Free Essay

Sox Affect of Dcaa

In: Business and Management

Submitted By taylorch
Words 1941
Pages 8
SOX effect on DCAA
Christy Taylor
AC 503
July 11, 2011

SOX effect on DCAA The public looks to financial documents for evidence on the success of companies and a basis for investing decisions. Investors and banks rely upon these documents to provide accurate information for the decision-making process. The accountants and auditors that create and verify the accuracy of the information within these documents hold the trust of those who rely on accurate financial information. Once the trust is broken, it can take time to rebuild. Unfortunately, the publics’ trust in the accounting profession was shaken with several large scandals such as Enron and WorldCom, and they are still working toward repairing the damage. Investors lost faith and hesitated to invest money, which can hurt the economy. In answer to this developing crisis of faith, President Bush signed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 2010). This act has far reaching effects on every aspect of the accounting and business world. It placed into effect guidelines and repercussions in accounting to help prevent future fraud. Those standards that were already in place, adapted to SOX and changed to meet the more stringent requirements. One such example is Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) standards. Like all agencies, DCAA had to adapt to the new requirements of SOX, but the changes needed to first be defined.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX), not only provides guidelines for the accounting industry but also a means of enforcement. These laws and regulations apply to all publicly traded companies. The purpose of SOX is to create a universal standard that can be upheld in order to increase the confidence the public has in financial statements. The act is broken down into 11 sections, of which there are six main areas. It is important to understand the sections so as to determine what impact they have on already established standards. Section 302 states that all signers to the financial documents have reviewed the document for accuracy and verified there are no misstatements or omissions. In addition, any issues found regarding the internal controls are also listed on the financial document (Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 2004). This provision assigns responsibility for accuracy back onto the managers and directors. They now share responsibility for accuracy with the auditors and have a vested interest in avoiding and detecting fraud. Prior to this, many managers would sign documents without reviewing them for accuracy. This provides a redundant check for accuracy.
Section 404 elaborates on Section 302 regarding internal controls. While 302 specifically mention deficiencies in internal controls, Section 404 requires details of internal controls to be provided in companies’ annual report. Therefore, interested parties can assess for themselves the effectiveness of the internal controls. Section 401 states that all financial statements must be accurate and transparent (Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 2004). Documents should be easily read and interpreted by someone who is willing to take the time to read and understand the financial statements. Transactions and liabilities must be categorized correctly to properly display the company’s financial standing. This also applies to recording of value of assets and inventory. If the financial statements are misleading in content, they are not considered transparent.
Section 401 goes along with Section 409, which states that companies must disclose any material changes in their finances. These disclosures must be easily understood and supported with additional documentation (2004). This specifically refers to changes that occurred after the financial statements were completed but do impact the financial status of the company. This could be a positive or negative impact. The important part is that information must be available to be read and understood by interested parties in order to avoid misinformation. Also, investors must have the most current and reliable information regarding the company’s finances to make informed decisions. Section 406 is unique since it requires that all publicly held companies have an established code of ethics. Previously, individual ethics were relied upon for integrity and honesty; companies were not required to dictate a universal ethics system. SOX now requires that an official code of ethics to be in place. Each company creates their code of ethics and is responsible for maintaining it. The code of ethics covers behavior and repercussions for those who violate the code. Ethical behavior for businesses increases the public’s trust in the financial statements and the accountants responsible for them. Section 802 is one of the most important sections of SOX. It is this section that provides the penalties attached to fraud, including the altering of work papers. Without repercussions, the SOX would not be enforceable. SOX provided government regulation to make sure all minimum standards are followed. If companies violate any aspect of SOX then the Securities Exchange Commission can enforce penalties and fines upon the guilty.
In some cases, the standards outlined by SOX were already in place, and there was not much change that needed to occur. One example of this was in the Defense Contract Auditing Agency (DCAA). This agency already closely regulated companies that dealt with government contracts, but with SOX there were additional considerations and accommodations that needed to be made.
