The Sarbanes Oxley Act, A Successful American Energy Company

Corporate governance in itself has no single definition but common principles which it should follow. For example in 1994 the most agreed term for corporate governance was “the process of supervision and control intended to ensure that the company’s management acts in accordance with the interest of shareholders” (Parkinson, 1994)1. Corporate governance code is not a direct set of rules but a self-regulated framework which businesses choose to follow. This code has continued to change in the past 20 years in accordance with what is happening in the business world. For example the Enron scandal caused reform in corporate governance with the Higgs Report which corrected the issues which were necessary. Although it does not quickly fix problems, it gives a better framework to

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 order to ensure effective regulation, the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation contains eleven sections that describe responsibilities of corporate boards (Engel, Hayes, & Wang, 2007). In case these responsibilities are not performed, criminal penalties are applied. The need for stricter financial governance laws created the global trend and such countries as Canada, Germany, France, Australia, Israel, Turkey and others also enacted the same type of regulations (Damianides, 2005). Today, the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation continues to play a fundamental role in the process of protecting the rights of investors and supporting a high level of investment attractiveness of the United States and companies that operate in the country. That is why this particular legislation can be considered as extremely benefiting for the national economy as well as investors.

Up to now no specific world-wide common understanding or single definition for “corporate governance” has been established. More generally, corporate governance can thus be understood as the totality of all national and international regulations (e.g. Sarbanes-Oxley Act), rules, values and principles (e.g. UK’s “Code of best practices”) that apply to businesses and determine how they are steered and monitored.

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

In 2002 the telecommunication company, WorldCom committed one of the biggest accounting scandals of all time. They perpetrated over *1 $3.8 billion in fraud, leading to a loss of 30,000 jobs and $180 billion losses for investors . This is one of the several accounting scandals that led to the passing of Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which introduced the most comprehensive set of new business regulations since the 1930’s. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) is an act that was passed by United States Congress in 2002. This act safeguarded investors from the likelihood of fraudulent accounting practices of publicly traded organizations by authorizing strict reforms to advance financial disclosures and prevent accounting frauds. With SOX being an extremely important piece of legislature it is necessary to understand the reasons why SOX was passed, how it was passed, what it entails, the aftermath of the act. To understand the events that lead to SOX passing it is imperative to grasp the business regulations that existed and allowed these accounting scandals to occur.

This paper addresses the current criticism of the exportation of U.S. corporate governance norms under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, focusing on the application of the audit committee requirement to foreign issuers from European countries with codetermination laws, and the

This research paper endeavors to expose how the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002 might have led to the accountability of holding corporate executives for their actions in the past and also in the future. The paper will examine and explore the genesis of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act as well as give details on the act’s relationship to the ethics of the institution and the persons who work and manage the institution. The paper also proceeds to discuss different corporations around the globe that have been endorsed with the Sarbanes- Oxley Act and their subsequent benefits and demerits as opined by different individuals. The paper shall prove to be a relevant tool for any administrator managing a public company. Anyone going through this

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

Not only was Enron a huge scandal at the time but also now WorldCom was coming into the picture, with this the public questioned as to how corporations were being governed (Welch. M. (2006)). In the wake of these scandals something major needed to happen to prevent any more corruption to occur. Both the Senate and the House in the summer of 2002 passed Sarbanes-Oxley Act with popular vote (Bumgardner.L. (2003)). After the Act was passed it called for changes in how companies run. Companies really had to look at how the roles of the companies’ top associates were going to change. Now when a company sends out financial statements, the managers of the company have to take ownership that the information being presented to the public and shareholders is correct. This can put an enormous amount of pressure on the company to report accurate numbers as to how the company is preforming, without Sarbanes-Oxley this would of never happened. Companies would not have to take ownership of what is being shared with the public and shareholder. Also now a clear picture is show as to how a company is truly preforming. It can be said that this is a

Rule twelve is concerned with CEOs certifying annually that their companies are not in violation of any of the NYSE corporate governance listed standards. The premise of rule twelve, is to ensure that companies are in compliance with rules one through eleven. This information must also be available to shareholders and filed with the SEC.

For an entity to have good corporate governance the Code (2008) dictates that they must exercise the following key components; accountability, transparency, probity and focus on the sustainable success of an entity over the longer term.

This paper addresses the current criticism of the exportation of U.S. corporate governance norms under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, focusing on the application of the audit committee requirement to foreign issuers from European countries with codetermination laws, and the

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………. 3 2. INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………... 4 3. GROWING OUT OF FINANCIAL CRISIS…………………………. 4 4. INITIATION OF GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS…………………. .5 5. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF US POLICIES AND IRREGULARITIES OF FINANCIAL MARKET……………………………………………6 6. CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Corporate governance is founded on laws, policies, processes, systems and behaviours and together they provide a system for the way in which an organisation is directed, administered and controlled. As such, the Charity Commission, (the ‘Commission’) recognises that to deliver its strategic aims, objectives and priorities successfully, it needs sound corporate governance arrangements in place, (Charity Commission UK). Corporate Governance is not - or should not be - about debate and discussion on executive compensation, shareholder protection, legislation and so on. In recent times, corporate governance became not only a subject of fierce debate and public outcry, but also, as a result of this and arising legislation, a subject which been wearisome for many company directors. The hidden gem here is to a great