Idiot, I was a SOX auditor for years for multiple companies.
Like I said, you are approaching it from the ACCOUNTING SIDE. I am not. . . LOOK AT THE REST.
I know the accounting side too. Look what the prosecutors did with the legal side!
Do you really think I pulled those Sarbanes Oxley legal case links out of my behind? I certainly did not make them up. None of them had a thing to do with accounting, CM. They had to do with a Federal prosecutor's interpretation of what they could include under SOX. . .and they got convictions. My company was warned by our legal counsel about what SOX meant in the areas of communications and transparency as case law grew to include the sections that were also part of Sarbanes Oxley. . . as the prosecutors interpreted it. Do you really think that fishing boat captain was an officer of the company much less the president? He wasn't. He was a grunt in the company. How about the college ROOMMATE of one of the Boston Bombers. . . brought up on Sarbanes Oxley charges. . . no corporation at all.
In the DOJ v. Apple on the iBooks anti-trust case, the DOJ prosecutor was threatening to invoke SOX due to the claims that the late Steve Jobs and more than one still living Apple officer had made in their statements because they claimed they were deliberately lying about the agency model of sales as opposed to a retail store model of sales with the DOJ claiming there was no such model as the Agency model, despite it being a time honored business model for many businesses including iTunes, Amazon, and consignment sales. SOX again.
These are facts. . . not associated with the ACCOUNTING end of SOX.