SOX Center

 Grilling the assembled members of the Securities and Exchange Commission about Sarbanes-Oxley, Barney Frank just took the time to note “I feel compelled by the spirit of bipartisanship to come to the defense of the Republican president and the Republican Congress that passed [Sarbanes-Oxley].”

CFO.com: SEC: No Help Needed from Congress

Roger Ehrenberg submits: I feared this day would come. And it’s here. No, not just the saber-rattling and moaning about how hedge fund and private equity-types are too rich, how hedge funds are increasing investor risks and debt buyers are accepting overly-liberal terms fueling the private equity juggernaut and the like.

But a newly-energized Democratic Congress starting the process of shaping the SEC dialogue around these and a host of other issues to flex their muscles. I’m trying to wake up and enjoy my coffee (jet lag, you know) and I have to click on a Wall Street Journal story titled (Entire) SEC Makes House Call - not the way to start a day:

WASHINGTON — In the latest sign Congress is turning a skeptical eye toward Wall Street, an influential House committee is set to hear testimony from all five commissioners of the Securities and Exchange Commission today — the first time that has happened in at least 10 years.

Yahoo.com: Congress Flexes Its Regulatory Muscles

Two separate oversight bodies responsible for financial reporting and auditing rules under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX)–the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Public Company Accounting Oversight Board–took steps in late May to streamline and clarify the act’s requirements.

On May 23, the SEC approved new guidelines for interpreting section 404 of SOX, instructing companies to focus their controls on those issues that present the greatest risk of affecting their financial reporting. According to the SEC, those changes will allow companies to eliminate unnecessary controls while tailoring their efforts.

On May 24, the Accounting Oversight Board, which reports to the SEC, approved a new standard for outside auditors that mirrors the SEC guidance approved the day before. The new framework, known as Auditing Standard No. 5, directs these outside firms to take a risk-based approach in determining what aspects of a business must be included in their audits. The new standard must now go to the SEC for final approval.

CRN.com: SOX Appeal

Almost three-quarters of the chief financial officers in the US believe that Sarbanes-Oxley should be “repealed or reformed” as the costs of the 2002 compliance law have outweighed the benefits, according to a survey.

The findings underscore the scale of frustration over the costs associated with implementing “Sarbox”, even as regulators said that costs were expected to fall as new guidelines for the law were finalised.

In a survey of 484 chief financial officers by Duke University and CFO Magazine, almost 70 per cent said the costs of adhering to Sarbox requirements - principally its section 404 provisions on checking internal controls - “greatly outweigh its benefits”.

A total of 35 per cent said repeal or reform of the law was “badly needed”, although no distinction was made in the survey questions between repeal or reform.

Most business groups and US law makers believe the law does not need to be repealed, although a majority believe that reform of the way it is implemented is needed.

Such reform is already being carried out. The Securities and Exchange Commission has just provided executives with new guidance on Sarbox implementation.

The Australian: CFOs call for Sarbanes repeal

With the SEC holding to its Dec. 15 deadline for compliance, companies will be scrambling.

Time’s up!

That’s the message for small public companies from the Securities and Exchange Commission, which met recently to give final approval to new guidelines and amendments to the Sarbanes-Oxley corporate reform law.

The five-member commission didn’t include a hoped-for extension of the Dec. 15 deadline for small public companies to comply with provisions that critics say are too costly and time-consuming. That means small public companies will have to follow the complex Sarbanes-Oxley rules, which require an annual evaluation of the effectiveness of internal controls, for fiscal years that end after that date.

“We feel at this point it’s full throttle ahead to get us fully compliant by the end of the year,” said Wayne Lipschitz, chief financial officer and vice president of finance for Brentwood-based Grill Concepts Inc., which owns and manages the Daily Grill and Grill on the Alley restaurants.

Small public companies are defined as those whose market value — the price of their stock multiplied by the number of their shares outstanding — is less than $75 million. Grill Concepts has a market value of about $45 million.

latimes.com: Sarbanes-Oxley: No more delays

Senators John Kerry (D- Mass.) and Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) outlined specific steps the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) should take to provide more time and assistance to small public companies to comply with Sarbanes Oxley internal control regulations. Kerry and Snowe, as Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, have been closely following the impact of Sarbanes Oxley compliance on small public companies worth less than $75 million.

“Small public companies still face higher costs than large firms and deserve more time to comply with the recent changes to Sarbanes-Oxley. The regulations issued by the SEC last month are an important step, but I again strongly urge the SEC to give small public companies additional time to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley and to find additional ways to reduce their regulatory burden” said Kerry.

Yahoo: Kerry, Snowe Call on SEC to Give Small Firms More Time, Assistance to Comply With Sarbanes Oxley

Securities and Exchange Commission internal control reporting requirements because smaller banks are already required to report to their bank regulators.

Testifying before the House Small Business Committee, Diane Casey-Landry, ACB president and CEO, said: “Community banks are part of a highly regulated industry subject to alternative requirements, heightening the need for relief from the unnecessary and duplicative burdens they face.” ACB was the only banking group to be invited to testify.

Casey-Landry explained that banks have 11 years of experience in filing internal control reports with their primary regulator and the FDIC, but now face the additional burden of costs and a second layer of internal control financial reporting required by section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. “No other publicly traded company is subjected to the same scrutiny as a publicly trade bank,” she declared.

Yahoo News: ACB Calls for Exemption of Community Banks From Requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley Act

CCH principal analyst and leading author on securities law, Jim Hamilton, JD, LLM, has released a white paper on the long-awaited Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) issuances on internal controls over financial reporting under section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
CCH, a leading provider of securities law information, is part of Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.

Reporting on the adequacy of internal controls was a significant element of the corporate reforms embodied in the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation. Hamilton can explain and comment on the new regulations, including:

• Why regulators felt a new approach was necessary;
• The broad principles behind the guidance; and
• What the new issuances mean in practice for auditors.

“The issuances emphasize a ‘principles-based’ and risk-based approach,” said Hamilton. “This allows for greater discretion and judgment in assessing the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting.”

Yahoo!Finance: New CCH White Paper Covers SEC, PCAOB Internal Controls Guidance

When the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission moved last week to relax a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, it signalled the end to what could be called the Great Audit War.

Ever since U.S. lawmakers passed the corporate reforms in 2002, legal and financial executives have been waging a behind-the-scenes war with external auditors over the staggering costs and management burden stemming from what surely has been the largest corporate list-making exercise in history.

The culprit is a four paragraph passage in the now infamous Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley which requires thousands of U.S. and about 200 Canadian companies listed on American stock exchanges to “review and assess” the controls they have in place to detect financial reporting errors or fraud. The kicker is a requirement that outside auditors test and deliver an annual opinion about the effectiveness of the corporate safeguards.

With no guidance from the SEC about how to arrive at the annual opinion, the accounting police went, well, berserk demanding exhaustive tests and reports so auditors wouldn’t be liable if financial shenanigans were exposed.

globeinvestor: Bid adieu to the Great Audit War

U.S. securities regulators will vote on tweaks to the controversial Sarbanes-Oxley law on Wednesday, finalizing changes initially approved in April amid continuing complaints from businesses about the law’s unpopular accounting provision.

At issue is Section 404 of the law, which was passed in 2002 following scandals at Enron and other companies. The section requires companies to monitor their internal controls over financial reporting, as well as to test their controls. The aim is to ensure accurate financial statements and to catch fraud.

The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board have been under pressure from Congress and businesses to adjust Section 404, which is often criticized as expensive and time-consuming.

MarketWatch: SEC to finalize Sarbanes-Oxley tweaks