August 21, 2018

SEC Calls Off the Dogs on Exxon Mobil

Exxon Mobil Corp. is out of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s doghouse for now, as the regulator ended its two-year accounting investigation into how the company calculates the value of its assets, as well as possible oily investor disclosures about climate change.

According to a Bloomberg News report, Exxon Mobil received a letter from the SEC on Aug. 2 that said it would take no enforcement action against the company. In an email to Bloomberg, Exxon spokesman Scott Silvestri said, “We are confident our financial reporting meets all legal and accounting requirements.”

The probe, which began in 2016, examined “whether Exxon has for decades failed to alert investors about potential climate-change risks for a company with annual sales that could rival the world’s top 50 national economies,” Bloomberg News wrote.

The SEC also looked at why Exxon Mobil hadn’t written down the value of its oil and gas reserves since the price of oil started dropping. A Sept. 20, 2016, Wall Street Journal article said the probe may have signaled the start of a “new front of climate-related regulation and enforcement at the SEC.”

At the time, Caleb gave props to the SEC for lumping investigations into accounting and climate change together:

If the SEC were just looking into costs related to climate change, Exxon supporters would be screaming bloody murder. But when you’re asking questions about why a company hasn’t suffered any impairment while its peers have been getting crushed, you can’t really be too upset about it. Their concerns seem pretty legitimate! And the CEO explanation of, “We don’t do write-downs,” and, “We hold people accountable,” doesn’t really explain anything! So the SEC wants to look at the details…and figured as long as they were doing that, they’d take a look at the climate change stuff too. It’ll save them a trip.

In its letter to Exxon Mobil, the SEC said the decision “shouldn’t be seen as an exoneration” and “the probe could be reopened later,” according to Bloomberg News.

While the SEC has dropped its investigation for now, the attorneys general in New York and Massachusetts have not. Both states are still hot on the trail of Exxon Mobil—and whether its public statements about climate change misled investors.

Exxon Mobil tried to block the states’ investigations in court, saying they were politically motivated, but a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit in March 2018, saying, “Exxon’s allegations that the AGs are pursing bad faith investigations in order to violate Exxon’s constitutional rights are implausible,” according to the New York Times.

The Accounting News Roundup newsletter is back! Every Friday you’ll get a recap of recent content posted on Going Concern, On This Date in Going Concern History, list of hot remote and hybrid accounting jobs, and more. Sign up here today.

Image: iStock/ClarkandCompany

Leave a Reply

Related articles

Madoff Feeders Getting Some Unwanted Attention

The SEC, feeling confident these days, has filed a complaint against Cohmad Securities Corporation and its Chairman, Chief Operating Officer, and one of the brokers, saying they “actively marketed Madoff investments while ‘knowingly or recklessly disregarding facts indicating that Madoff was operating a fraud.'”
Call us Captain Obv but that sounds like they were either dumb or in on the scam. Either way, they can’t be too psyched about it.
An additional complaint has been filed by the SEC against Stanley Chais, an investment adviser who put all of the assets he oversaw into casa de Madoff.
Irving Picard, who might have the most thankless job in America, also sued both Cohmad and Chais, because, you know, a few people want their money back. The trustee’s complaint against Cohmad spells it out:

The trustee’s lawsuit asserted that fees paid to Cohmad by Mr. Madoff were based on records showing the actual cash status of customer accounts — the amounts invested and withdrawn — without including the fictional profits shown in the statements provided to customers. When a customer’s withdrawals exceeded the cash invested, Cohmad’s employees no longer earned fees from that account — even though the customer’s statements still showed a substantial balance, according to the lawsuit.

This arrangement indicated that Cohmad and its representatives knew about the Ponzi scheme and knew that the profits investors were allegedly earning were bogus, according to the trustee’s complaint.

Good luck explaining that.

Brokerage Firm and 4 Others Sued in Madoff Case
[New York Times]

SEC Rule Would Crack Down on Celebrity Board Members

oj-simpson-mugshot.jpgNow that the SEC has got this Ponzi thing under control, it can focus on more important matters like getting famous people off companies’ board of directors because, you know, they don’t really know shit about the companies they serve.
Perfect example: Tommy Franks, former commander of forces in Iraq, who resigned his seat on Bank of America’s board last week, was on the audit committee. The AUDIT COMMITTEE.
That’s actually not even the best example. According to Bloomberg, everyone’s favorite acquitted killer, O.J. Simpson was on the audit committee of Infinity Broadcasting Corporation before he was charged with murder in 1994. O.J. Simpson. Audit committee. Yes.
We could go on to tell you about Lance Armstrong missing 11 board meetings but still getting paid over $70,000 by Morgans Hotel Group or Gerald Ford sitting on the Board of Traveler’s Insurance (owned by Citi) until he was 85 years old but you get the picture.
This is your SEC, citizens of America, getting their shit together since 1934.

Armstrong, ‘Celebrity’ Directors Targeted in SEC Rule
[Bloomberg]