监管虚假公司会计:2008年第71号公司法有足够的效力吗?

E. Olivier
{"title":"监管虚假公司会计:2008年第71号公司法有足够的效力吗?","authors":"E. Olivier","doi":"10.47348/samlj/v33/i1a1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article questions whether the enforcement mechanisms in the Companies Act 71 of 2008 (the Act) are adequate deterrents to financial reporting misconduct and whether they provide suitable sanctions to punish wrongdoers. The South African regulatory approach to company directors and financial reporting compliance places great emphasis on stakeholder protection and board accountability. By criminalising the publication of false financial statements, providing civil remedies to prejudiced stakeholders and robust protection for whistleblowers, empowering regulatory agencies to investigate allegations of accounting fraud and penalise transgressors, and by creating a broad net of liability for corporate decision-makers who allow or cause the publication of false financial reporting, the Act takes a firm stance that accounting fraud must be discouraged. The Act’s enforcement mechanisms in respect of financial reporting are commendable, but detection and enforcement will likely remain challenging unless a concerted effort is made to educate the public about financial reporting misconduct and its dangers, sufficient funding is provided to the regulatory agencies, consistent use is made of the available criminal, civil, and administrative remedies, and Parliament reconsiders the appropriateness of the maximum penalties for accounting fraud.","PeriodicalId":118675,"journal":{"name":"South African Mercantile Law Journal","volume":"91 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulating against False Corporate Accounting: Does the Companies Act 71 of 2008 Have Sufficient Teeth?\",\"authors\":\"E. Olivier\",\"doi\":\"10.47348/samlj/v33/i1a1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article questions whether the enforcement mechanisms in the Companies Act 71 of 2008 (the Act) are adequate deterrents to financial reporting misconduct and whether they provide suitable sanctions to punish wrongdoers. The South African regulatory approach to company directors and financial reporting compliance places great emphasis on stakeholder protection and board accountability. By criminalising the publication of false financial statements, providing civil remedies to prejudiced stakeholders and robust protection for whistleblowers, empowering regulatory agencies to investigate allegations of accounting fraud and penalise transgressors, and by creating a broad net of liability for corporate decision-makers who allow or cause the publication of false financial reporting, the Act takes a firm stance that accounting fraud must be discouraged. The Act’s enforcement mechanisms in respect of financial reporting are commendable, but detection and enforcement will likely remain challenging unless a concerted effort is made to educate the public about financial reporting misconduct and its dangers, sufficient funding is provided to the regulatory agencies, consistent use is made of the available criminal, civil, and administrative remedies, and Parliament reconsiders the appropriateness of the maximum penalties for accounting fraud.\",\"PeriodicalId\":118675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Mercantile Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"91 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Mercantile Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47348/samlj/v33/i1a1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Mercantile Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/samlj/v33/i1a1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文质疑2008年《公司法》第71号的执行机制是否足以威慑财务报告不当行为,以及它们是否提供适当的制裁措施来惩罚违法者。南非对公司董事和财务报告合规的监管方法非常强调利益相关者保护和董事会问责制。通过将发布虚假财务报表定为刑事犯罪,为受偏见的利益相关者提供民事救济,并为举报人提供强有力的保护,授权监管机构调查会计欺诈指控并惩罚违规者,并为允许或导致发布虚假财务报告的公司决策者建立广泛的责任网,该法案坚定地表明,必须阻止会计欺诈。该法案在财务报告方面的执行机制是值得赞扬的,但检测和执行可能仍然具有挑战性,除非共同努力教育公众财务报告不当行为及其危险,向监管机构提供足够的资金,一致使用现有的刑事、民事和行政补救措施,以及议会重新考虑对会计欺诈的最高处罚的适当性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulating against False Corporate Accounting: Does the Companies Act 71 of 2008 Have Sufficient Teeth?
This article questions whether the enforcement mechanisms in the Companies Act 71 of 2008 (the Act) are adequate deterrents to financial reporting misconduct and whether they provide suitable sanctions to punish wrongdoers. The South African regulatory approach to company directors and financial reporting compliance places great emphasis on stakeholder protection and board accountability. By criminalising the publication of false financial statements, providing civil remedies to prejudiced stakeholders and robust protection for whistleblowers, empowering regulatory agencies to investigate allegations of accounting fraud and penalise transgressors, and by creating a broad net of liability for corporate decision-makers who allow or cause the publication of false financial reporting, the Act takes a firm stance that accounting fraud must be discouraged. The Act’s enforcement mechanisms in respect of financial reporting are commendable, but detection and enforcement will likely remain challenging unless a concerted effort is made to educate the public about financial reporting misconduct and its dangers, sufficient funding is provided to the regulatory agencies, consistent use is made of the available criminal, civil, and administrative remedies, and Parliament reconsiders the appropriateness of the maximum penalties for accounting fraud.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信