spring.net — live bbs — text/plain
The SpringPolitics › topic 31

Sarbox or Sarbanes Oxley - making corporations responsible for accouting

topic 31 · 0 responses
~terry Thu, Jul 31, 2003 (14:53) seed
One for-instance: If a company truck delivering toxic chemicals springs a leak, operations employees might have to speed that news up the chain of command to the comptroller so that an 8-K form could be filed. To grease the wheels, companies will need to tool up their reporting software and train line managers to communicate faster, Fumo says. The act also has surprises in unexpected areas, things like compensation, executive relocation, and overseas operations. And contrary to popular belief, private companies aren't entirely immune to the provisions of Sarbox, as some finance managers have come to refer to the law. Indeed, if you thought the provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley only concerned corporate finance, independent auditing, and equity research, you've missed the fine print. Sarbox also covers such disparate corporate functions as information technology, human resources, compensation, and environmental compliance. Why? Because these areas � and a host of others � affect company financials. In fact, after the SEC gets finished implementing the provisions of the bill, Sarbanes-Oxley might be a whole lot more far-ranging than its proper title suggests. That moniker? "Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act." politics conference Main Menu
log in or sign up to reply to this thread.