The Story of Frujinator

[frujinator]

Thanks for all your responses guys, I really appreciate all the awesome advice I'm getting here.

I have done well in my accounting claasses, and have done some temp accounting work, so far I love it.

But can someone explain to me in more detail what Sarbanes Oakley has done to the world of Accounting?

 

[justin]

Where's Mr. Google when you need him?

 

[Texas Proud]

Thanks for all your responses guys, I really appreciate all the awesome advice I'm getting here.

I have done well in my accounting claasses, and have done some temp accounting work, so far I love it.

But can someone explain to me in more detail what Sarbanes Oakley has done to the world of Accounting?

Sarbanes Oxley has created a new standard statement when someone asks 'Why do we do it this way?', just say "Sarbanes Oxley"...

Really, it has put some teeth in the ability of law enforcement to bring criminal charges to people who cheat...  before, they could just say 'it was the accountants, I knew nothing abou it'... the law says you must know.  So, you have to have controls in place to prevent fraud etc.. and there is a cottage industry that is doing Sarbanes Oxley testing etc...  and it is costing companies a LOT of money to comply... I am 'lucky' that I only need to do testing twice a year on my stuff as it is deemed not critical..

Have a look at this site for more info:


http://www.sarbanes-oxley.com/

 

[astromeria]

But can someone explain to me in more detail what Sarbanes Oakley has done to the world of Accounting?

Wasn't he the ne'er-do-well political nephew of Annie Oakley?
:

 

[OldAgePensioner]

Fruitjunator,
just ask CFB for the Quebec version of Triumph and the poodle is so froojinatoor. You will definitely be a Certified Pubic Accountant.

Good luck with being only 14 and so sucsessfull.

 

[roadkill]

But can someone explain to me in more detail what Sarbanes Oakley has done to the world of Accounting?

What SOX has done is to create a huge demand for accountants to do the work. Many accounting firms are having a difficult time attracting enough qualified staff.It is clearly a growth area in the accounting profession. From what I have seen, however, one could easily burn out with the demands of the workload.  In addition, the threat of being sued is hanging over your head.

 

[donheff]

But can someone explain to me in more detail what Sarbanes Oakley has done to the world of Accounting?

Some of you private sectors guys should jump in and correct me if I am wrong -- I just left 30+ years with Government....but, the impression I got is that corporations have to document adequate management controls to ensure that they can catch waste, fraud, and abuse before it affects shareholders. The accountants are tasked with evaluating (testing) the controls for adequacy. If your controls are not adequate, you will get a qualified opinion or worse. We have something analogous in Government. The impact on me (a CIO) was that the auditors drove me nuts with security assessments of my systems (reliable IT systems are a (the?) core part of management controls) -- and any problems they reported became serious problems for me and my staff. My private sector counterparts reported similar pain from Sarbanes-Oxley.

Don

 

[Nords]

Where's Mr. Google when you need him? 

It's hard to make fun of Fruj when he's getting more hits & less garbage from this board than he'd ever get from Google.

Pretty soon he'll be asking for the answers to the questions on the CPA exam... and probably getting them!

 

[Brat]

My daughter attended a well regarded university in the south bay, graduated with a finance major.  When she changed from engineering to finance I warned her that that path, for all practical purposes, required earning a CPA. She didn't want to be a public accountant but she suffered through a couple years and passed the exam.  She did that and audited a number of high tech companies.  It wasn't easy, but it has been very rewarding (she has a position with a great group of people who are highly regarded in their industry). 

She could have gone a number of directions with her credentials, intellectual and people skills.  The only way you will know what doors are open to you is to prepare well and work smart.  

Frujinator will learn soon enough about Sarbanes Oxley. 

 

[frujinator]

Come on guys don't be so tough, so I am just starting out, but I will learn.

HAve some mercy, I'm only 19...

 

[limey]

So, you have to have controls in place to prevent fraud etc.. and there is a cottage industry that is doing Sarbanes Oxley testing etc... and it is costing companies a LOT of money to comply... I am 'lucky' that I only need to do testing twice a year on my stuff as it is deemed not critical..

Wrong .. no control on earth will prevent fraud. That is huge myth and let me be the first to correct you. All controls will do is minimise the possibility of fraud and hopefully reduce the damage if fraud is perpetrated. Even then there has to be as cost-benefit. One does not spend two dollars to save one.

On a related note, I was once at a BOD meeting submitting my annual internal audit review. Someone casually mentioned the term 'risk taking' in the context of enacting workable functional internal controls. I pointed out that well run companies do not take risks. Rather, they manage them. Nobody objected to my comment.

 

[limey]

But can someone explain to me in more detail what Sarbanes Oakley has done to the world of Accounting?

I would be glad to give you my view even though others here may not share it.

SOX is what we refer to it as.

SOX had to happen.

With all those misleading financial statements, and awkward and humiliating about face re-statements, and the demise of some huge companies, it was only a matter of time before SOX was born.

The Board of Directors can no longer conveniently and blindly trust their external auditors.

Nowadays companies which are publically listed must put it all in writing and take full responsibility to do their due diligence. That means the Board, or one person designated, must officially attest to the efficacy of controls. They can no longer blame the accountants and say they knew nothing if any wrongdoing occurs (such as these called 'accounting irregularities'.)

I say it is about time. Well overdue in my view.

Some companies say they need more time. Others say it is too costly. I say time to quit bitching and get on with the job. It is about time someone took corporate governance seriously and not pay lip service.

 

[limey]

I am a CPA and CFO as well. When I was in public accounting, I saw the partners in the firm working enormous amounts of hours with no life outside of work. I quickly decided that I did not want to grow up to be a partner in a CPA firm. However, I think anyone who aspires to a financial career would gain a great deal by spending a few years in public accounting and pass the CPA exam. This will open many more doors for you.

I chose exactly the same route. I decided not to become a practitioner even though it would have been more lucrative. I made that decision some 38 years ago and have never looked back. I decided to become an accountant at age 16. I knew even then exactly what I wanted to do. That was 47 years ago.

 

[Texas Proud]

Wrong .. no control on earth will prevent fraud. That is huge myth and let me be the first to correct you. All controls will do is minimise the possibility of fraud and hopefully reduce the damage if fraud is perpetrated.  Even then there has to be as cost-benefit. One does not  spend two dollars to save one.

On a related note, I was once at a BOD meeting submitting my annual internal audit review. Someone casually mentioned the term 'risk taking' in the context of enacting workable functional internal controls. I pointed out that well run companies do not take risks. Rather, they manage them. Nobody objected to my comment.

Just semantics in my opinion...

they are there to PREVENT fraud, you do not get told to let 10% or 1% or any % fraud to take place... but to prevent it...

But, like you say, there is no system in the world that can prevent it...

 

[frujinator]

Today I asked my Accounting Professor and he pretty much said the same thing.

He said that out all of the legislation coming out of congress/senate, this is one of the more reasonable laws. It is meant to prevent fraud and not only "Blame the Accountants", but yet it does add more work and in turn increased the need for Accountants! Woo-Hoo!

I'll stick with Accounting, but I will take business and other financial courses as recommended!

Thanks guys!

-Fruji