Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Also found in: Dictionary, Financial, Acronyms, Encyclopedia.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act, Pub.L. 107-204, July 30, 2002, 116 Stat. 745, July 30, 2002) was enacted by Congress in the wake of corporate and accounting scandals that led to bankruptcies, severe stock losses, and a loss of confidence in the Stock Market. The act imposes new responsibilities on corporate management and criminal sanctions on those managers who flout the law. It makes Securities fraud a serious federal crime and also increases the penalties for white-collar crimes. In addition, it creates a new oversight board for the accounting profession.

During the 1990s, the stock market rose dramatically in value, fueled by the promise of the Internet revolution as well as large corporate Mergers and Acquisitions. Several of that decade's changes produced severe consequences during the first years of the new century. The five major U.S. accounting firms developed consulting divisions that advised corporations on ways to maximize their profits. Their advice often clashed with the traditional auditing functions and standards of these accounting firms. At worst, the accounting firms forfeited their traditional oversight function and allowed or encouraged financial reporting practices that misled investors. On the corporate side, managers were expected to produce short-term gains on a quarterly basis to satisfy investment analysts who worked for stock brokerages. These analysts were sometimes encouraged and directed by management to tout the value of questionable stocks. Some corporate managers, who skirted or broke laws that mandated honest financial reporting, transformed the drive for profitability into a lust for personal fortune. The bubble burst when the Enron Corporation filed for Bankruptcy in December 2001 and the accounting firm of Arthur Andersen was convicted of Obstruction of Justice for its actions in shredding Enron-related documents. As the stock market plummeted and investor confidence waned, Congress responded. Senator Paul S. Sarbanes (D-Md.) and Representative Michael Oxley (R-Ohio) worked to enact a set of provisions that would prevent future debacles such as those that ruined Enron and Arthur Andersen. President george w. bush, after initially downplaying the need for reform, signed the bill into law on July 30, 2002.

Under the act, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has the authority to prohibit, conditionally or unconditionally, permanently or temporarily, any person who has violated laws governing the issuing of stock from acting as an officer or director of an corporation if the SEC has found that such person's conduct "demonstrates unfitness" to serve as an officer or a director. The act also imposes new disclosure requirements when companies file financial reports. Under Section 302 of the act, the SEC is required to issue a rule that mandates that the principal executive officer and the principal financial officer certify in each annual or quarterly report the accuracy of certain information. The signing officer must disclose to the auditors and audit committee any significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal controls, any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the issuer's internal controls, and any significant changes in the internal controls. Section 906 requires that the chief executive officer and chief financial officer provide written statements to be filed with each periodic report filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 certifying that the periodic report containing the financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer. A knowing violation of Section 906 is punishable by up to ten years in jail and a $1 million fine. A willful violation is punishable by up to 20 years in jail and a $5 million fine.

Section 303 prohibits any officer, director, or person acting at their direction "to fraudulently influence, coerce, manipulate, or mislead" an accountant who is conducting an audit. Under Section 304, if an issuer is required to restate its financial statements as a result of misconduct, the chief executive officer and chief financial officer must reimburse the issuer for any bonus or other incentive-based compensation paid during the twelve-month period following the improper reporting. Those officers also must pay to the company any profits realized from the sale of its securities during that twelve-month period.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act also authorizes the establishment of a Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which will oversee the accounting profession. Under Section 1 of the act, the board will have five financially experienced members who are appointed to five-year terms. Two of the members must be or have been certified public accountants, and the remaining three must not be, and must never have been, CPAs. The chair may be held by one of the CPA members, provided that he or she has not been engaged as a practicing CPA for five years. The board's members will serve on a full-time basis. Members of the board are appointed by the SEC "after consultation with" the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board and the secretary of the Treasury. No member may, concurrent with service on the Board, "share in any of the profits of, or receive payments from, a public accounting firm," other than "fixed continuing payments," such as retirement payments. The Commission may remove members "for good cause."

The Accounting Oversight Board will register accounting firms, develop auditing standards and rules of ethics for the profession, and investigate accounting firms. The board may discipline and sanction accounting firms that violate rules. It is required to "cooperate on an on-going basis" with designated professional groups of accountants and any advisory groups convened in connection with standard-setting, and although the board may, "to the extent that it determines appropriate," adopt standards proposed by those groups, it will have authority to amend, modify, repeal, and reject any standards suggested by the groups. The board must report to the SEC on its standard-setting activity on an annual basis.

Further readings

Cangemi, Michael P. 2000. Managing the Audit Function. 2d ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Monks, Robert A. G., and Nell Minow, eds. 2001. Corporate Governance. 2d ed. New York: Blackwell.

Root, Steven J. 2000. Beyond Coso: Internal Control to Enhance Corporate Governance. New York: John Wiley & Sons.


Corporate Fraud "Enron: An Investigation into Corporate Fraud" (In Focus).

West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 goes into great detail concerning auditors and a commission to oversee them.
As executive vice president chief financial officer of medical professional liability insurer FPIC Insurance Group Inc., Thorpe has been there, done that and is now advising others on how to do the same as the ground is laid for mutual insurers to comply with "best practices" sections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Public companies subject to reporting under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOA) will want to evaluate their controls in place to reasonably assure timely and accurate reporting of any changes in income taxes that may have resulted from changes in reinvestment or repatriation plans.
James Quigley, chief executive of Deloitte & Touche, argues that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 should not be diluted or amended, but its implementation could be clarified.
RIM professionals in the United States need information on two major developments in the legal domain: The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Information about HIPAA and other national standards to protect the privacy of health information can be found at the U.S.
Technology is a vital component to any organization in assisting it to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
According to a new national survey by Chicago-based accounting firm Grant Thornton, approximately 20 percent of the nonprofit organizations responding to an electronic survey have made governance changes in response to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The two most common changes: adopting or modifying conflict-of-interest or internal-control policies.
The Findlay Republican told an audience of more than 100 that renewed consumer confidence is based on true financial reporting and oversight requirements brought about by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Oxley said the limited response to the Act's 2002 restatement filing requirement for public companies demonstrated that contrary to the media's reporting, the vast majority of business professionals are honest and that Enron and WorldCom were not the tip of the iceberg for more widespread corporate abuses as some had claimed.
Examiner Guidance on the Review of Regulatory Reports, Considering the Provisions of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (as amended by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002).
The AICPA is particularly sensitive to this need as a result of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the related Securities and Exchange Commission rules that place certain new requirements on the audit committee of boards of directors.
GAO found that (1) the rule implements section 401(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and requires the disclosure of off-balance sheet arrangements, (2) the rule would require a registrant to provide an explanation of its off-balance sheet arrangements in a separately captioned subsection of the "Management's Discussion and Analysis" section of a registrant's disclosure documents, and (3) SEC complied with applicable requirements in promulgating the rule.