Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Way back in the 80s, companies in the U. S. Defense industry determined that it was in their best interests to band together and develop the Defense Industry Initiatives as a method to police themselves during a time when their industry was fraught with fraud and corruption. As an aftermath, ethics and compliance programs have been developed and implemented by the majority of U.S. companies. To further entice companies to establish an effective and proactive program designed to detect and, to the extent possible, prevent violations of law The Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations, passed in November 1991, rewards these companies with relief when sentenced for violations of law.
While these programs have been primarily designed to demonstrate that a company is serious about acting ethically and within the law, we have seen a record number of financial restatements in the past year. One can surmise that this is due to a lapse in the effectiveness of those companies' ethics and compliance efforts.
Now, along comes the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which contains a specific provision requiring chief financial and chief executive officers of SEC registrants to make certifications concerning their company's quarterly and annual reports that, if found to be made knowingly or willfully false, may subject the signing officer to criminal penalties. On October 22, 2002, the SEC issued rule proposals that, if adopted, would also require certifying officers to design, establish, maintain evaluate and report the effectiveness of the company's “internal controls and procedures for financial reporting.” The SEC proposes that “internal controls and procedures for financial reporting” mean controls that pertain to the preparation of financial statements for external purposes that are prepared and presented to conform with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) as described in the Codification of Statements on Auditing Standards section 319. This section describes internal controls as “a process, effected by an entity's board of directors, management, and other personnel, designed to provide reasonable assurances regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories: effectiveness and efficiency of operations, reliability of financial reporting, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations.” This certainly sheds new light on the importance of a company's ethics and compliance efforts. Corporate executives now have a never-before seen level of professional and personal interest in insuring that ethics and compliance programs, as well as the entire internal control structure, operates effectively at all times.
The Spotlight Is on You
If that is not enough to convince you that the spotlight is shining brightly on ethics and compliance programs, Sarbanes-Oxley also has a provision that provides Federal protection for employees, of SEC registrants, who report wrongdoing to the government and/or law enforcement. In the past, these whistleblowers have been a by-product of the provisions of the False Claims Act that allows a private individual to bring a lawsuit against a company on behalf of the Government. Typically, these whistleblowers (also known as qui tam relators) were protected from retaliation by their employers under state statutes. Sarbanes-Oxley has created a situation in which anyone who reports wrongdoing to the government and/or law enforcement is protected from employer retaliation under Federal Statute. The scary proposition about the whistleblower provision under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act is that an SEC registrant can now find himself or herself with an employee who is a whistleblower, and who they probably cannot terminate. Unlike the relator, who will either prevail in their lawsuit or not, the Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower will likely not have filed a lawsuit and probably will not stand to gain monetarily. A company may now find itself facing the prospect of having a whistleblower as an employee for life.
More Reasons
So what are the other reasons why ethics and compliance programs are important to companies today? Aside from the fact that their development and implementation is the right thing to do, these programs may also help to spare a company from an “Enron” type situation. Additional and important by-products of an effective ethics and compliance program are that company officials required to sign certifications may rest easier knowing that there is a mechanism in place to identify problems while also acting to prevent (or at least minimize) the likelihood of an employee becoming a Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower. To determine whether a company's ethics and compliance program is effective, it should be periodically assessed. This is not necessarily a new concept, but is one area where the stakes are high enough to warrant re-visiting. Let's look at some questions and considerations for companies when assessing the effectiveness of their ethics and compliance efforts:
Program Design, Board of Directors and Senior Management
Employees
Vendors/Customers
Effecting the Assessment
Now that the questions have been asked, how is the assessment done? I believe that an effective assessment should be conducted by an independent, objective and uninterested third party. The following is a list of general procedures likely to be performed when assessing a company's ethics and compliance program:
Identify and obtain a complete understanding of the business and compliance risks associated with the business, the ways noncompliance may occur and the conditions that give rise to them. Activities would include:
Perform a detailed assessment of the company's financial, management and other practices related to each of the compliance risk areas under review. Activities would include:
Implementation of proposed enhancements to the ethics and compliance program, resulting from the findings in number three, would be addressed jointly by the third party conducting the review, company management and legal counsel. Activities would include:
The final aspect of the ethics and compliance program assessment is development of an ongoing monitoring process. Activities would include:
As an additional consequence of recent accounting-related irregularities, it is more likely that a company's independent auditor will be required to examine, assess and perhaps opine on the quality of a company's fraud prevention efforts; including the company's ethics and compliance program.
Now more than ever effective compliance programs, and their related controls, are the number one tools that companies have at their disposal to insure that the potential for violations of law are minimized and ethical behavior is instilled within the organization.