Defense Contract Audit Agency The Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) was created by the Department of Defense (DOD) to make a uniformed auditing standard for government contractor companies. Prior to the establishment of DCAA, each branch of the military had different contracting standards. This made it easy for mistakes to happen or improper pricing, such as the $100 hammer. DCAA was established in 1965 to provide accounting and financial advisory services for government contract agencies to ensure that taxpayer dollars were spent in a fair manner without waste (Defense Contract Audit Agency, 2011). DCAA was successful in DOD’s goal of creating a way to maximize effort and minimize waste of resources. In 2010, DCAA was responsible for auditing over $34 billion of costs and over $185 billion on pricing proposals (Defense Contract Audit Agency, 2011). The audit saved almost three billion dollars due to audit findings. The cost for running DCAA is about $530 million, which is worth the expenditure when the savings to taxpayers is about five times the expense. While DCAA has shown in numbers how effective it can be, the addition of SOX is believed to improve the effectiveness and reliability of the audits. There is debate whether confidentiality aspects of SOX hinders or helps with the DCAA audits.
Effect of SOX on DCAA There are many government-contracting companies and not all of them are publicly held. In smaller, privately owned companies, DCAA compliance is the only concern. However, in cases where the government contracting company is a publicly held entity, such as Lockheed Martin, SOX also applies. The biggest concern regarding how SOX and DCAA work together is in the definition of confidentiality of information. SOX established the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) to oversee audits, collect documentation and share it with the appropriate governmental agencies without it affecting the confidentiality of the information. The interesting aspect to this is that DCAA is not one of the authorized agencies (BNA, Inc, 2003). DCAA did issue a statement that said SOX does not directly impact DCAA. However, DCAA relies on information generated by management and their financial reporting in order to conduct an audit. SOX does effect these aspects and the information generated by SOX may also apply to these areas.
Initially, when reviewing the internal controls, Securities and Exchange Commission stated that the information must be disclosed to the auditors, but it does not necessarily need to be shared with the public depending on its impact. Since SEC does not recognize DCAA as one of the governmental agencies that information can be shared without confidentiality being broken, then DCAA may not be privy to these disclosures. The SEC does encourage DCAA to seek and request these disclosures (BNA, Inc, 2003). The DCAA guidelines state that having access to this information can help make the company a minimum risk category. If the company refuses access, DCAA will classify the company at maximum risk and perform a more in-depth audit. Therefore, this encourages the company to be forthright with any information.
There is nothing in SOX that directly refers to DCAA or expands its current access to information. DCAA has issued guidance, instructing auditors to review the supporting documentation regarding the companies’ compliance with SOX. DCAA auditors must follow the agency policy of relying on the work of others for determining compliance. Therefore, the work generated by the SOX auditors can be shared as it applies to DCAA compliance (Wall, 2006). According to DCAA regulations, this only applies when individuals who are qualified and competent performed the work. In addition, the working papers must support the conclusions (2006). Therefore, the supporting documents and work papers must show competence and thoroughness of the auditors.
Although there is some debate regarding the confidentiality of papers and whether DCAA auditors can request to look at SOX audit papers, each case should be determined on an individual basis. This is supported by DCAA protocol that states that other information may be used if there is supporting documentation and the auditor who compiled the information is competent. In conclusion, SOX is still beneficial addition to the DCAA compliance since a properly conducted SOX audit can mean a reduced audit effort by DCAA auditors. In order to help streamline the auditing effort there are several recommendations. The first recommendation is that anytime an audit is performed on a company the purpose and scope of the audit should be clearly detailed to all parties so the expectations are clear. Secondly, since there is some debate over the documentation that needs to be disclosed to DCAA auditors versus SOX auditors, a list of requested items should be issued in advance. This way documents may be collected and prepared. Any issues can be addressed prior to the audit. Finally, Once DCAA has outlined the purpose and scope of the audit, the company can decide to limit access to only the documents that are related to the scope of the audit.
DCAA and SOX can compliment each other. The cost of complying with SOX is not as high as many other companies, since many of the requirements were already in place by DCAA. SOX developed a segregation and expansion of duties. This allows auditors to focus more fully on their area of concern and rely on each other to produce accurate documents that may be used to support both audits.

