Disclosure failed during the run up to the financial crisis. As a result, the SEC developed new disclosure requirements for U.S. companies this year. So how well have they worked?
By Eleanor Bloxham, contributor
Disclosure is the often sought remedy in regulation. Rather than specify what a company is required to do, disclosure itself is often used as the regulatory mechanism.
The idea behind requiring disclosure from companies, rather than coming up with specific behavioral requirements, is that, if you specify too much, you run the risk of getting the requirements wrong.
Disclosures can inspire external pressure on corporations from shareholders, creditors, customers, government agencies, rating agencies, members of the community, and the media. But the beneficial impacts of disclosure are highly dependent on two factors -- careful reading of the disclosures and actions taken, based on the disclosures.
Sometimes disclosure leads to corrections; other times it fails miserably.
Disclosure failed during the run up to the financial crisis. The available warning signals, both inside and outside corporations, failed. As a result, the SEC developed new disclosure requirements for U.S. companies this year.
So how well have these disclosures worked? More
|Regulators pave way for Internet "fast lane" with net neutrality rules|
|What stumps Warren Buffett? Minimum wage|
|Apple shares soar on increased buyback|
|Facebook profit triples on mobile growth|
|Thanks to Obamacare, more workers may quit their jobs|