Way back in the 80s, companies in the U. S. Defense industry determined that it was in their best interests to band together and develop the Defense Industry Initiatives as a method to police themselves during a time when their industry was fraught with fraud and corruption. As an aftermath, ethics and compliance programs have been developed and implemented by the majority of U.S. companies. To further entice companies to establish an effective and proactive program designed to detect and, to the extent possible, prevent violations of law The Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations, passed in November 1991, rewards these companies with relief when sentenced for violations of law.
While these programs have been primarily designed to demonstrate that a company is serious about acting ethically and within the law, we have seen a record number of financial restatements in the past year. One can surmise that this is due to a lapse in the effectiveness of those companies' ethics and compliance efforts.
Now, along comes the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which contains a specific provision requiring chief financial and chief executive officers of SEC registrants to make certifications concerning their company's quarterly and annual reports that, if found to be made knowingly or willfully false, may subject the signing officer to criminal penalties. On October 22, 2002, the SEC issued rule proposals that, if adopted, would also require certifying officers to design, establish, maintain evaluate and report the effectiveness of the company's “internal controls and procedures for financial reporting.” The SEC proposes that “internal controls and procedures for financial reporting” mean controls that pertain to the preparation of financial statements for external purposes that are prepared and presented to conform with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) as described in the Codification of Statements on Auditing Standards section 319. This section describes internal controls as “a process, effected by an entity's board of directors, management, and other personnel, designed to provide reasonable assurances regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories: effectiveness and efficiency of operations, reliability of financial reporting, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations.” This certainly sheds new light on the importance of a company's ethics and compliance efforts. Corporate executives now have a never-before seen level of professional and personal interest in insuring that ethics and compliance programs, as well as the entire internal control structure, operates effectively at all times.
The Spotlight Is on You
If that is not enough to convince you that the spotlight is shining brightly on ethics and compliance programs, Sarbanes-Oxley also has a provision that provides Federal protection for employees, of SEC registrants, who report wrongdoing to the government and/or law enforcement. In the past, these whistleblowers have been a by-product of the provisions of the False Claims Act that allows a private individual to bring a lawsuit against a company on behalf of the Government. Typically, these whistleblowers (also known as qui tam relators) were protected from retaliation by their employers under state statutes. Sarbanes-Oxley has created a situation in which anyone who reports wrongdoing to the government and/or law enforcement is protected from employer retaliation under Federal Statute. The scary proposition about the whistleblower provision under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act is that an SEC registrant can now find himself or herself with an employee who is a whistleblower, and who they probably cannot terminate. Unlike the relator, who will either prevail in their lawsuit or not, the Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower will likely not have filed a lawsuit and probably will not stand to gain monetarily. A company may now find itself facing the prospect of having a whistleblower as an employee for life.
More Reasons
So what are the other reasons why ethics and compliance programs are important to companies today? Aside from the fact that their development and implementation is the right thing to do, these programs may also help to spare a company from an “Enron” type situation. Additional and important by-products of an effective ethics and compliance program are that company officials required to sign certifications may rest easier knowing that there is a mechanism in place to identify problems while also acting to prevent (or at least minimize) the likelihood of an employee becoming a Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower. To determine whether a company's ethics and compliance program is effective, it should be periodically assessed. This is not necessarily a new concept, but is one area where the stakes are high enough to warrant re-visiting. Let's look at some questions and considerations for companies when assessing the effectiveness of their ethics and compliance efforts:
Program Design, Board of Directors and Senior Management
Employees
Vendors/Customers
Effecting the Assessment
Now that the questions have been asked, how is the assessment done? I believe that an effective assessment should be conducted by an independent, objective and uninterested third party. The following is a list of general procedures likely to be performed when assessing a company's ethics and compliance program:
Identify and obtain a complete understanding of the business and compliance risks associated with the business, the ways noncompliance may occur and the conditions that give rise to them. Activities would include:
Perform a detailed assessment of the company's financial, management and other practices related to each of the compliance risk areas under review. Activities would include:
Implementation of proposed enhancements to the ethics and compliance program, resulting from the findings in number three, would be addressed jointly by the third party conducting the review, company management and legal counsel. Activities would include:
The final aspect of the ethics and compliance program assessment is development of an ongoing monitoring process. Activities would include:
As an additional consequence of recent accounting-related irregularities, it is more likely that a company's independent auditor will be required to examine, assess and perhaps opine on the quality of a company's fraud prevention efforts; including the company's ethics and compliance program.
Now more than ever effective compliance programs, and their related controls, are the number one tools that companies have at their disposal to insure that the potential for violations of law are minimized and ethical behavior is instilled within the organization.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.