BNA, Inc. (2003). Federal Contracts. “Sarbanes-Oxley Act.” Retrieved from 11.2003-Fed_Contracts-Manos.pdf
Defense Contract Audit Agency. (2011). “DCAA.” Retrieved from
McKenna Long & Aldridge. (2009). “Government Contracts Advisory”. Retrieved from

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. (2004). “The Sarbanes-Oxley Act.” Retrieved from
The Bureau of National Affairs. (2003). Federal Contracts Report. Retrieved from 11.2003-Fed_Contracts-Manos.pdf.
Thompson, M. & Zimmerman, S. (2006). Contract Management. “Sox compliance: DCAA disclosure and cost- control strategies.” Retrieved from
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. (2010). The laws that govern securities industry. Retrieved from
Wall, D. (2006). Institute of Management Accountants: Sarbanes-Oxley Act the DCAA perspective. Retrieved from

Similar Documents

Free Essay

Dell Pre and Post Sox provide reliable and accurate information for investors. The Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 was a large stepping stone in that movement and has impacted many public companies. SOX requires public companies registered with the Securities Exchange Commission to evaluate the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting and disclose this information in its financial statements. For instance, Dell Inc., a large multinational IT corporation, was one of the many large corporations affected by the implications of SOX. First, Section 404 of SOX requires Dell’s management, under the supervision of the CEO and CFO, to establish and maintain adequate internal control in accordance with the rules defined in the Securities Exchange Act. In addition to establishing the controls, they are also required to evaluate the effectiveness of the controls against the criteria established in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by COSO. Second, Section 409 of SOX requires management to disclose material changes in internal control, and the results or potential effects of those changes. Finally, Section 404 of SOX requires Dell’s auditing firm to evaluate management’s assessment of Dell’s internal control and to issue an opinion on the quality and accuracy of the assessment. All in all, SOX raised corporate responsibility to assess and improve internal control over financial reporting. It also increased the responsibility of accounting firms by expanding audits......

Words: 1526 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Adoption of Sox

...Adoption of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 as an Important Piece of Legislation Professor Ronald Pereira Strayer University BUS 309 Ethics June 12, 2011 1. Analyze the new or enhanced standards for all U.S. public company boards, management, and public accounting firms that the SOX required. The Sarbanes Oxley Act, commonly known as SOX, came into existence in 2002, named after Senator Paul Sarbanes and Representative Michael Oxley, in response to the ever increasing instances of financial scandals plaguing publically traded United States-based companies. The purpose of the Act is to “protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures made pursuant to the securities laws." ( Specifically, the act requires a heightened level of accountability from Chief Executive Officers, Chief Financial Officers, the implementation of a Board of Directors, stricter fines and jail time for violations or fraud, closely monitored disclosure of financial documents and data, and the need for independent external auditing. 2. Examine why the new enhanced standards are necessary. The basic concept of why the new enhanced standards are necessary is to hold companies and their executives accountable for their actions and the data they present to investors and securities agencies. The Act specifically addresses 11 areas for control, which are Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB); Auditor Independence; Corporate......

Words: 965 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Sox of 2002

...Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) of 2002 Topics Covered: How SOX affects the following: CEO’s and CFO’s of Public Companies Outside Independent Audit Firms SOX section 404 on Internal Control The Main Advantages and Disadvantages of SOX Executive Summary The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) was intended to create more transparency in financial reporting and to combat the perceived inflation of CEO compensation. To do this, the act required that a board of directors be financially independent from the CEO and have no familial ties. It also required the CEO and CFO to personally sign all quarterly and annual reports submitted to the SEC and provided for criminal penalties if this was not done. Our research indicates that Sarbanes-Oxley has created more transparency in the system, but it has actually had the opposite effect than was intended with regards to CEO compensation. The research indicates that CEO compensation has increased for many companies post-Sarbanes-Oxley. Due in large part to the Enron scandal, SOX needed to address outside independent audit firms to improve the accuracy of financial reports disclosed by publicly traded companies. These financial reports are used by investors, bankers and interested consumers to determine how well an organization is doing and provide investors with vital information about a company’s performance. This paper will discuss the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and how the SOX law affects outside independent audit firms. Next we......

Words: 4177 - Pages: 17

Free Essay

Law Sox

... Sarbanes-Oxley Act (Sox Act) 2002 Student’s Name Institutional attachment The Sarbanes Oxley [sox] Act of 2002 made a significant move in the administrative environment of publically exchanged organizations. Because of a becoming number of corporate misrepresentation outrages, for example, Enron and Tyco universal, the united state congress passed the law in a push to decrease the likelihood of future extortion. The law requires more compressive monetary reporting necessities and upholds stricter punishments on the individuals who occupied with plans to swindle financial specialists. Then again, there are numerous adversaries to the law who accept the regulations are unnecessary and excessively excessive for generally organizations. With the end goal of this paper, I will dissect an article title "The Law change corporate" by Michael peregrine, which traces the some significant impacts of the law. The creator is a corporate legal counselor and has abnormal state of experience dealing with agreeability issues with open organizations. Generally, Michael accepts that SOX has been very fruitful. The most vital impact clarified in this article is focused on the structure of corporate legislation. He expressed that SOX seized the focused of corporate course from the corner of the workplace and returned it the meeting room, where it had a place. Besides the law empowered the recognizable proof of the best practices to guide meeting room conduct....

