Enron: Ethics, Ethics And Ethics In Business

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.

In the late 20th and early 21st century, the Anron and Worldcom scandals directly led to the birth of Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2003, which strengthens the accounting oversight and disclosure on the corporation. However, only 4 years later, the most extensive and devastating financial tsunami since the 1930s Great Depression happened and then spread to the globe, generating extremely serious harm to the American and the global economy.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was implemented and designed to “protect the interests of the investing public” and the “mission is to set and enforce practice standards for a new class of firms registered to audit publicly held companies” (Verschoor, 2012). During the early 2000 's, the world saw an alarming number of accounting scandals take place resulting in many corporations going bankrupt. Some of the major companies involved in these scandals were from Enron, WorldCom, and one of the top five accounting and auditing firms, Arthur Andersen. These companies were dishonest with their financial statements, assuring the public the company was very successful, when in reality they were not. This became a problem because if the public believes a company is doing well, they are more likely to invest in it. That is to say, once these companies were exposed, it caused a number of companies going bankrupt and a major mistrust between the public and the capital market. Consequently, the federal government quickly took action and enacted the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2002, also known as SOX, which was created by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Many have questioned what Norman Bowie (2004) had questioned,

Prior to the 2002 scandal of Enron, the standards for financial reporting were much more relax than the regulations that businesses encounter today. The Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002(SOX) came into play as a response to the unruly financial reporting to the public from companies such as Enron, Arthur Andersen, Tyco and WorldCom. The public scandals created insecurities for any American to invest in big companies, due to fear of additional fraud encounters. The Sarbanes Oxley Act was enacted to try create some trust between these big companies and the hardworking individuals who were investing in them. The fraud scandals were front page news stories and the government hoped that passing this legislation

The story of Enron is truly remarkable. As a company it merely controlled the electricity, natural gas and communications sectors of the world. It reported (key word, reported) revenues over one hundred billion US dollars and was presented America’s Most Innovative Company by Fortune magazine for six sequential years. But, with power comes greed and Enron from its inception employed people who set their eyes upon money, prestige, power or a combination of the three. The gluttony took over sectors which the company could not operate proficiently nor successfully.

The similar circumstance occurred with other companies. As such, the government decided that they must do something about this issue and in 2002 Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Not only this act had an immediate effect on us corporations, but the accounting profession was revolutionized by this new introduction. The act gave more regulatory power to lawyers, analysts, and auditors. WorldCom, who was one of the biggest bankruptcies in history, admitted to overstating profits by billions throughout the years. The

This was but one of many accounting scandals, but it was possibly the worst. To help prevent something like this from happened again, the Sarbanes Oxley Act was passed. This act greatly increased the accountability of auditing firms, and it also increased penalties for acts such as defrauding shareholders, as well as faking, destroying, or altering records (Jennings, 2015).

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was the result of a number of large financial scandals in the United States in the late 1990s and early 2000s. One of the most well-known corporate accounting scandals was the Enron scandal, which was exposed in 2001. Enron, an energy company that was considered one of the most financially sound corporations in the United States before the scandal, produced false earnings reports to shareholders and kept large debts off the accounting books (Peavler, 2016). Enron executives also committed fraud by embezzling corporate funds and manipulating the stock market. Enron shareholders lost around $74 billion dollars, Enron employees lost their retirement accounts, and some Enron employees even lost their jobs (The 10 Worst Corporate Accounting Scandals of All Time, n.d.).

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passes in 2002 in response to a handful of large corporate scandals that occurred between the years 2000 to 2002, resulting in the losses of billions of dollars by investors. Enron, Worldcom and Tyco are probably the most well known companies that were involved in these scandals, but there were a number of other companies guilty of such things as well. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed as a way to crackdown on corporations by setting new and improved standards that all United States’ public companies and accounting firms were and are required to abide by. It also works to hold top level executives accountable for the company, and if fraudulent behaviors are discovered then the executives could find themselves in hot water. The punishments for such fraudulence could be as serious as 20 years jail time. (Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 2014). The primary motivation for the act was to prevent future scandals from happening, or at least, make it much more difficult for them to happen. The act was also passed largely to protect the people—the shareholders—from corporations, their executives, and their boards of directors. Critics tend to argue that the act is to complicated, and costs to much to abide by, leading to the United States losing its “competitive edge” in the global marketplace (Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 2014). The Sarbanes-Oxley act, like most things, has its pros and cons. It is costly; studies have shown that this act has cost companies millions of

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, also known as the SOX Act, is enacted on July 30, 2002 by Congress as a result of some major accounting frauds such as Enron and WorldCom. The main objective of this act is to recover the investors’ trust in the stock market, and to prevent and detect corporate accounting fraud. I will discuss the background of Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and why it became necessary in the first section of this paper. The second section will be the act’s regulations for the management, external auditors, and companies, mainly publicly-traded companies, and the cost and benefits of the act. The last section will be the discussion of the quality of financial reporting since SOX and the effectiveness of SOX provisions to prevent

The Sarbanes Oxley Act came to existence after numerous scandals on financial misappropriation and inaccurate accounting records. The nature of scandals made it clear there are possible measure that could be used to prevent future occurrence of financial scandals. And the existence and effectiveness of Sarbanes Oxley has caused

This deception on behalf of the executives and others in the organization who hid this vastly affected anyone who had stock in Enron as well as stock in other energy corporations. The

All of the prior represents the business side of the downfall of Enron. That being said, businesses fail all of the time. The reason why Enron Corporation and its executives will always live in infamy is not because the company failed, but how and why the company failed. How, exactly, does a company worth about $70 million collapse in less than a month? It became clear that the company not only had financial problems, but ethical problems that started from the top of the company and trickled down. A key player in these problems was Jeffrey Skilling. He was a man brought to the company by Ken Lay himself. Skilling brought his own accounting concept to the company. It was called mark-to-market accounting. This concept allowed Enron to record potential profits the day a deal was signed. This meant that the company could report whatever they “thought” profits from the deal were going to be and count the number towards actual profits, even if no money actually came in. Mark-to-market accounting granted Enron the power to report major profits to the public, even if they were little or even negative. It became a major way

The story of Enron begins in 1985, with the merger of two pipeline companies, orchestrated by a man named Kenneth L. Lay (1). In its 15 years of existence, Enron expanded its operations to provide products and services in the areas of electricity, natural gas as well as communications (9). Through its diversification, Enron would become known as a corporate America darling (9) and Fortune Magazine’s most innovative company for 5 years in a row (10). They reported extraordinary profits in a short amount of time. For example, in 1998 Enron shares were valued at a little over $20, while in mid-2000, those same shares were valued at just over $90 (10), the all-time high during the company’s existence (9).

Enron's entire scandal was based on a foundation of lies characterized by the most brazen and most unethical accounting and business practices that will forever have a place in the hall of scandals that have shamed American history. To the outside, Enron looked like a well run, innovative company. This was largely a result of self-created businesses or ventures that were made "off the balance sheet." These side businesses would sell stock, reporting profits, but not reporting losses. "Treating these businesses "off the balance sheet" meant that Enron pretended that these businesses were autonomous, separate firms. But, if the new business made money, Enron would report it as income. If the new business lost money or borrowed money, the losses and debt were not reported by Enron" (mgmtguru.com). As the Management Guru website explains, these tactics were alls designed to make Enron look like a more profitable company and to give it a higher stock price.