The world has witnessed a series of corporate bankruptcies in the recent decades like Enron, Lehman Brothers Inc, Global Crossings, and Tyco in the USA; HIH in Australia, Parmalat in Italy, APP in Asia, and Islamic bank Ltd. of South Africa. These collapses have weakened and shaken the confidence of shareholders, debtors, governmental institutions, and other similar relevant stakeholders in corporate governance (CG) and the stock markets, and led to regulating many reforms and codes of best governance practices all over the world, to strengthen transparency and restore confidence in financial markets (Barros et al., 2013). For instance, after the financial failure of Enron and dissolution of Arthur Anderson; one of the five largest audit and accountancy partnerships in the world, U.S enacted the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2002; France regulated the financial security law of 2003, as many other countries developed a set of regulations in the aftermath of huge corporate scandals. In Addition, the integration and globalization of financial markets also has given significance and highlighted the importance of CG as claimed by Srinivasan & Srinivasan (2011). Consequently, many studies on the CG have justified their argument on the existence of information asymmetry between managers and stockholders of the company based on the agency theory, which is defined as a contract under which one party (the principal) delegates another party (agent) to perform some services on their behalf
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 Sarbanes-Oxley is a U.S. federal law that has generated much controversy, and involved the response to the financial scandals of some large corporations such as Enron, Tyco International, WorldCom and Peregrine Systems. These scandals brought down the public confidence in auditing and accounting firms. The law is named after Senator Paul Sarbanes Democratic Party and GOP Congressman Michael G. Oxley. It was passed by large majorities in both Congress and the Senate and covers and sets new performance standards for boards of directors and managers of companies and accounting mechanisms of all publicly traded companies in America. It also introduces criminal liability for the board of directors and a requirement by
This memorandum discusses a brief history of Pat, his wrongdoings and related action, and the response by the related law enforcement agencies.
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.
Prior to the advent of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, referred to herein as “SOX,” the board of directors’ pivotal role was to advise senior leaders on the organization’s strategy, business model, and succession planning (Larcker, 2011, p. 3). Additionally, the board had the responsibility for risk management identification and risk mitigation oversight, determining executive benefits, and approval of significant acquisitions (Larcker, 2011, p. 3). Furthermore, for many public organizations, audit committees existed before SOX and provided oversight of internal processes and controls. Melissa Maleske (2012) advised that the roles and responsibilities of the board were viewed “…from a perspective that the board serves management” (p. 2). In contrast, Maleske (2012) noted that SOX regulations altered the landscape “…to a perspective that management is working for the board” (p. 2). SOX expanded not only the duties of the board and the audit committee, but also the authority of these bodies (Maleske, 2012, p. 2).
White collar crime has been around for ages. Today more and more news stories can be found where the elite, the top executives of fortune 500 companies, are being prosecuted for participating in illegal activities. It was hoped that the passing of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2001 after the Enron debacle would reduce the amount of illegal acts being committed in corporate America. The Sarbanes Oxley act makes executives personally responsible for their activities requiring top management to sign off on financial statements stating they are true and accurate and these executives can face jail time for committing fraudulent acts. Unfortunately, immorality in business is still running rampant. One illegal practice we see happening in
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.
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 conduct themselves in a manner that promotes public trust. Through defining a code of ethics, organizations can follow, the market becomes fair for investors to have confidence in the integrity of the disclosures and financial reports given to them. The code of ethics includes the promotion of honest and ethical conduct. This code requires 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 Congress signed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act into law in response to the public demand for reform. Even though there is some criticism of it, the act still stands to prevent and punish corporate fraud and malpractice.
Numerous scandals broke out in the early 2000s, losing the trust of investors in the public
According to the textbook, Sarbanes-Oxley Act is a federal statute enacted by Congress to improve corporate governance (Cheeseman, H. R., p.344). It was passed by congress that sets policy and regulates the accounting practices of U.S corporations.
Foremost, a company hires an auditor to preform an audit. He/she is paid $1,000,000 dollars for their services. In addition, the company is willing to pay the auditor an additional $700,000 for providing more services. This additional pay may stem from the auditor’s friendly relationship with the company’s management. This scenario could potentially cause a huge ethical dilemma for the auditor. Given the friendship between the two parties, the auditor could very well be tempted to “cook the books” by management. This could very well happen if the company needs to improve their company’s earnings. Friendship combined with lofty pay could easily persuade the auditor into disregarding the GAAP as well as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Furthermore, the nature of the job is highly unethical. As it violates several provisions of the aforementioned Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The auditor, management, and the top executives of the company will all be affected by this ethical dilemma.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was created in reaction to the increasing number of accounting fraud scandals in the late nineties and early 2000 's. One example of an accounting scandal that occurred was Enron. Andrew Fastow, the CFO at the time, created phony partnerships and companies, keeping separate books for these companies. He convinced some of the major banks to invest in these companies. The Vice-President at the time, Sharon Watkins, discovered these fraudulent accounting treatments, effectively becoming a whistleblower. The fraud at Enron also caused the end of the accounting firm Arthur Anderson, which was the firm that audited the financial statements of Enron. Sarbanes-Oxley no longer allows top executives to place blame on other employees, as they are now required to sign-off on all financial statements, meaning the executives agree with all accounting treatments.
The audit world was transformed more than ten years ago due to a series of accounting scandals. This change took place when The Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, otherwise known as SOX, was passed affecting not only business entities but also the firms that audit those companies (Thomas). One of the companies whose fraud was unmasked by the passage of SOX was HealthSouth Corporation. A company in the healthcare industry who had overstated about $2.7 billion dollars in earnings since 1996. The company’s CEO, Richard Scrushy, was the first to be tried under SOX for misrepresenting and signing off on misleading financial statements(Accounting Fraud at HealthSouth).
A company discloses their financial reporting and other financial information with their shareholders, creditors, financial analysts, and employees. The creditability of a company’s financial information hinges on its internal control of effectively adhering to governing regulations. According to Epstein (2014) the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was established to eradicate companies from submitting fraudulent financial reporting. “The Sarbanes-Oxley Act changes management’s responsibility for financial reporting significantly. The act requires that top mangers personally certify the accuracy of financial reports” Blokhin (2018). This improves the quality of financial information being presented permitting decision makers the ability to have
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