Words: 775 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Changes to Sox

...Possible Changes to SOX Although SOX has improved firms’ financial reporting, additional modifications could make SOX more effective. Adjustments could be made that will encourage better composition and performance of corporate boards, improve safeguards for whistleblowers, and enhance management accountability as well as the function of the PCAOB. Although SOX put in significant provisions to improve corporate governance, which included the establishment of audit committees that had independent directors, there is room for improvement. One potential measure is to set term limits for directors, which would ensure that fresh eyes are reviewing business practices . Another measure is to limit the number of public company boards an individual could serve on, which would ensure that board members are not focusing on too many different companies. It is possible that these recommendations will constitute regulatory overreach. At minimum there could be measures that require continuing education for board members so that they remain current in their knowledge of best corporate practices. Another weakness of the bill is that it does not provide protection for auditors who want to report fraud but worry about potential retaliation. Legislation could be created, requiring that no auditors can be fired unless a super majority of the shareholders approves it or the SEC allows it (Livingstone, 2003). In addition, the law already requires that a confidential reporting system is......

Words: 485 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Is Sox Working?

...Shane Connolly Journal Article ACT 301 December 17, 2014 Is The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Working? This article written by Stephen D. Willits and Curtis Nicholls was printed in the CPA journal in April of this year. To give a brief history of SOX after the corporate fraud in the early 2000’s the SEC felt pressure to respond. Their response to the fraud committed my giant corporations such as Enron and WorldCom was the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The main point of SOX was to try to limit or ideally eliminate corporate fraud by cracking down on self-regulating audit. The answer as to whether SOX is working or not is not as simple as yes or no. Some say that the scope of SOX was too wide while others maintain that it did not go far enough. The basis for the success of SOX comes down to cost versus benefit. Section 404 of SOX seems to have drawn the greatest criticism. Section 404 states that companies must issue reports concerning the internal control structure and the procedures for financial reporting. The purpose of this section was assessing the internal control and procedures of any company. The problem was the cost. Shortly after SOX was enacted companies (depending on size) report spending between 4 and 10 million dollars in order to comply with section 404. This number was expected to decrease as companies adjusted to the new laws; however there have been conflicting reports as to whether that has come to fruition. In respond to the political pressure the SEC was facing......

Words: 663 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Sox Discussion

...Auditing Principles and Procedures ACC2366 Section311 SOX Discussion Question: Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act states that senior management must certify the accuracy of the financial statements produced by that accounting firm.  How will this section of the act affect senior management’s cautiousness before signing off on the financial statements?  Do you think this mandate will encourage more ethical people in senior management roles? Why?  Which major corporation that we’ve studied recently had issues with management signing off on their financial statements?  Why did they refuse to sign off on them? Under section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act signing officers are responsible for various duties to ensure the final statements are fairly represented and not misleading to its users. Before management signs off on financial statements they have to be reviewed. They also have to ensure internal controls in place have been evaluated and effective within 90 days prior to the report being issued. According to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, “the signing officers have designed such internal controls to ensure that material information relating to the issuer and its consolidated subsidiaries is made known to such officers by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which the periodic reports are being prepared” (Sarbanes Oxley Act, 2012, s302). The act requires management to disclose these controls in their financial statements. Officers must also disclose...

