How To Comply With Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404

2012 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Section 404 ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley

Investor Perceptions of Government Deregulation: Evidence from Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin W Hoffman ◽  
John L. Campbell ◽  
Jason L. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Abnormal Returns ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Internal Controls ◽  
Litigation Risk ◽  
Section 404 ◽  
Fraud Risk ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Public Company

We investigate the stock market's reaction to events leading up to the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) and Public Company Accounting Oversight Board's (PCAOB) 2007 regulatory changes that reduced the scope of and documentation requirements for assessments of firms' internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR), as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The stated goal of these regulations was to reduce firms' and auditors' compliance costs with mandatory ICFR assessments, while maintaining the effectiveness of these assessments. We examine abnormal returns surrounding key dates leading to the passage of these regulations and offer two main findings. First, investors reacted negatively on key event dates, suggesting that investors viewed the regulations as likely to reduce financial reporting quality rather than to drive firm and audit efficiencies. Second, this negative market reaction is larger when ICFR effectiveness should matter most - when firms are more complex, have higher litigation risk, and greater fraud risk. In additional analysis, we find that restatements increase in the post-regulation time period, consistent with investors' concerns that the effect of the legislation would be a reduction in ICFR effectiveness. Overall, our results may imply that investors prefer stronger government regulation when it comes to the assessments of a firm's internal controls over financial reporting.

The Valuation Effect and Motivations of Voluntary Compliance with Auditor's Attestation Under Sarbanes-Oxley Act Section 404 (B)

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kareen Brown ◽  
Parunchana Pacharn ◽  
Jennifer Li ◽  
Emad Mohammad ◽  
Fayez A. Elayan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Section 404 ◽  
Voluntary Compliance ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Valuation Effect

The impact of the Sarbanes–Oxley Section 404(b) exemption on earnings informativeness

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-23
Author(s):  
Alexey Lyubimov ◽  
Larry Davis ◽  
Greg Trompeter
Keyword(s):  
Section 404 ◽  
Earnings Informativeness ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
The Impact

An exploration of the choice to comply voluntarily with SOX section 404(b)

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-110
Author(s):  
Alan Blankley ◽  
David Hurtt ◽  
Jason MacGregor
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Internal Control ◽  
Small Businesses ◽  
Small Companies ◽  
Section 404 ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Financial Perspective ◽  
The Law ◽  
Several Delays

Purpose Central to the Sarbanes–Oxley Act was a requirement that every company have an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. However, there were concerns that this requirement was overly burdensome, from a financial perspective, for small businesses. This concern promoted several delays in enforcing the law for small companies and ultimately caused congress to permanently exempt small businesses. Yet, there are some small companies that voluntarily elect to comply with the law. The purpose of this paper is to explore why these companies elect to incur these costly audits. Design/methodology/approach Using a sample of 5,834 non-accelerator US firms, this paper uses a robust logistic regression model to examine why some firms comply voluntary with SOX Section 404(b). Findings This study shows that small companies getting audits of internal controls may be doing so to restore investor confidence after reporting failures, to appear credible prior to raising funds, as a response to organizational changes, or in anticipation of being required to comply. Practical implications This study provides regulators with an improved understanding of when it is necessary to implement mandatory rather than voluntary guidance. Originality/value This study is the first to document why a client would voluntarily comply with SOX Section 404 (b).

A study of firms surrounding the threshold of Sarbanes–Oxley Section 404 Compliance

2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria E. Nondorf ◽  
Zvi Singer ◽  
Haifeng You
Keyword(s):  
Section 404 ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley

Auditor Attestation under SOX Section 404 and Earnings Informativeness

2012 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucy Huajing Chen ◽  
Jayanthi Krishnan ◽  
Heibatollah Sami ◽  
Haiyan Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Internal Control ◽  
Control Sample ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Test Sample ◽  
Section 404 ◽  
Earnings Informativeness ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Audit Reports ◽  
Section 302

SUMMARY Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires managers to assess, and their auditors to express an opinion on, the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR). Policymakers expect the ICFR audits to enhance the credibility of firms' financial statements. Prior research argues that audit characteristics that enhance the credibility of financial reporting are associated with stronger earnings-return associations. We examine whether earnings accompanied by the first-time Section 404 ICFR reports were associated with higher informativeness compared with earnings in the prior year when only financial statement audit reports were available. We conduct our analysis for a test sample of accelerated filers with clean ICFR reports and clean previous Section 302 disclosures. Using a difference-in-differences approach, we compare the change in earnings informativeness for the test sample with that for a control sample of non-accelerated filers. We find that earnings informativeness for companies with clean internal control reports was greater in the Section 404 adoption year than in the previous year, while there was no change in earnings informativeness for the non-accelerated filers. Also, there is no difference in the increase in earnings informativeness across firms with small and large compliance costs (measured by change in audit fees), suggesting that both groups benefited from the Section 404 ICFR audits.

Sarbanes Oxley Section 404 Costs of Compliance: a case study

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lineke Sneller ◽  
Henk Langendijk
Keyword(s):  
Section 404 ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley

Observed effectiveness of the COSO 2013 framework

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-45
Author(s):  
Ifeoma Udeh
Keyword(s):  
Control Systems ◽  
Internal Control ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Control Process ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Section 404 ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Material Weaknesses ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose This paper aims to examine the effectiveness of the Committee of Sponsoring Organization’s 2013 Framework, by investigating how the number of auditor-reported material weaknesses compares for Early-, Timely- and Late-adopters of the framework, and how the number of auditor-reported material weaknesses changed for Early- and Timely-adopters following their adoption of the framework. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses regression analyses based on a sample of US firms subject to Sarbanes-Oxley Act Section 404(b). Findings Timely-adopters of the 2013 Framework continued to exhibit fewer instances of auditor-reported material weaknesses than Late-adopters, even though they had a marginal increase in the number of auditor-reported material weaknesses, in the post-2013 Framework period. Practical implications The findings suggest that the effectiveness of the 2013 Framework may lie in the iterative nature of the internal control process, and as firms remedy deficiencies they or their auditors identify, they will continuously improve the effectiveness of their internal control systems. Originality/value Unlike existing literature, this paper uses data from the pre-2013 Framework, transition and post-2013 Framework periods to examine changes in the number of auditor-reported material weaknesses, thus differentiating between Early-, Timely- and Late-adopters of the 2013 Framework. It also shows the effect of adopting the 2013 Framework on the number of auditor-reported material weaknesses.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document