The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

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.

Corporate Responsibility contains 8 sections which senior executives take individual responsibility for the accuracy and transparency of the organization financial statements. In other words the executives cannot longer bounce responsibility for the inaccuracies of their financial reports, and it describes the communication between organization audit committees and external auditors.

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

Auditing firms are no longer able to focus primarily on selling additional services. Instead, they are now concerned with providing excellent service to the client. This has resulted in additional tax and financial reporting

Legitimacy in accounting practices is ensured by the check and balance of having independent auditors from registered public accountant firms reviewing financial practices. The report features eleven sections and these sections pertain to accounting overview, independence of auditors to reduce interest conflicts, corporate responsibility, financial disclosures, tax returns, criminal fraud and various elements of white collar criminal activity (107th Congress

Exceptions can be approved by the Board and are made in cases where the revenue paid for such services contributes less than 5% of revenues paid to the auditing firm. Also, a public accounting firm may provide these non-audit services along with audit services if it is pre-approved by the audit committee of the public company. The audit committee will disclose to investors in periodic reports its decision to approve the performance of non-audit services and audit services by the same accounting firm. This requirement to disclose to investors is likely to inhibit auditing committees from approving the performance of auditing and non-auditing services by the same accounting firm. Other sections outline audit partner rotations, accounting firm reporting procedures, and executive officer independence. Specifically, subsection 206 states that the CEO, Controller, CFO, Chief Accounting Officer or similarly positioned employees cannot have been employed by the company's audit firm for one year prior to the audit.

I am not familiar with the law nor do I know if it is currently being used in my organization. Based on my research, Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires public companies' annual reports to include the company's own assessment of internal control over financial reporting, and an auditor's attestation. Since the law was enacted, however, both requirements have been postponed for smaller public companies. Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404, all public organizations are mandated to publish information in their annual reports in regards to the scope and adequacy of the internal control structure and procedures of their financial reporting. This information is then used to assess the efficiency in the internal control and procedures

Some of the Sarbanes-Oxley requirements aren't entirely clear, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, which implemented the law, hasn't been all that helpful. In comments on section 404, the SEC ruled that beginning with a company's fiscal year ending on or after June 15, 2004, it must issue four statements: one indicating management's responsibility for maintaining internal controls; one identifying the framework used to evaluate internal controls; one saying the company's auditor attests to management's assessment; and one assessing the effectiveness of internal-reporting

Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J., & Beasley, M. S. (2013). Auditing and Assurance Services. Old Tappan, NJ: Pearson Education.

After major corporate and accounting scandals like those that affected Tyco, Worldcom and Enron the Federal government passed a law known as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 also known as the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act. This law was passed in hopes of thwarting illegal and misleading acts by financial reporters and putting a stop to the decline of public trust in accounting and reporting practices. Two important topics covered in Sarbanes-Oxley are auditor independence and the reporting and assessment of internal controls under section 404.

The first one is the Sarbanes-Oxley section 302, which is found under Title III of the act, pertaining 'Corporate Responsibility for Financial Reports'.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was enacted in July 30, 2002, by Congress to protect shareholders and the general public from fraudulent corporate practices and accounting errors and to maintain auditor independence.   In protecting the shareholders and the general public the SOX Act is intended to improve the transparency of the financial reporting.   Financial reports are to be certified by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) creating increased responsibility and independence with auditing by independent audit firms. In discussing the SOX Act, we will focus on how this act affects the CEOs; CFOs; outside independent audit firms; the advantages and a

This paper provides an in-depth evaluation of Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which is said to be promoted to produce change in the corporate environment, in general, by stressing issues of public accountability and disclosure in the financial operations of business. It explains how this is an Act that represents the government's and the Security and Exchange Commission's concern in promoting ethical standards in terms of financial disclosure in the corporate environment.

The final responsibility for the integrity of an SEC registrant’s internal controls lies on the management team. U.S. companies need to refer to a comprehensive framework of internal control when assessing the quality of financial reporting to determine that financial statements are being presented under General Accepted Accounting Principles, GAAP. The widely used framework is referred as COSO, Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, sponsored by the following organizations American Accounting Association, the American Institute of CPA’s, Financial Executives International, the Institute of Internal Auditors, and the Institute of Management Accountants. COSO’s defines internal control as:

4). Section 401 of SOX requires corporations to issue financial statements that are complete and accurate and include all material off-balance sheet obligations or liabilities (A Guide to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 2006). This regulation was instituted to prevent public corporations from hiding liabilities from investors, and thus artificially inflating stock prices.