Words: 462 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Sox Regulations

...The Impact of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 on Accounting and Finance Departments Danika Grace Brown Lakeland College Kellett School of Business – BlendEd BA 772 Advanced Industrial Accounting II Instructor Mary Diederich March 10, 2015 Table of Contents Abstract 2 Overview of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 3 About SOX 4 Reporting and Compliance 5 Risk Assessment and Control 6 Interview at Company X 7 Standards for Corporations and Officers 8 Auditing and Financial Reporting 9 Future Impact of SOX 10 Conclusion 11 References 13 Abstract Sarbanes-Oxley is the response from Congress in regards to the financial industry collapse that happened over a decade ago. Due to unethical reporting from corporations, Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) is a United States federal law that set new or enhanced standards for all U.S. public company boards, management and public accounting firms. As a result of SOX, top management must individually certify the accuracy of financial information. In addition, penalties for fraudulent financial activity are much more severe. Furthermore, SOX increased the oversight role of boards of directors and the independence of the outside auditors who review the accuracy of corporate financial statements. This paper will look to provide an oversight of the law and how it pertains to the standards in Accounting and Finance departments nowadays. In addition, this paper will also touch on the ongoing costs and benefits of the now......

Words: 3586 - Pages: 15

Premium Essay

Sox Anaylzation

...Group 2 Assignment: The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) & Financial Statements Accuracy University of Maryland University College Geralda Francois Courtney Holbrook Nicole Mone Walker Moyosore Bankole AMBA630 Mark Wylie August 18, 2015 Introduction The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was created after the Great Depression of the 1930’s, and given a mandate to oversee US financial markets. Since then its basic policy has been to promote transparency in corporate finance, through the full disclosure of companies’ financial performances. This allowed the SEC to maintain a strong track record of corporate financial disclosure oversight through the 1990’s, when a period of rapid stock market growth and crashes rocked the system (Introduction to SOX, n.d). During that period, companies such as Enron and Sunbeam Corporation abruptly filed for bankruptcy or devalued overnight. This occurred largely because they concealed the real state of their financial health on audit reports (Livingston, 2003, p.7). In response to these scandals the US Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). Many of the provisions in SOX give additional powers to the SEC, including jurisdiction over the new Public Accounting Oversight Board and oversight over private industry Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS). Moreover, U.S. public company CEOs and CFOs must certify the accuracy of financial......

Words: 3587 - Pages: 15

Premium Essay

Sox Act

...1. Researched instance of whistleblowing in one (1) publicly traded company. Playboy Enterprises Inc. previous Controller Catherine Zulfer occupation was ended since she protested a shameful (illegal) guideline by Playboy's CFO to collect $1 million in optional rewards for officials when those rewards had not been endorsed by Playboy's Board. A jury concurred and found that Playboy unlawfully struck back against Zulfer by terminating her for her secured reports under SOX furthermore fired her, violating public policy under California law. The jury recompensed $6 million in unspecified harms with no designation between the SOX claim and the California wrongful termination claim. 2. Decide whether or not the whistleblower was justified in reporting the company’s actions. Provide a rationale for your response. I believe that Ms. Catherine Zulfer, who trusted all bonuses and rewards must be affirmed by the board of directors, blew the whistle on company CFO Pachler's alleged scheme to the Securities and Exchange Commission and Playboy's investors and shareholders. Also Ms. Zulfer states in her claim that she was to a great degree worried that CFO Pachler and CEO Scott Flanders were endeavoring to viably steal, take or change over Playboy assets which she believed Pachler's solicitations was "untrustworthy to shareholders." After she reported those shames, she was on New Year's Eve 2011, a demonstration she calls only a "guise for what really was countering" against......

Words: 481 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Sox Act of 2002

...SOX Act of 2002 ACC/561 UOP SOX Act of 2002 On July 30, 2002, President Bush signed into law the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which he characterized as "the most far reaching reforms of American business practices since the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt." The Act mandated a number of reforms to enhance corporate responsibility, enhance financial disclosures and combat corporate and accounting fraud, and created the "Public Company Accounting Oversight Board," also known as the PCAOB, to oversee the activities of the auditing profession. (Securities Exchange Commission, 2014) Over the years, there have been multiple fraud cases involving businesses’ accounting practices. Some of the motives range from misleading potential investors about the company’s earning to attract more investors and get more funding from banks to corporate executives taking a little more cash home in salaries, plus avoiding taxes to increase profits. The SEC was created to enforce statutes such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and others to try to prevent the massive amount of fraud that has been on the rise. Even after all these measures have been put forward, more than half of U.S. organizations that experienced fraud in the past two years reported an increase in the number of occurrences, according to a new survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers that also found a rise in accounting fraud, bribery and corruption, with cybercrime moving to the forefront of U.S. companies’ concerns. (Cohn, 2014) One of the...

