was very poor for the corporate giants and they basically performed however they chose. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act caused the corporations to modify their auditing schemes, the compliances became stricter, and the complaints about the new act grew large in numbers. The corporate managers’ focus on increasing their cash flow and expanding their budget was more like an epidemic instead of an honest job duty (Ferrell, Hirt, & Ferrell, 2009).

During my time at Accounting Firm X I learned many lessons that apply not only to accounting and the principles and practices associated with that subject, but also to life as a professional in a real world work setting. The purpose of this essay is to highlight my experiences at Accounting Firm X to shed light upon key learning experiences that can contribute to a holistic educational experience. In this essay I will first describe my goals and expectations. Next, I will go in to detail about my daily routine and how these exercises contributed toward the overall experience. I will then explore the overall lessons learned from my time spent at the firm.