As early as today, Pennsylvania Democrat Paul Kanjorski plans to introduce an amendment that would apply the most onerous Sarbanes-Oxley regulations to the smallest public companies. Supported by House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank, this amendment to the financial re-regulation bill now moving through the House would inflict millions of dollars in compliance costs upon thousands of companies.
Those companies will still be audited, of course. But Sarbox would subject them to the double whammy that big companies have had to live with at enormous expense—and with no noticeable decline in business fraud. Unable to stop regulatory relief in his own committee, Mr. Frank now believes he can rally enough Democrats to kill it on the floor.
Yesterday, Mr. Obama reminded his audience at the Brookings Institution that small businesses are the “companies that drive innovation, producing 13 times more patents per employee than large companies. And it’s worth remembering, every once in a while a small business becomes a big business—and changes the world.” However, this is happening less and less frequently, due in no small measure to Sarbox.
Every day it feels more like they are purposely trying to destroy the economy.
Oh shit. No recovery here.
JCD’s head’s gonna blow.
Well, it’s a great way to implement communism. Once they get rid of anybody that can economically compete or oppose the government, the game is over.
Wow… what problem are they trying to solve exactly?
It’s called NEW TAXES.
And yes, small businesses won’t be able to handle it. So they either will go out of business or move even more manufacturing to another country.
It’s destructive and idiotic.
I wonder what the Obamapologist like Dallas would say?
I wonder, which part of; auditor independence, corporate governance, internal control assessment, and enhanced financial disclosure – does Ron Paul object to?
Ok, first of all, its an opinion piece in WSJ, which doesn’t exactly have a track record of independent balanced analysis.
Second, many seem to have missed the term “public” companies. These are not mom and pop operations, but publicly traded companies.
As far as judging companies by their patents, then patent trolls ought to be the most productive companies on the planet. Lets face it, the patent system is broken, but that’s another topic.
It will never pass. SOX is already onerous for large corporations. It would bring small corps to their knees. You cannot expect a one or two person operation to be able to comply with SOX.
… anybody that can economically compete or oppose the government …
Name that anybody that can do it now.
a said, on December 9th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Name that anybody that can do it now.
Goldman Sachs?
# 10 Troublemaker,
Wrong, Goldman Sachs does not compete directly nor oppose the US government. They fucking own it…
#5 We’re this late in the game and you still have to wonder what they’ll come up with? Dude, these are the most predictable people on this blog!
#9 There. You got your stupid answer for your stupid question. Next!
That revolver has an eight round cylinder. Only Smith and Wesson make one like that, and it’s only a 22LR firearm. Get a better artist next time.
In addition, the round in battery is not lined up with the barrel.
Faxon, please excuse the artist. Probably some liberal who has actually never seen a gun and wants to ban them all to insure that:
We The People become We The Sheeple.
#7- on the money. Although your first paragraph was a bit understated IMO.
Kanjorski is also pushing some legislation that says, if you’re too big to fail, then you’re too big to exist. Boy that’s some commie crap too, huh?
#8 Thomas- as ‘me’ noted, it will apply to public companies. Which 1-2 person public companies are you concerned about?
#15 That’s what I call pwning someone.
i wonder if they will include political parties in this new regulation…
just a thought…
What was Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s famous statement about America? Who was sitting in his congregation soaking it all in?
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Critical issue framing error.
Notice that SOX will still apply only to public companies. How small are the smallest publicly held companies? Most likely they are penny stocks that were never even intended to make products, just pump and dump schemes.
If you have a small company you should stay private. There ought to be extra costs involved with being a public company. If you are after they e-trade monkey crowd you should be subject to extra scrutiny.
A lot of great business was done when risky businesses were run as partnerships. When your bacon is close to the fire you pay extra special attention.
SOX has not stopped corporate crime, especially control fraud, because enforcement and penalties against these crimes are not a priority. SOX is intended to help inform investors more reliably about the state of the company.