Free Subscription to CFO Magazine

You are here: Home : CFO Magazine : September 2006 Issue : Article

The Case for Clarity

(continued)

Although the SEC has rejected the idea of exempting small companies from Sarbox, the Commission has indicated (during and after its roundtable in May) that it is willing to compromise.

While that may help satisfy critics, Karolyi worries that they will push for more. "The integrity of the law and what it represents could be why we see 30 percent valuation premiums in the U.S. markets," he says. "If we dilute the standards, that value may dissipate."

Kate O'Sullivan is staff writer at CFO.


A Bunch of Bad Apples

While beleaguered finance executives often point to Enron and WorldCom as the source of all their Sarbanes-Oxley woes, at least a hint of trouble, in the form of material weaknesses, has turned up at hundreds of companies in the second and third years of Section 404 compliance. — K.O'S.

Year Number of Companies Reporting Number of Material Weaknesses Reported % of Companies Reporting Weaknesses
2005 3,900 1,500 16%
2006* 3,000 400 7%
*Through 4/25
Source: Christopher Cox speech at the SEC roundtable in May

Frustrated Expectations

The costs of complying with Section 404 have not declined as markedly as many finance executives expected. Auditor-attestation fees, for example, which were expected to drop by 26 percent in the second year after 404 took effect, fell by just half that amount, according to a study by Financial Executives International. — K.O'S.

Expected % Decline, 2004–2005 Actual % Decline, 2004–2005
Nonaudit Fees* 39.0% 34.5%
Auditor Fees 26.0% 13.0%
*Includes internal staff time and software and consulting fees.
Source: FEI

Reader CommentsDisplaying 1 of 1

  • Walter Orme

    Sep 26, 2006 2:56 PM ET

    Fantastic analysis!

    This is certainly one of the most incisive articles I have ever read in your magazine. Kudos to a fine writer on a job … more

Post a comment | View all comments