This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Supreme Court Finds Audit Board Violates Constitution, Puts SarbOx In Question
Just headlines: "the audit board violates constitution, supreme court finds." As Reuters explains: "At stake in the case is how corporate America is audited and a key provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley corporate reform law adopted in 2002 in response to the Enron and WorldCom accounting scandals. If the Supreme Court strikes down the board, the ruling will put pressure on Congress to revisit the law, opening it up for potential changes in the reporting duties of companies." Then again, who even pretends we have remotely credible filings anymore? With FASB indefinitely locked in the basement and companies allowed to report their numbers on a mark-to-unicorn basis, it is all lies anyway.
»
- 3531 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Fastow for SecTreas!
Hurry please. The BIS is starting to publish the truth.
OT: Someone's having fun with gold today.
while on Sarbox
http://www.corporatesecuritieslawblog.com/securities-litigation-arizona-...
are bank ceo's subject to sarbox, or did they buy their way out of that too?
They did stand up for Gun Rights and the Constitution.
"mark-to-unicorn" LOL
With a 5-4 vote, they stood up for gun rights saying the Second Amendment applies to states and localities.
Seriously??? 4 Justices voted against the Bill of Rights applying to the states?
Supremes rule that business methods can be patented
Algos now have legal standing...
I implemented SOX404 a/k/a SarbOx at a publicly traded company. I can tell you first hand it is nothing but a Kabuki dance. The corporate directors/management are untrustworthy, but SOX doesn't prevent that. Nothing except a buyer's revolt followed by shareholder activism would help.
Demonstrating how the Constitution compares to Charmin... it does leave those small pieces left clinging to your ass! Only makes sense as to why they hate it with a passion.
While my opinion is that SOX is ultimately worthless. Justice would rule in favor of companies, don't want to hurt their feelings now that they are declared individuals.
Just like the SEC, SarbOx is only present to make market participants feel safe when they should be terrified.
People need to shake this belief that corruption is not common place in this market. The market is full of bribes, violence, and theft.
Its not that difficult to show the banks (Citi, JPMorgan, GS) as loan sharks and institutions for forgery.
"Forgery - the process of making, adapting, or imitating objects, statistics, or documents with the intent to deceive," -wiki
I could easily make the arguement that creating CDO's fits the above definition perfectly. Better yet, go look at the definition of a loan shark and tell me that banks engaged in sub-prime lending aren't loan sharks.
It is just one more step to legalizing the corruption and greed found in the upper echelons of corporate America. Saves them a significant amount of money otherwise spent on bribes and armies of corporate lawyers.
Just to make it clear to my decidecly non-legal mind - does this mean that The Lawyer's Full Employment Act of 2002 is at least partially repealed? Or not?
The only thing that was ruled unconstitutional was the way PCAOB board members were appointed. The law stated that the SEC could only removed a board member for cause, which the SC nows says is unconstitutional. All other parts of the law go on as before. Essentially a non-event.
Thanks, Cop. Pity.
Doublespeak
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said the panel, as originally set up, was too unaccountable.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-28/sarbanes-oxley-audit-board-must...