In response to:

Sarbanes-Oxley: 10 Years Later

Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Nov 11, 2012 7:02 AM
"This is the nature of SOX. It creates impossible, subjective standards that can always be contested after the fact, so that enterprising lawyers can make off like bandits while investors get left holding the bag. " Actually that's the nature of most modern federal law dealing with businesses & finance, esp. when actionable offenses under civil law are created. They create a playground & goldmine for the ruling class & well-connected lawyers, while providing little practical guidance or notice for the actual "regulated community." Bear in mind that Enron & Worldcom were headed by good pals of Bill Clinton. Enron was protected from SEC scrutiny by then Treasury Sec'y Bentsen.
ReddestNeck Wrote: Nov 11, 2012 8:27 PM
Well meaning liberals meddling where they have no knowledge. Was there any proof or even credible evidence these onerous provision for novice auditors would help?

Before talking about either the impact or the need for Sarbanes-Oxley, I think it would be helpful to briefly review what the Act covers.

Despite all the talk about transparency and disclosure, most of Sarbanes-Oxley is about the regulation of auditors, from the creation of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to requirements on auditor rotation and restrictions on the provision of non-audit services.

(Editor's Note: Remarks at the COMMIT Forum, New York, NY. October 3, 2012)

Yes, there is title 4, the one out of 11 titles, that deals directly with disclosure and perhaps the most infamous section, 404, which...