@Going Concern “Sarbanes-Oxley Doublespeak”
By Francine • Dec 2nd, 2009 • Category: Writing for OthersMy new post is up @Going Concern.
“A law by itself does not bring benefits. Measure the benefits of the moral and ethical behaviors the law promotes and requires, instead. Certainly, all the above requirements — except perhaps “real-time” reporting that will implemented by XBRL mandates — are now second nature to most public companies. This didn’t happen without significant cost for some and a lot of bitching. But the significant additional cost (and bitching) was the result of two separate but equal conditions:
• Many companies, even the largest and most highly regarded, were poorly run – policies, procedures and controls over external financial reporting were either very weak or non-existent.
• The audit firms used the law to gouge clients and hold them hostage to a clean audit opinion. Auditor inefficiency and higher fees were the result of a vague, incomplete law that didn’t provide the rigid rules auditors are accustomed to. They also over-tested due to legitimate fears of legal liability…”
For more of this post go here.
Francine is
Email this author | All posts by Francine
Francine McKenna (@retheauditors) has more than twenty years of experience in consulting and professional services including tenure at two Big 4 firms, both in the US and abroad. For more info, check the "About" page.
[...] other recent stories discussing my position on Sarbanes-Oxley here, here, and here. Easy AdSense by [...]
[...] In the meantime, I asked Bob Hirth (San Francisco), Executive VP, Global Internal Audit Practice for Protiviti, and Scott Gracyalny (Chicago), Managing Director, Risk Technology Services a few questions about Sarbanes-Oxley and companies’ attitudes towards risk, controls, and corporate governance. fm: What are your objectives in producing this study at this time given that the PCAOB, and perhaps SOx and Section 404, are perceived by many to be threatened by the forthcoming Supreme Court decision in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board? [...]