Applied Sarbanes Oxley at Work

[ThunderLew]

Just wondering what people's experiences have been with SOX at their work. Do people see this as critical or a lot of uncessary steps in an already busy work environment. Or does it fall somewhere between?

My company has a lot of SOX regulation and I was just curious about other's experiences and opinions.

 

[JulesMaximus]

It's been a huge PITA and a lot of unecessary extra work for everyone.

We weren't fudging our books before this and we aren't fudging them now. We have annual audits by E&Y and now quarterly audits by our parent company (which is traded on the NYSE-and why we must be SOX compliant).

Forget about running a paperless business where SOX is concerned.

 

[BrokenVisage]

It's pronounced - "SarBox" and my manager hated dealing with their consultants.

 

[whalen]

Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
It's pronounced - "SarBox" and my manager hated dealing with their consultants.

I've never heard it called "sarbox"....SOX is how we refer to it.

 

[austin316]

I'm a SOx auditor. you guys all probably hate me.

I like my job though.

 

[amdforever2]

What specific changes has it forced?

 

[GeneValgene]

Originally posted by: whalen

Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
It's pronounced - "SarBox" and my manager hated dealing with their consultants.

I've never heard it called "sarbox"....SOX is how we refer to it.

we call it SOX

 

[Pepsi90919]

just means you have to change your passwords like every day

 

[BillGates]

SOX SUX

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: austin316
I'm a SOx auditor. you guys all probably hate me.

I like my job though.

Actually, we are doing pretty well with our SOX testing. Better than any of our other divisions.

It's still a PITA though. You need paper backup signed by the CEO just to take a piss.

 

[DurocShark]

SOX SUX



My company is privately owned and not required to comply, but we do anyway. Of course, office politicians use SOX as an excuse to build empires and such.

 

[austin316]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: austin316
I'm a SOx auditor. you guys all probably hate me.

I like my job though.

Actually, we are doing pretty well with our SOX testing. Better than any of our other divisions.

It's still a PITA though. You need paper backup signed by the CEO just to take a piss.

yeah, but who is doing a monthly review of all the pissing forms the CEO signs? its a never ending cycle.

 

[Dr. Detroit]

Why I left the Big 4 after 5yrs there and am working for a smaller local CPA firm.

Watched our Audit go from $500K to $2.5M in 1yr becasue of SOX. Cleint hated us and I hated dealing with the their contractors and managing IT auditors. What a complete waste of time.

Hopefully the amendment will pass in which all comapnies with a market cap below $800M will be SOX exempt. But then again that may take away some our firms work............

 

[Descartes]

I am currently leading a project at one of the Big 4 firms to build a SOX product that allows their auditors to be compliant, and this will be used for all of their clients by every auditor in the world. With that in mind it's been positive; it's been a long project with a lot of challenges. This project has a budget of almost 100 million.

SOX presents a lot of challenges to be certain, but it should, in time, be much easier to accommodate. Auditing should be more deterministic, more accountability will be available, and you won't have partners at accounting firms that are sole knowledge holders of any company's financial situation. Products like the one I'm working on should ultimately make the auditing process a lot cheaper for both the firms and the clients they serve, but whether or not that makes it to the client in the form of savings or not is another question.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: austin316

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: austin316
I'm a SOx auditor. you guys all probably hate me.

I like my job though.

Actually, we are doing pretty well with our SOX testing. Better than any of our other divisions.

It's still a PITA though. You need paper backup signed by the CEO just to take a piss.

yeah, but who is doing a monthly review of all the pissing forms the CEO signs? its a never ending cycle.

The cycle does end, eventually. There is a hierarchy of sign-off that has to occur on everything committed to the system, and for that there are only really two forms: Preparer and Reviewer. The Preparer is who you might expect, the auditor; the reviewer can take on many different forms as well, but I never heard of it having to be a CEO.

Market valuation is ultimately built on trust, and SOX should establish enough accountability and credibility to build structure into our economic foundation. I consider it a positive step.

 

[spidey07]

I'll preach my theory once again (and I'm no tinfoil hat guy)

This legislation was created to save the auditing industry and nothing more. Just look at what was going on when it was passed. It exists solely to support/bolster a failing industry and little to do with the investor.

I still believe Mr. Sarbanes and Mr. Oxley are large shareholders of the big 4.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: spidey07
I'll preach my theory once again (and I'm no tinfoil hat guy)

This legislation was created to save the auditing industry and nothing more. Just look at what was going on when it was passed. It exists solely to support/bolster a failing industry and little to do with the investor.

I still believe Mr. Sarbanes and Mr. Oxley are large shareholders of the big 4.

Actually they are liberal lawyers.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: spidey07
I'll preach my theory once again (and I'm no tinfoil hat guy)

This legislation was created to save the auditing industry and nothing more. Just look at what was going on when it was passed. It exists solely to support/bolster a failing industry and little to do with the investor.

I still believe Mr. Sarbanes and Mr. Oxley are large shareholders of the big 4.

Couldn't disagree more. This represents a misunderstanding of both the purpose of auditing and SOX, imo. The big firms are taking on an absolutely enormous expense at being SOX compliant for their clients, and it's no casual matter. The saying that goes around is that we're trying to "keep them out of jail"; that's our motivation, and it's real. As I said in my previous post, the integrity of our economy depends on it (in part). Is it the best step? Probably not, but it is a step... at least we're getting somewhere.

All IMO of course.

 

[AdamSnow]

We have SOX here as well, and yes... a lot of unnecessary paper work, and a lot of extra steps...

Keeps everything clean across the board, and it gives some other people jobs... so I guess I'm okay with it.

 

[SampSon]

I feel sorry for the paper you people at huge companies have to wade through.

If companies would run ethically then SOX wouldn't be necessary.

 

[tarheelmm]

Curious as to what products peoples companies use to monitor email for SOX and such??

 

[gigapet]

From First hand experience the business folks HATE HATE HATE IT. 85% of it is a complete over reaction.

 

[zephyrprime]

What exactly is so odious about it? Can I get some examples? I've never had to deal with it because that's not my line of work at all.

 

[Taggart]

Originally posted by: tarheelmm
Curious as to what products peoples companies use to monitor email for SOX and such??

Isn't Legato EmailXtender used for this?

 

[ultimatebob]

Privately held firms don't have to put up with this crap, do they?

Anyway... I don't think that I've been directly impacted by SOX, but the number of IT audits that I've had to do on my servers has doubled over the past three years. I'd imagine that it's related.