Words: 1483 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Sox Reaserch

...Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 SE584: Forensic and Business Investigations Techniques February 22, 2009 The passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) changed how accounting is practiced and how corporations handle their accounting departments, to include auditing and internal controls. Some of these changes are for better accountability and some are for governing the application of stricter rules. The accounting profession was dramatically affected by the events leading up to and after the passing of this law. In the days before SOX, there were many high valued fraudulent activities. The news was flooded with employees, managers, and executives who were committing fraud against their investors, their organizations, or both. Millions and billions of dollars were being lost. The acts that brought about SOX began many years before its inception but were especially prevalent during the dot-com boom. These company’s executives fraudulently reported increases in revenue dollars, bringing their net income up in order to keep pace with their growth projected by analysts. The collapse of these “fast and furious” companies did not mean the last of the major fraudulent activities by executives against organizations or their investors. The 1990s was a time that saw many changes affecting business. The Internet was beginning to open more to commercial use, no more was it just for academics and the government. The age of technology that had started in the 1960s truly took off.......

Words: 3558 - Pages: 15

Premium Essay

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (Sox)

...Introduction Authored in the wake of the Enron and WorldCom scandal, The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted in 2002, to keep public entities from committing fraudulent financial practices. The name Sarbanes-Oxley derives from former Senator Paul Sarbanes and former Representative Michael Oxley. “The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was signed into law by President Bush on July 30, 2002, and created a new private sector, nonprofit corporation-the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)-to oversee the financial reporting of public companies. Among other changes, SOX's sweeping reforms required that a company strengthen auditor independence; have its chief executives sign off on the financial statements; obtain an opinion about its internal control systems; and have an internal audit function that is examined by external auditors” (Grumet, 2007). Part A Audit Committees The Sarbanes-Oxley Act affects audit committees of public company boards of directors. The committee of the board of directors is directly responsible for the public company financial statements, in addition to the appointment, compensation, and oversight of the work of any registered public accounting firm employed by that issuer. In the case of misunderstanding between management team and the auditor’s regarding financial reporting, it is the audit committee’s responsibility to get everyone involved on the same page. In addition, the audit committees need to monitor all financial information......

Words: 1822 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

The Sox

...The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was the result of innumerable corporate scandals such as Enron, WorldCom and Tyco. These companies were misrepresenting their financial reporting to investors and stakeholders to make themselves look more financially stable when in reality they were not. This misrepresentation resulted in huge financial losses and the mistrust of investors in the market. In order to better control financial reporting and restore investors trust, the SOX act was passed. Sarbanes-Oxley aims to enhance corporate governance and strengthen corporate accountability. It does that by: • formalizing and strengthening internal checks and balances within corporations • instituting various new levels of control and sign-off designed to • ensure that financial reporting exercises full disclosure • Corporate governance is transacted with full transparency. (Sarbanes-Oxley Essential Information) The Sarbanes-Oxley Act implemented new standards for financial reporting accountability in a way that CEOS could not pass on the blame to others. They cannot hide behind the “I was not aware of the company’s financial issues “reason anymore. Executives are now held responsible for any financial misrepresentation in their companies’ reporting. They are also held accountable for the design and implementation of new internal control to validate their financial records. Thus, they are responsible of making sure that an internal control report as well as an internal control......

Words: 849 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

The Sox Act

...The SOX Act The SOX Act Paul Sarbanes a senator and a Representative Michael Oxley in 2002 created the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, also known as the SOX Act. These people drafted this act to protect public companies by regulating the truthfulness along with the consistency of financial accounts. The SOX Act put in place new rules and laws for corporate accountability as well as new penalties. It changed how corporate boards and executives interacted with these auditors. It eliminated the excuses from chief executive officers and chief financial officers. Instead it held them liable for the correctness of financial statements. The SOX Act specifies new financial reporting responsibilities, including accuracy regarding new in-house controls and measures designed to ensure the reliability of their financial records. The SOX Act requires financial reports to include an internal control report. It is designed to show that not only are the company's financial data correct but also the company has confidence in them because satisfactory controls are in place to protect financial data. Financial reports must contain an evaluation of the success of the internal controls. The auditing firms are required to confirm to that assessment. The auditing firm does this after reviewing controls, policies, and procedures during a Section 4040 audit, conducted along with an established financial audit. Roles that ethics plays in business today with the SOX Act......

Words: 726 - Pages: 3