The Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), the federal agency that is responsible for regulating and enforcing security laws, experienced one the largest fraud schemes perpetrated on investors and citizens. Madoff defrauded an approximately 65 billion dollars from investors (Shafritz, 2013) and Madoff did so under the blind eye of the SEC. To avoid similar disasters, the oversight and enforcement is critical to maintain effective policies to ensure the best interests of the public. Securities Exchange Commission Regulatory Policies and Structure The SEC’s principle division, Division of Enforcement, which enables the commission to investigate and recommend civil action, is largely evaluated on how well the division performs (Macy, 2010). Specifically, the regulatory policies of the SEC emphasizes the importance of the Division of Enforcement activities because its success is the existence of budget allocation within Congress therefore the SEC focuses on raw number of cases it brings forward and the fines its collect (Macy, 2010). As a result, the SEC discourages complex investigations and elects to pursue quick open and close cases (Perri & Brody, 2011). Shafritz (2013) states that the SEC failed to investigate numerous tips regarding Madoff’s Ponzi scheme because of agency capture, the phenomenon regarding agencies that are hesitant in challenging prominent figures, and interagency rivals (pp. 350-351). Shafritz identifies the reasons the SEC failed to investigate
1. The SEC is often called the “watchdog” of corporate America. How does it assist in preventing fraud?
The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is the US federal agency that holds the primary mandate to enforce federal securities laws and regulations to control the securities industry and the country’s stock exchange and regulation of all activities and organizations including the US electronic securities market. The SEC is committed to promoting a market environment that yields public trust characterized by integrity to attain its mission of protecting investors through maintenance of fair and efficient markets through facilitation of capital information (Basagne, 2010). The SEC financing is a major area of focus since there has been major concern regarding the SEC agency financing and whether they utilize the
The Securities and Exchange Commission has the mission of protecting investors by maintaining fair, orderly and efficient markets. The SEC does this in a number of ways, and firms need to pay attention to these ways in order to ensure SEC compliance. The SEC has enforcement authority over a number of areas related to the nation's capital markets, including insider trading, accounting fraud, and providing false information. The SEC's jurisdiction extends to all securities that are traded publicly. Privately-held companies do not need to register with the SEC (SEC.gov, 2012).
The Security and Exchange Commission is the organization who monitors fraudulent transactions and insider trading. Some experts in ethical behavior consider inside trading the most dramatic form of utilitarian ethics.
As a result of these public scandals, it was a need in new more strict regulatory standards in terms of protecting investors from fraud activities of corporations.
The effects of the economic market crash of 1929 appeared in how the public sustained severe losses at the hands of securities traders and corporations. With the unmistakable need to restore financial specialist trust in the securities market President Roosevelt pushed for a huge securities regulation and the creation of the Securities Act of 1933 sprouted along with the approval of Congress. Then in a year later in 1934 Congress observed the need to make modifications to the 1933 Act by establishing an independent governmental regulatory body the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC main responsibility came to be to ensure and protect the public against malpractices in the securities and financial markets. As the years passed businesses and technology advances developed and the economic market expanded. With the economy market positive rise many companies needed to keep up and acted upon fraudulent acts in order to stay in the business competition. Companies acted fraudulent by “cooking the books” in recording
Following a number of discovered fraud scandals committed by well-known corporations and in order to restore public confidence in the stock market and trading of securities, the United States congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the year 2002. As a result of the act endorsement by the New York Stock Exchange and the Securities and Exchange Commission, among many other national overseeing committees, a number of rules and regulations were proposed and adopted and that demanded new processes and programs be instilled for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the new law. The new rules and regulations pertaining to the enacted law have a common goal:
Convictions of the Bernie Madoff conspirators prove the Ponzi scheme could not have been the work of one person. Furthermore, the conspirators each played a critical role in facilitating the Ponzi scheme and concealing it from regulators, and auditors. For instance, Annette Bongiorno, was employed for Madoff for approximately 40 years as his secretary (Lappin, 2014). Consequently, Bongiorno was charged with manufacturing the false statements sent to clients that indicated they were worth a lot more than they actually were. Moreover, Bongiorno transferred $50 million of client’s funds into her own private account (Lappin, 2014).
