U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
SEC Seal
Home | Previous Page
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Public Statement by SEC Chairman:
How to Prevent Future Enrons


Chairman Harvey L. Pitt

"Op-Ed" for the Wall Street Journal

December 11, 2001

These remarks reflect solely the personal views of Mr. Pitt, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, the individual members of the Commission, or its Staff.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating Enron's meltdown and its tragic consequences. Until all the facts are known, there is nothing that can or should be said about who may be responsible for this terrible failure. The public can be confident, however, that we will deal with any wrongdoing and wrongdoers swiftly and completely, to ensure full protection of investor interests.

Even before the Enron situation, we were working to improve and modernize our disclosure system -- to make disclosures more meaningful, and intelligible, to average investors. Our immediate concern in the wake of this tragedy should be to understand how to prevent more events like this. Of course, those with intent and creativity can override any system of checks or restraints. Believing that we can create a foolproof system is both illusory and dangerous. But investors are entitled to the best regulatory system possible, and we can achieve more than we presently do if we focus attention on finding solutions instead of scapegoats.

Our current reporting and financial disclosure system has needed improvement and modernization for quite some time. Disclosures to investors are now required only quarterly or annually, and even then are issued long after the quarter or year has ended. This creates the potential for a financial "perfect storm." Information investors receive can be stale on arrival and mandated financial statements are often arcane and impenetrable.

To reassure investors and restore their confidence, the public and private sectors must partner to produce a sensible and workable approach that includes, in addition to our existing after-the-fact enforcement actions:

  • A system of "current" disclosure. Investors need current information, not just periodic disclosures, along with clear requirements for public companies to make affirmative disclosures of, and to provide updates to, unquestionably material information in real time.
  • Public company disclosure of significant current "trend" and "evaluative" data. Providing current trend and evaluative data, as well as historical information, would enable investors to assess a company's financial posture as it evolves and changes. It would also preclude "wooden" approaches to disclosure, and encourage evaluative disclosures that begin where line-item and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles disclosures end. This information, upon which corporate executives and bankers already base critical decisions, can be presented without confusing or misleading investors, prejudicing legitimate corporate interests, or exposing companies to unfair assertions of liability.
  • Financial statements that are clear and informative. Investors and employees concerned with preserving and increasing their retirement funds deserve comprehensive financial reports they can easily interpret and understand.
  • Conscientious identification and assessment by public companies and their auditors of critical accounting principles. Public companies and their advisers should identify the three, four or five most critical accounting principles upon which a company's financial status depends, and which involve the most complex, subjective or ambiguous decisions or assessments. Investors should be told, concisely and clearly, how these principles are applied, as well as information about the range of possible effects in differing applications of these principles.
  • Private-sector standard setting that responds expeditiously, concisely and clearly to current and immediate needs. A lengthy agenda that achieves its goals too slowly, or not at all, like good intentions, paves a road to the wrong locale.
  • An environment that encourages public companies and auditors to seek our guidance in advance. The SEC must be, and must appear to be, a constructive resource and hospitable sounding board for difficult and complex accounting issues before mistakes are made. We will always need, and utilize, after-the-fact enforcement, and we can, and will, improve our review of financial reports. But by now it is painfully clear that preventing problems is infinitely superior, and far less damaging, than acting after investor funds, retirement accounts or life savings are dissipated.
  • An effective and transparent system of self-regulation for the accounting profession, subject to our rigorous, but non-duplicative, oversight. As the major accounting firm CEOs and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants recently proposed, the profession, in concert with us, must provide assurances of comprehensive and effective self-regulation, including monitoring adherence to professional and ethical standards, and meaningfully disciplining firms or individuals falling short of those standards. Such a system has costs, but those who benefit from the system should help absorb them.
  • More meaningful investor protection by audit committees. Audit committees must be proactive, not merely reactive, to ensure the quality and integrity of corporate financial reports. Especially critical is the need to improve interaction between audit committee members and senior management and outside auditors. Audit committees must understand why critical accounting principles were chosen, how they were applied, and have a basis for believing the end result fairly presents their company's actual status.
  • Analyst recommendations predicated on financial data they have deciphered and interpreted. Analysts and their employers should eschew expressing views without an adequate data foundation, or when confused by company presentations.

Our system can be improved and modernized. In a crisis, some seek easy answers to difficult problems by pointing fingers. But true reform requires rigorous analysis, respect for competing views, and compromise and statesmanship by all concerned. We are up to the task, but only if we are able to tap our best minds to produce our most creative solutions, and only if we are able to discuss these issues openly and honestly. We are committed to that end, and we seek participation from everyone with an interest in our capital markets. Together, in partnership, we can make a difference. That is our vision, and our mission.



Modified: 12/11/2001