On May 18, 2009 the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would hear a constitutional challenge to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, a law that mandated costly accounting procedures of questionable effectiveness in the wake of the Enron and WorldCom scandals. Attorneys from the Competitive Enterprise Institute are serving as co-counsel in the case, representing pro bono a small accounting firm in Nevada burdened by the Sarbox mandates.
CEI’s John Berlau, writer of the popular Youtube public policy video “Sarbanes-Oxley and Tattoos,” explains the nuts and bolts of Sarbox in this video, and why Sarbox overhaul is now needed more than ever to bring growth to this sluggish economy. Berlau explains how issuing stock has traditionally helped smaller companies during a debt shortage, but how Sarbox means a brick wall — through the tripling of audit costs — for companies that try to go public now. Berlau shows how Sarbanes-Oxley did not catch the current scandals and harms honest entrepreneurs, and shows why repealing it could be one of the best economic stimulus packages we could have.
Duration : 0:6:8
November 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
yp:)
yp:)
November 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
As usual//
As usual//
November 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Welcome.
Welcome.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!
November 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
According to …
According to Christine Hall, the Communications Director for CEI:
“The Appointments Clause of the Constitution requires that “officers of the United States” be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. But the officers serving on the PCAOB, with tremendous power to impose criminal and civil penalties on people and companies accused of violating accounting regulations, were not appointed that way.”
November 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Thank you for such …
Thank you for such insight.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I love CEI, BUT…. …
I love CEI, BUT……
can you please explain what are the constitutional reasons why it is being challenge.