Did Sarbanes Oxley Foster a Global Shift in Corporate Governance? Evidence of change in European Union Countries

Kathryn Hansen*, Edward Lance Monsour**
*Associate Professor ,California State University,Los Angels
**Assistant Professor,California State University,Los Angels
Periodicity:March - May'2007
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jmgt.1.4.372

Abstract

With passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in July, 2002, a revolution in corporate governance procedures took place.  Certainly, given the accounting, internal control, and governance problems in U.S. companies in the early 2000s, change was necessary.  But what happened in other countries with developed economies and sophisticated financial markets?  Accounting scandals of the same magnitude certainly were not evident.  Did the countries of the European Union follow in the U.S.’s footsteps to try to prevent their own version of WorldCom and Enron or were similar internal control and corporate governance procedures already in place?  What this paper accomplishes is a comparison of the criteria from Sarbanes-Oxley to existing procedures and subsequent changes made in the EU and EU countries.

Keywords

Global Shift, Sarbanes Oxley, Corporate Governance, Evidence

How to Cite this Article?

Kathryn Hansen and Edward Lance Monsour (2007). Did Sarbanes Oxley Foster A Global Shift in Corporate Governance? Evidence of Change in European Union Countries. i-manager’s Journal on Management, 1(4), 31-40. https://doi.org/10.26634/jmgt.1.4.372

References

[1]. Audit Practices Board, December 2004, APB Ethical Standard 2, "Financial, Business, Employment and Persona|Relationship"
[2]. December 2004, APB Ethical Standard 3, "Long Association with the Audit Engagement"
[3]. Combined Code: Principles of Good Governance and Code of Best Practices, May, 2000
[4]. Combined Code on Corporate Governance, July 2003
[5]. Commission of the European Communities, November 2000, "Commission Recommendation on quality assurance for the statutory audit in the European Union: minimum requirements"
[6]. May, 2002, "Commission Recommendation: Statutory Auditors' Independence in the EU: A Set Of Fundamental Principles"
[7]. May, 2003, "Modernizing Company Law and Enhancing Corporate Governance in the European Union A Plan to Move Forward"
[8]. March 2004, "Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on statutory audit of annual accounts and consolidated accounts"
[9]. July 23, 2004, "Commission Recommendation on strengthening the role of non-executive or supervisory directors"
[10]. October, 2004, "Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC concerning the annual accounts of certain types of companies and consolidated accounts"
[11]. The Committee on Corporate Governance, January 1998, The Hempel Report, "The Committee on Corporate Governance: Final Report"
[12]. The Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance, December I 992, The Cadbury Report, "The Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance" The Companies Act of 1989
[13]. Financial Accounting Standards Board, September, 2002, Norwalk Agreement, "Memorandum of Understanding"
[14]. Higgs, Derek, Jonuory 2003, The Higgs Report, "Review of the Role and Effectiveness of Non-Executive Directors" (as incorporated in the Combined Code on Corporate Governance of 2003)
[15]. The International Federation of Accountants, June 2005, "Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants"
[I 6]. The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England & Wales, September, 1999, The Turnbull Report, "Internal Control Guidance for Directors on the Combined Code"
[17].Palepu, Krishna, Tarun Khanna, and Joseph Kogan, August 2002, "Globalization and Similarities in Corporate Governance: A Cross-Country Analysis, working paper
[18].Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, July 26, 2005, Release No. 2005-14, "Ethics and independence Rules Concerning Independence, Tax Services, and Contingent Fees"
[I9] . S chaub, Alexander, December 1 2, 2002, "Comments of European Commission to SEC".
[20].Securities and Exchange Commission, March 3, 2003, Rule 33-8 I 77, "Disclosure Required by Sections 406 and 407 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002"
[21].March 28, 2003, Rule 33-81 76, "Conditions for Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures"
[22].May 6, 2003, Rule 33-8183, "Strengthening the Commission's Requirements Regarding Auditor independence"
[23].Smith, Sir Robert, January 2003, The Smith Guidance "Audit Committees: Combined Code Guidance" (as incorporated in the Combined Code on Corporate Governance, 2003)
[24].Study Group Chaired by Sir Richard Greenbury, July 1995, The GreenburyReport, "Directors' Remuneration"
[25].U.S. General Accounting Office, November 2003, "Required Study on the Potential Effects of Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation"
[26].WeiI, Gotshal & Manges, LLR January 2002, "Comparative Study of Corporate Governance Codes Relevant to the European Union and Its member States"
[27].Eighth Council Directive 84/253/EEC, April 10, 1984 1O7m U. S. Congress, 2002, "Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002"
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Online 15 15

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.