In his ‘Remarks on The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002: Ten Years Later’ at NYU Stern School of Management Roundtable in September 2012*, Steven B. Harris, PCAOB Board Member maintained that the Act met its stated purpose which is "to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures." Everybody however is not so happy.
Critically examine the costs and benefits of the ACT and its impact on the investing public and the business community over the past 10 years. Provide links to any articles you consult.
Your submission should be 2 to 3 pages in length (double spaced, Times New Roman 12 or Arial 10 Font).
Question
Solution Preview
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.
While the intentions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act are clear, its actual effects continue to be debated not only in the media, but in academia as well. There is no consensus regarding whether or not SOX has been detrimental or beneficial. Critics of the Act assert that it has caused negative effects such as increasing auditing costs, and forcing some firms out of the stock market. However, proponents of the Act argue that it has indeed increased transparency, and that there has not been any negative effect on listing of new firms. This paper examines the costs and benefits of SOX and its impact on the investing public and the business community over the past 10 years...
Return to homework library