« India and Thailand Governments Learn the Hard Way | Main | Northern Rock Fallout »
November 4, 2007
Equal Disclosure Can Mean Less Disclosure
A new study by Begley, Cheng, and Gao on the effect of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 on the accuracy of analysts' projections notes that, in essence, analysts were less able to forecast earnings accuracy after the Act was passed than before the Act was passed. The inference is that once Congress and the SEC increased disclosure requirements and increased the penalties for inaccurate disclosure, companies actually disclose less. The companies limit what they say to the bare bones of the requirements and, in the process, disclose less information than they have disclosed voluntarily before. This a familiar result. We have watched a similar effect with Regulation FD.
November 4, 2007 in Government and Business | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00e54f79d6f98833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Equal Disclosure Can Mean Less Disclosure:
Comments
In analyzing the affects of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, does this study sufficiently account for the affects of variations in enforcement pre and post Sarbox?
And assuming for the sake of argument that less disclosure is being made, haven't we benefited by ensuring that all investors are now playing on a more even field? That is less disclosure at the same time to everyone as opposed to the multi-tier disclosure model before Sarbox when certain analysts enjoyed privileged access to information.
Posted by: David O'Donnell | Nov 4, 2007 10:22:43 PM