This book brought out the failures of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in one of the biggest Ponzi schemes in America’s history, as orchestrated by Bernie Madoff. Harry Markopolos caught up with Madoff’s Ponzi scheme earlier on in his career and saw all the red flags. There was no explanation of the continuous one percent yield in over forty five stocks that Madoff dealt with. Madoff took advantage of the laxity by the SEC officials in failing to follow up complains with an investigation, and the trust
The Securities Act of 1933 regulated the securities and the accounting standards before the Sarbanes Oxley Act was passed. Under the Securities Act, corporations and their investments bank were legally responsible for telling the truth and making sure the financial statements were audited correctly. Although corporations were responsible, the CEOs were not which was meant it was hard to prosecute them for fraud. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted in response to a series of high profile financial scandals that occurred in the early 2000s at companies including Enron, WorldCom, and Tyco that rattled investor confidence. The Sarbanes Oxley Act was named after
Although only required to discuss two associations this writer thought it was important to discuss the SEC as they are directly connected to FINRA in that they take litigation cases, and fraud cases from FINRA and follows up on whether any security laws or criminal laws were broken. Once they investigate the wrong doing they proceed with the corrective action that best suits the offense not excluding criminal prosecution and jail time. According to the Securities and Exchange Commission (2014) website the mission of the SEC is to “protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation”. The SEC was created to ensure that all investors big or small have a fair and unbiased account of a
SEC whistleblowers who provide tips about possible unlawful conduct are heroes, although they rarely see themselves that way. Anyone who is considering alerting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) about irregularities that involve their employer, colleagues or friends has probably wrestled with the decision for a while before taking action. People who find the courage to report potential violations should remember that they are protecting investors who are saving for retirement or their child's college education.
To combat this assumption it turns out large amounts of money of the value of $300million was invested in Bernard Madoff accounts in the form of pension funds. Some officials knew that the unscathed performance of Madoff securities were too good to be true as their prices consistently climbed up in spite the financial crisis. However, still they pawned its own shareholders’ funds with the hopes of jumping on the same band wagon as Madoff and reaping further profits. Another angle at probing the case was that the CEO, directors as well as executives were only looking out for themselves. Evidently they had direct benefits in the form of handsome compensation packages for retaining high profile clients such as Madoff and Wise which
This paper introduces Bernard L. Madoff a fraudster who orchestrated a multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme. The paper discusses elements that make up a Ponzi scheme and explains what a Ponzi scheme is. The paper goes on to introduce some of the victim’s and examines some reasons why someone might fall victim to a Ponzi scheme. The paper describes the three elements making up the fraud triangle and how they relate to the fraud and the fraudster. This paper covers Bernard Madoff’s background and history and how he committed the fraud analyzing the fraud triangle. The paper describes ways to correct the issue, accounting principles violated, and recommendations for a fix. Finally, the paper looks at internal and external controls violated and ends with a conclusion.
The illegal construction of the Bernie Madoff securities pyramid scheme grew to preposterous proportions from legal, auditing, and regulatory weaknesses of the Securities Exchange Commission, the designated regulatory body of the U.S. financial markets. The required expertise, authority, and relevant penalties needed to deter management from committing ethical breaches lacked substance in the case study of BMIS (Crews 11). Even after the wake of the Enron and WorldCom scandals that occurred in the early 2000s, the SEC unexplainably revoked provisions created to help avoid fraud. The provision the SEC revoked specifically mandated firms structured like Madoff’s to be audited by accounting firms registered and audited by the Board. By revoking the provision, BMIS was allowed to continue its Ponzi scheme for another half a decade with the aid of utilizing an unregistered, small accounting firm called Freihling & Horowitz (“Madoff’s Jenga”