Free Subscription to CFO Magazine

CFO Blog: Commentary and Opinion

You are here: Home : CFO Blog : SEC Department of Irony

REGULATORY ISSUES
SEC Department of Irony
Posted by Alan Rappeport | CFO.com | US
February 29, 2008 9:01 AM ET

In his plea this week for companies to communicate in plainer language, SEC Chairman Christopher Cox deftly debunked any incoming criticism of his own convoluted constructions.

Noting that the SEC was "taking plain English to the next level," he bemoaned muddled proxy statements, explaining that the Flesch Reading Ease score for descriptions of executive pay on an index of readability ranging from 0 to 100 was a flunking 34.86. A score that low is incomprehensible for two-thirds of Americans. Aware that even he is guilty of government-speak, Cox acknowledged that the text of his own testimony did not fare much better, scoring a lackluster 49.

"These are laws, regulations, government documents, and investor communications we’re talking about. It's not supposed to be Hemingway," Cox said. "If we lose the capacity for poetry in the process of keeping things clear and understandable, that's a price we should happily pay."

The SEC has published a "Plain English Handbook" and is translating some of its key provisions into simpler prose. And despite his 3,147 word treatise on the subject, Cox still knows how to turn a terse phrase. "We're dead serious about plain English," he said.

Comments (3)


Comments | Post a Comment
To keep this in comparison, the Flesch score for this article is 45.2.
Posted by Hassen Al-Shawaf | March 03, 2008 11:15am

How does one "Plain English-ize" a company's FIN 46R or FIN 48 disclosures? Is each company responsible for educating the majority of the investing public on what a variable interest is? Or does the 10Q and 10K just need to direct the public to the actual pronouncements, and let the investing public read the accounting guidance themselves (insert smiley face icon here)?


My prediction:
In 10 years, the SEC will be claiming that the excessive disclosures in the form 10Q (which will, on average, exceed 1,000 pages in length) has caused companies to fail to focus on significant issues related to their business. CFOs and CEOs will be called to testify before Congress, where inquiries will focus on why companies are hiding significant business issues through over-disclosure. The costs of these inquiries roll into the tens of millions of dollars. Senator Chelsea Clinton will create legislation to require CFOs and CEOs to certify that the disclosures are not excessively worded and not insulting to the intelligence of the average 12th grade student. This certification will not amend or replace other certifications, rather it will be added to the other 10 certifications already required.
Posted by James McMonagle | March 03, 2008 11:46am

As to the previous comment, the Flesch score for sections of FIN 46 are in the single digits.
Posted by Hassen Al-Shawaf | March 03, 2008 07:39pm

previous post next post
MOST RECENT POSTS
Nothing Direct about the Direct Cash-flow Method
Accounting for Politics
Are the Big Four 'Too Big to Fail?'
Fuzzy Accounting Principles
Homespun Wisdom about Bank Pay
ABOUT THE CFO BLOG
FAQ
ARCHIVES
« NOVEMBER 2009 »
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30      
   
OPTIONS
Email to a Colleague
  Printer Friendly Version  
  RSS Feeds  
WE DELIVER
Newsletters
Capital Markets/Banking
Today in Finance
Webcasts
Notify me of future events
Enter your email address to begin receiving updates on these topics.
INSIDE TODAY IN FINANCE
Why Is CFO Turnover So High?
Court to Hear New Tyco Appeals
How Not to Control Workers' Comp Costs
Turnaround Hinges on Weak Credit Markets
Survey: Tech CFOs Favor Say on Pay
Waters's Balance Sheet Is All Wet
Next Year's Model?
Value Judgement
Browse all Today in Finance

advertisement