
Nasdaq calls for further amendments to Sox 404
Daily news headlines
Nasdaq, the world’s largest electronic stock exchange, has called for further amendments to the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board's (PCAOB) new auditing standard for Sarbanes-Oxley (Sox) Section 404 compliance, claiming that recent concessions have not gone far enough.
In a statement released to mark the fifth anniversary of the passing of the contentious auditing law, Nasdaq acknowledged that “the benefits of the legislation have been proven – among them greater transparency, accountability and improved corporate governance,” but urged further revision of Section 404 to prevent over-auditing.
“Nasdaq believes incremental progress has been made to improve Section 404 via the PCAOB proposed Auditing Standard No. 5 (AS5). However, Nasdaq believes AS5 has not provided the needed clarity or the tools to alleviate the root cause of unnecessarily onerous and costly auditing processes,” the statement read.
AS5 and the related shift to principles-based Sox compliance by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) were implemented in reaction to vehement protests from US public companies and politicians that the 2002 Act went too far and has debilitated American commerce rather than strengthened it.
Nasdaq’s recommendations include:
- Changing the auditor's role to focus on evaluating the effectiveness of management's internal controls programme, rather than the effectiveness of individual controls.
- A clearer, more workable definition of materiality to assist management and auditors.
- Establishing an ombudsman office in the PCAOB to serve as an advocate for issuers who feel their internal controls are being over-audited.
- Establishing a clear policy against over-auditing including a fine schedule against auditors, if necessary.
- Allowing companies with no material weaknesses to perform the auditor portion of Section 404 in alternate years.
- Raising relief for smaller companies by focusing on ‘smaller’ companies, not just ‘smaller and less complex’ companies.
Given that it took four and a half years to convince the SEC and PCAOB to give the ground they have, it seems unlikely that any appetite exists for changes in the near future, although Nasdaq has one influential figure on its side.
"Good governance depends on good controls and bright line standards. While AS5 represents improvement over the previous standard, it does not go far enough to help decrease regulatory complexity and reduce the risk for overzealous auditing. We must take bolder steps to make our markets more attractive and competitive," said Michael Oxley, Nasdaq’s vice-chairman and co-author of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Operational risk
Power play: how geopolitics is shaping op risk at G-Sibs
Op Risk Benchmarking: Geopolitics is a top five fear for G-Sibs, but most banks lack specialist risk staff and classical tools
Automating regulatory compliance and reporting
Flaws in the regulation of the banking sector have been addressed initially by Basel III, implemented last year. Financial institutions can comply with capital and liquidity requirements in a natively integrated yet modular environment by utilising…
No tick-the-box approach to compliance risks
Op Risk Benchmarking: G-Sibs share fear of regulatory run-ins, but lack common stance on modelling, KRIs and more
Bread-and-butter op risks at the top table
Op Risk Benchmarking: As G-Sibs are forced to do more, how can they avoid doing more wrong?
Op Risk Benchmarking: Inside the G-Sibs
New initiative scrutinises op risk measurement and management practices at the world’s largest banks
Sizing cyber: banks split on who owns and measures hack threats
Op Risk Benchmarking: G-Sibs split on risk modelling and management for IT disruption and infosec
Banks frequently breach appetite for top op risks
Op Risk Benchmarking: Five G-Sibs breached appetite in past year across four risk types, new research reveals
Investment banks: the future of risk control
This Risk.net survey report explores the current state of risk controls in investment banks, the challenges of effective engagement across the three lines of defence, and the opportunity to develop a more dynamic approach to first-line risk control