Looking at the Sarbarnes-Oxley Act of 2002, could you guide me to the section or sections that have drastically increased the insurance premiums for the company.
I have taken the trouble of reading the 66 page act, below are some of what I have come accross.
Sections 101 to 109, can not cause any insurance premium to rise.
Under the sections dealing with auditors independance, sections 201 to 209, I see no need for additional costs.
Under the headings of corporate Responsibility, I see no need for an increased insurance premium.
Under several more sections of the act such as those dealing with Analyst conflict of Interest, where does the need for increased insurance premiums come from.
Under section 8 of the act, "Criminal Fraud Accountability" are you suggesting that we as shareholders should provide an insurance policy against Criminal penalties for altering documents (Sec 802), or (Sec 803) Debts nondischargeable if incurred in violation of securities fraud laws, or even section 808, Criminal penalties for defrauding shareholders of publicly traded companies.
Do we really need to provide insurance for cover to cover white-collor crime.
Basically their is no need for additional insurance premiums if the directors of the company are honest people. By all means it is correct and proper to have insurance cover for human error or honest mistakes.
I would like to know, how much the insurance premiums cost and what exactly I as a shareholder am providing cover for, If it is for allowing the directors to commit fraud, then let us find out.
AMS
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
