SarbOx Showdown: Taking Sarbanes-Oxley to Court
Doherty, Brian, Reason
THE SARBANES-Oxley Act, passed in 2002, was billed as a way to prevent large-scale frauds like the Enron scandal. In practice, it has done more to frustrate publicly held companies with picayune restrictions on businesses' internal practices. In just its first year of operation, the law imposed $35 billion in compliance costs on American businesses. But relief may be on the horizon: In December, U.S. District Court Judge James Robertson heard arguments in a suit challenging the legitimacy of Sarbanes-Oxley's enforcement body, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB).
A pro-market research institute, the Free Enterprise Fund, and a small accounting firm, Beckstead and Watts, claim in their suit that the PCAOB violates the Constitution in several ways. First, they argue, the way the body is appointed--by all five members of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)--violates the Appointments Clause. That clause says that all "principal officers" of the government must be appointed by the president and approved by the Senate, appointed by a court, or appointed by the head of a major department.…
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Article title: SarbOx Showdown: Taking Sarbanes-Oxley to Court. Contributors: Doherty, Brian - Author. Magazine title: Reason. Volume: 38. Issue: 11 Publication date: April 2007. Page number: 8+. © 2009 Reason Foundation. COPYRIGHT 2007 Gale Group.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.