D Rule 504 Regulation

Legislations and regulations are essential to have and follow in the working environment, it ensures safe practice for the workers and safety, protection and stability to people that are in their care.

In this essay I will discuss a few terms and how their relationships apply between regulation and market structures, as well as how regulation policies affect the market.

In essence there are certain rules and regulations you must follow and the government may regulate certain

As discussed in Chapter 3, statutory provisions that impose secrecy obligations carry a range of administrative, civil or criminal penalties. Of the 506 secrecy provisions identified by the ALRC, approximately 70% impose criminal penalties.[17] While the remaining provisions do not expressly contain criminal penalties, some establish a duty not to disclose Commonwealth information and have the potential to attract the penalties imposed by s 70 of the Crimes Act 1914

One of our most world-renowned business women and television personalities Martha Stewart decided to dip her feet into illegal insider trading. Martha served five months in a federal prison at Alderson in West Virginia and two additional years of supervised release after a portion in home confinement. Back in 2001, Martha Stewart sold all her shares from a biotech company she invested in called ImClone. Ironically, a few days after she sold her shares the company’s stock fell sixteen percent after they publicly announced that the FDA did not approve ImClone’s pharmaceutical product (Moffatt, 2017). With her selling her shares before the company went public and the subsequent drop in stock’s value, Martha avoided a $45,673 loss. In addition, she wasn’t the only one who benefitted from the quick sale. The CEO of ImClone, Sam Waskal, ordered to

At many times, regulations and enforcement agencies are subject to public scrutiny. In order to ensure accountability, provisions need to have an industry reporting mechanism (as per Lesson 2, week 2). This mechanism could be in the form of an annual report on regulation. Provisions need to also include how much does it cost to run the regulation, how will the regulation be enforced, and what is the appeal process for the regulated community (as per Lesson 2, week 2).

According to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 50, a party can ask for a motion notwithstanding the verdict, also referred to as a “motion for judgment as a matter of law”. This can be done by either party before the case is handed over to the jury for decision. However, if the motion is not granted by the judge in the case, then it is considered automatically motioned again if the jury rules against the party that filed the original motion. In the case that the judge again decides against granting the motion, a consideration for a new trial will be given by the judge (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 50).

In 2002, her reputation of being a successful businesswoman took a plunge when rumors leaked regarding her involvement of insider trading of ImClone stocks. She took part in selling her ImClone stock after hearing news of the rejection of their new cancer drug. After being convicted, the affect of this scandal took a toll on both Martha and ImClone. After serving her sentence, Martha began to reconstruct her life in hopes to bounce back from the insider trading scandal. Today she has managed to become just as successful as before this incident.

Under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is required to issue airport operating certificates to airports that serve scheduled and unscheduled air carrier aircraft with more than 30 seats or serve scheduled air carrier operations in aircraft with more than 9 seats but less than 31 seats. To ensure that airports are meeting the requirements of 14 CFR Part 139, there are approximately 35 FAA Airport Certification Safety Inspectors that conduct annual and unannounced certification inspections. In the course of the inspection, inspectors look at the movement areas, aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF), fuel facilities, and lighting. Additionally, the inspectors view the airport files and the airport certification manual, Airport Master Record (FAA Form 5010), Notices to Airmen (NOTAM), and airfield self-inspection forms.

Stewart argued that the sale was “entirely proper and lawful,” because she claimed to have already made plans to sell her stocks way before the drug was rejected. Stewarts assistant and friend contradicted Martha Stewarts innocence when they testified against her in court. Ann Armstrong, Stewart’s assistant said that Martha herself changed the log of a message that Bacanovic left for her the same day she sold the ImClone shares. Stewarts friend Mariana Pasterak, said that Stewart told her, “Isn’t it nice to have brokers who tell you these things?” Stewart told her friend that she did indeed know about Dr. Waksal selling his shares. (O’Rourke, Pp. 451and 453.) After realizing this there was no way around it, I felt defeated and could not argue anymore that Stewart was innocent or being targeted. At the end of my analysis I thought, there’s way too many inconsistency’s and coincidences in this case. Naturally investigators would not settle for less, being that there we’re just too many

After reviewing the federal statue under 15 U.S.C. 78U-1 – civil penalties for insider trading, it provides clarity on why Martha Stewart was not charged with insider trading. On December 27, 20, 2004 Martha Stewart sold ImClone stock based on information she received from her stock broker who stated that the CEO of the company Sam Waksal was dumping his $5 million stake in the company. Stewart owed 4000 shares of ImClone, which was worth $45,673. Even though Stewart’s actions were somewhat suspicious, there was no proof that she knew that the FDA did not grant the approval for the drug Erbitux. She may have been friends with the CEO, but there was no proof of him contacting her or vice versa regarding the FDA decision; In order to charge Stewart

During the investigation, Stewart lied to the SEC and FBI, saying that she had no knowledge of Waksal’s trade and that she had sold on a standing agreement with her broker to sell if shares traded below $60. Bacanovic corroborated the story, but his assistant Faneuil eventually came forward and revealed the truth (Leite, 2012). Later, Stewart’s own assistant, Annie Armstrong, testified that Stewart had tried to change a record of Bacanovic’s phone message to her about ImClone (Leite, 2012). The charge for illegal insider trading against Martha Stewart was ultimately dropped because she had no knowledge of the FDA’s decision on the drug, but she was sentenced to five months of prison time and forced to pay a fine of $195,000 for obstruction of justice and conspiracy. Stewart’s reputation was further tarnished as she was forced to step down as CEO of her company for five years, and resign her board member status at the New York Stock Exchange (Moffatt, 2015). The conviction damaged Stewart’s career and her company as the Martha Stewart Organization’s stock fell 22.6 percent after the crisis (Torossian,

On January 20, 2004, jury selection launched the trial of Martha Stewart, Chief Creative Officer and former Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia (MSO). Nine charges filed by the Federal Grand Jury in New York and the SEC relate to Stewart’s personal sale of $228,000 in ImClone Systems, Inc. stock on December 27, 2001, one day before regulators rejected the biotech company’s cancer drug (Erbitux) and sent its stock tumbling. Communications records show that Stewart placed an 11-minute cellphone call to her assistant at 1:31 P.M. EST on December 27 to check her messages. The call was registered moments after Stewart’s chartered private jet

Regulation is defined as a set of rules that is designed to control and govern conduct by authority (Deegan 2009, p.59). On the basis of this definition, Deegan (2009, p.59) has defined regulations relating to financial accounting as rules that are developed by independent authoritative body to govern the preparation of financial statements which are accounting standards. Since decades ago, there have been arguments for and against the existence of accounting regulations. With a stance of pro-regulation, this essay is going to examine the reasons that financial accounting and reporting should be regulated and the merits of accounting regulations.

Regulation is a topic that has been debated for many years and will continue to be debated for years to come. In the business and finance sector, there are many regulators including but not limited to the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC), Financial Reporting Council (FRC), Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB). While these are only a few regulatory bodies in the industry, they all have their own set of regulations to enforce. ASIC, for example, regulate the Corporations Act 2001 along with the Australian Accounting Standards. While ASIC ensure that organisations adhere to the regulations laid out before them, the AASB create and develop those