'Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me,' F. Scott Fitzgerald once wrote. To which Hemingway retorted, 'Yes. They have more money.'
The Rich Are Different
A clash of attitudes colors the current debate over the extent to which the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) should apply to small public companies. The most visible argument is that small companies should not have to shoulder the same compliance burdens as large companies do, simply because they can't afford to. But that premise is being challenged by studies, derided by a number of commentators, and viewed with public skepticism even by some SEC Commissioners. It assumes that were money no object, small and large companies should be regulated the same. If that assumption is true, then any argument for relaxed compliance that hinges on expense is vulnerable. Cost seldom satisfies as a reason for not doing something that ought otherwise be done. However, it is wrong to assume that the main difference between small and large companies is how much money they have. Large and small companies play very different roles in the national economy and in the minds of investors. The very large companies really are different than their smaller brethren, and not just because they have more money.
This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.






