Skip to main content

Sarbanes-Oxley - New Developments

There are a number of significant new developments in the world of Sarbanes-Oxley. First and most important is litigation: Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which seeks to have Sarbanes-Oxley ruled unconstitutional.

I'm a long way from a constitutional scholar, but it seems to me that the Free Enterprise Fund is making an excellent case. They make several points in their case, including that the PCAOB can levy fees and fines on its own - which is a power traditionally reserved for the legislature. As an example, the IRS - which many of us would argue is insanely powerful - can't raise taxes - Congress must legislate a tax increase. PCAOB can raise fees on all public companies at will.

This is course will take years to work through the courts - but may prove to be the fatal shot.

A more near term change comes from the Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, which points out that Sarbox has imposed massive costs on the economy, and a regulatory regime so hostile that foreign companies, which used to visit the previously friendly American capital markets, have decided to raise capital elsewhere. The notable statistic is that of the ten largest public offerings in 2006, none occurred in the U.S.

This leads to unusual bipartisan support, as Democrats like Senator Chuck Schumer see the incredible tax revenue stemming from Wall Street diminishing in the future join conservatives who favor more lassiv-faire markets. While not in the first hundred hour program championed by House Democrats, legislation to amend the well-intentioned but economically poisonous Sarbanes-Oxley legislation.

Finally, the SEC is continuing to postpone Section 404 requirements on smaller capitalization companies - in recognition of the shocking cost to create mounds of paper to satisfy a "standard" that was developed before the widespread adoption of personal computers, networks and the Internet. This documentation requirement provides virtually no value to anyone, does little or nothing to prevent fraud, and imposes an ongoing maintenance cost. In a zany feat of logic failure, the SEC concludes that small companies can't cost justify it - but that it is important for larger companies - where costs routinely exceed $10 million of hard-earned shareholders' money per year - should continue compliance.

Hope for the litigation; write your Congressman for the legislation.


Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: What Matters Now by Gary Hamel

Interview of Eric Schmidt by Gary Hamel at the MLab dinner tonight. Google's Marissa Mayer and Hal Varian also joined the open dialog about Google's culture and management style, from chaos to arrogance. The video just went up on YouTube. It's quite entertaining. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)Cover of The Future of ManagementMy list of must-read business writers continues to expand.Gary Hamel, however, author of What Matters Now, with the very long subtitle of How to Win in a World of Relentless Change, Ferocious Competition, and Unstoppable Innovation, has been on the list for quite some time.Continuing his thesis on the need for a new approach to management introduced in his prior book The Future of Management, Hamel calls for a complete rethinking of how enterprises are run.

Fundamental to his recommendation is that the practice of management is ossified in a command and control system that is now generations old and needs to be replaced with something that reflects an educat…

Book Review- Stretch by Scott Sonenshein

Have you ever watched, or been involved in, a business failure, where, despite the best efforts of hardworking people, the business doesn’t survive? Scott Sonenshein lived through it, as he describes in the Introduction to his engrossing book Stretch.  (In some books, the reader can skip the intro- not this one; the introduction is a must-read part of the book.) He was hired by start-up Vividence in Silicon Valley at the very apex of the tech boom.  Despite prestige VC backers, top-tier hires and $50 million, Vividence didn’t make it. As his career continued, that experience led to an interest in why some well-funded operations don’t succeed, while other, more resource constrained, do. Peter Senge wrote about reinforcing cycles as part of his book The Fifth Discipline, which I consider one of the finest business books ever penned. In it, Senge describes the downward cycle that some companies fall into, and why it is so difficult to reverse. Sonenshein explores those cycles from diffe…

Tax Inversions

A savvy businessman once told me “it’s important to know what problem you are trying to solve”.
Let’s ignore for the moment whether or not Treasury or the IRS had the power to change the rules on so-called tax inversions without Congressional action. (The power they said they didn’t have only a few months ago.)
Rather, let’s focus on what problem we are trying to solve. That is, why is the greatest country on earth chasing companies away? Shouldn’t the U.S. be the place that companies want to locate their headquarters?
Imagine this: the U.S. legal structure and tax regime was so attractive that Mercedes, Toyota, Astra Zeneca, Samsung, Total, Singapore Air, Banco Santander, Petrobras, Fujitsu, Nokia, SAP, Audi, Tata Group, Lenovo, Pirelli, Deutsche Bank, Honda, LG, Hyundai, Roche, Credit Suisse, Four Seasons, Siemens, Phillips, Bridgestone, Anglo-America, DeBeers, Volkswagen, Canon,  L’OrĂ©al, Swatch, Armani, LVMH, Toshiba, H&M, Mahindra, Aldi, Kubota, Onex, Ducati, Pemex, Saudi-Ara…