The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002 Case Study

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 main objective of the Sarbanes-Oxley act was to reduce fraud. So far that objective seem to have been obtain. Since SOX was enacted, there has not been a major domestic corporate financial scandal uncovered other than the options back-dating scandal that occurred before July 2002 (Jahmani & Dowling, 2008). It is a tax advantage because companies and investors are not losing money.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) of 2002 was implemented to deter fraudulent activities amongst companies by monitoring and auditing financial activities as well as set up internal controls to aid in the safeguard of company funds and investor’s interest. SOX also regulates the non-audit tax services (NATS) that can be performed by an auditing firm. SOX was passed by Congress in 2002 in an attempt to address the unethical behaviors of corporate firms such as Enron, WorldCom, Sunbeam, and others (Raabe, Whittenburg, Sanders, & Sawyers, 2015). Raabe et al. (2015) continues explaining that SOX was created in response to the inadequacies

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) is a legislation enacted in 2002 under the sponsorship of U.S. Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) and U.S. Representative Michael G. Oxley (R-OH). The law introduced increased government oversight for publicly held companies. It also imposes additional management responsibilities and corporate operating costs on companies trading under SEC regulations. Sarbanes-Oxley was enacted in direct response to a number of corporate accounting scandals, including those of Enron, Tyco International, and WorldCom.

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.

Senators Paul Sarbanes and Michael Oxley were the sponsors of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which represented a tremendous change to federal securities law. The act was signed into law by president George W. Bush who described it as “the most far reaching reforms of American business practices since the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt1.” After the financial scandals implicating Enron, WorldCom and Global Crossing, the public needed to restore their trust in the public financial statements of the companies and that’s where the SOX Act of 2002 came into place. The act is composed of eleven titles which require numerous reforms to prevent accounting fraud, increase corporate responsibilities, among others.

The Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002 is the most important piece of legislation since the 1933 and 34 securities exchange act, affecting everything from corporate governance to the accounting industry and much more. This law was in direct response to the failure of corporate governance at Enron, Tyco, and WorldCom. The Sarbanes - Oxley seeks to bring back the confidence in all publicly held corporations to the shareholders, while placing more responsibility on CEOs and CFOs for the actions of the corporation. "Sarbanes - Oxley is more than just another piece of legislation - it has become synonymous with a new culture of corporate accountability and reform1." The SOX, as it has come to be known, covers a myriad amount of corporate

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) was enacted to bring back public trust in markets. Building trust requires ethics within organizations. Through codes of ethics, organizations are put in line to conduct themselves in a manner that promotes public trust. Through defining a code of ethics, organizations can follow, market becomes fair for investors to have confidence in the integrity of the disclosures and financial reports given to them. The code of ethics include “the promotion of honest and ethical conduct, requiring disclosure on the codes that apply to senior financial officers, and including provisions to encourage whistle blowing” (A Business Ethics Perspective on Sarbanes Oxley and the Organizational Sentencing Guidelines). The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was signed into law from public demand for a reform. Even though there are some criticism about it, the act still stands to prevent and punish corporate fraud and malpractice.

Congress established the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which is otherwise called the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act, in the beginning of corporate and accounting scandals that prompted liquidations, serious stock misfortunes, and a loss of trust in stocks (Batten, 2010). The demonstration forces new obligations on corporate administration and criminal authorizes on those supervisors who spurn the law, and it

Corporations around the world have exhibited ethical business practices. However, some corporations gave into unethical business practices such as fraud, dishonesty, and scams. One particular dishonest act that remained common amongst companies such as Enron, WorldCom, and Tyco was the fabrication of financial statements. These companies were reporting false information on their financial statements so that it would appear that the companies were making profits. However, those companies were actually losing money instead. Because of these companies’ actions, the call to have American businesses to be regulated under new rules served as a very important need. In 2002, Paul Sarbanes from the Senate and Michael G. Oxley from the House of Representatives created what is now known as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was signed into law on July 30, 2002, by President George W. Bush; it was a congressional regulatory response to the enormously damaging corporate scandals at WorldCom, the Arthur Anderson accounting group and most notoriously, Enron. Because of the damage done not only to the reputations of those corporations and to the American corporate community but also to the stockholders and people who lost life savings (people who lost 401-K investments in the scandal), Congress had to take action to try and avoid scandals like these in the future. Hence, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was created and passed into law. Will it deter future criminal activity vis-à-vis corporate financial reporting? There is no guarantee that the Act will prevent future corruption, but this paper asserts that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act is a step in the right direction.

I think that the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) has been feasible in managing tricky financial reporting from major corporations. It has a much lower influence on the misappropriation of benefits. No law or Act have the ability to cover all human predisposition to endeavor relationships with good offense. The law made it harder to quote out of context the association's cash related affairs and made the results more extraordinary (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2013). SOX have increased auditor’s vigilance and tightened management's responsibility for reporting misappropriating assets (Church & Shefchik, 2012). Here are two reasons I trust SOX was successful. First, this Act was powerful enough to cause chief executives to consider money

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, also known as the SOX Act, was created in response to the series of misleading and outright fraudulent activity of big business in 1990s (Lasher, 2008, p. 187). Multiple publicly-traded businesses raised up their stock prices by “publishing false or deceptive financial statements” (Lasher, 2008, p. 187). The most notable company to crash were Enron, WorldCom and Tyco. Eventually almost one thousand publicly traded companies restated their financial statements which resulted in almost $6 trillion of stock market value disappearing (Lasher, 2008, p. 187). In response to these events, Congress drafted and passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) of 2002.

Enron was a one-hundred billion dollar company in 2000, until questionable accounting practices, known as mark-to-market, saw their stock prices drop from ninety dollars per share to just pennies (Ferrell, Hirt, & Ferrell, 2015). All of the top employees were charged and convicted of various crimes and sentenced to time in prison. Because of loss of confidence among investors, the government put into place the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). SOX is a set of requirements put into law in an attempt to regulate corporations’ accounting practices, in an attempt to protect stockholders. Sox has proponents, but it also has it’s critics. Some experts claim that it has helped weed out some of the corruption in business accounting. While other

Every company should have a code of ethics, because it maintains the company’s values, culture, and reputation. It communicates to employees that the company is committed to doing business responsibly. It also guides employees’ conduct and how they should interact with each other, customers, vendors, contractors, and the general public. Code of ethics set clear standards and expectations for employees, and if everyone in the company adheres to these policies, then the company will create a culture that reflects the code. Companies with code of ethics also show that they are committed to integrity and social responsibility, which in turn will make their customers feel more reassured, and help with the company's bottom line as well as protect the company from potential liability.