(2004, (2012, (2013). (2013, (2014). (2014, (Bishop, (Brite, (Coustan, (Gillia2012). (Gilmore, (Hanna, (Moran, (Srinivasan, (b) (c) (debate.org, 1). 10 10).the 18 2002 2002, 2004). 2004, 2005 2007, 2013). 2013, 2014). 2014, 24). 30). 33 404B 44 44). 53, 78 83 Accountancy:http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Issues/2004/Feb/SarbaneSOXleyWhatItMeansToTheMarketplace.htm Accountants: Act Act. After Although American Another Appeals April As Assessing Auditing Auto Be Bishop, Brite, Business Businesses, C. CFO’s CPA CPA’s California Certified Chicago Companies Corporate Court Coustan, Critics Do Enactment Enhanced Executive Exploratory Failing February).Sarbanes-Oxley: Financial Foundation Fraud Fraudulent From Gillian, Gilmore, H. Hanna, Impact Implementation In Increasing Industry: Institute Investor Involved Is It J. Journal July June K. L. Law Law: Law? Learned Logistics M. March Marketplace. Means Meets Might Moran, Nearly Of One Over Overkill. Oxley P. Pennsylvania Periodic Perspective: Press: Protection Protection. Public Publicly References Research Retrieved Review: SOX SOX, SOX. Sarbanes Sarbanes-Oxley Sarbanes-Oxley. Sarbanes– Sarbanes–Oxley Securities Selected Srinivasan, States States. Statutory Studies Study. The Theft There These This Those Transportation USC, Undergraduate United University Unlike Volume What With Works. Years, a about accounting accustomed activity. addition addition, additional advantage advantage, advantage” affect after against ago agree agreed agreeing alike allowed also amended amendments among an and another” any applicable. are as assembled asymmetry attempting auditing be because become been being believe beneficial. benefit benefits bill bill” both both, brought burdened business business. businesses businesses’ but by by25 can case cause change changes citing clear, companies companies. company compared competitive competitiveness” completely compliance compliance. comply concerns conclusion, confidence confidence, confident confusion conglomerates. consideration contention contentions continue continues control controls corporate corporation corporations cost costly costs cots could could– criminal criticized critics cumbersome debate debate. debate.org. debate.org: decade decisions decreases deferred. delist did different differentiate difficulty direct do does earnings, economic effectiveness effects eliminate environment establishment evaluate even evidence excessive expense; expenses express expressed external extremely failed? far feel financial find firms for forums found fraud fraud, fraud-prone” fraud; frauds, fraud” frequency from fromForbes.com: frustration future go going governance. greater guilty” had has hastily have high higher. how however, http://calcorporatelaw.com/2013/06/grand-theft-auto-meets-the-sarbanes-oxley-act/ http://uculr.com/articles/2013/6/30/is-sarbanes-oxley-a-failing-law http://www.debate.org/opinions/do-you-believe-the-sarbanes-oxley-act-has-failed http://www.forbes.com/sites/hbsworkingknowledge/2014/03/10/the-costs-and-benefits-of-sarbanes-oxley/ http://www.picpa.org/Content/46112.aspx implementation implementation. implementing imposing improve improved in inception. includes increase increased increases incredibly inevitable. information inhibit innocent intelligent intended internal international interpretation into invest. investment investor investors investors. investors’ is it it. its just known large larger later law, lawmakers led legislation lends less liquid, listed loopholes major make many market marketplace. may mean meet might modifications modified more must no not not” number nytimes.com:http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/07/24/has-sarbanes-oxley-failed/sarbanes-oxley-has-enhanced-investor-protection of on one only openly operate, opinion opinions opposes or organizations out outweigh outweighs over overkill overreaching owned. p. p.1).Today, p.2). paragraph party penalties per perceived percent performance perspective, perspectives placed player positive potential prevent preventing primarily private private, privately prohibitive protect proved provisions public publicly public” published purchase question questioned. really recent recently reduce reduced reduces reducing reduction referred regulation regulations regulatory relationships reliability remain removed” reportedly reporting reports required requirements requirements. research responsibility restrictions retained rules sale same section seek services. sets share show shows side sides since situation situations six).Grand size small small, smaller smaller, softened. some speak specific stake stakeholders stand standards states stating statute still structure subsequent substantial successful suffer support survey take testing than that that. the their there these they this those through time” to traded transaction transparency transparency. ultimately unduly unnecessarily unnecessary until up was way were we’ve where whether which while will with without word wording worldwide would wrongdoers years year” you – “A “Audit “Information “Regulatory “SOX “Sarbanes “The “fears “knowingly” “paragraph “that “wrongfully