PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 8, 2002
Investor Confidence in Public Accounting Act of 2002 Directs the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to designate an Independent Public Accounting Board (IPAB), subject to SEC oversight, which shall exercise regulatory jurisdiction over public accounting firms.Directs IPAB to: (1) establish and enforce auditor quality control and auditing standards to be used by registered independent public accounting firms (RIPA firm); (2) assess periodically RIPA firm compliance; and (3) establish record retention criteria.Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to prohibit RIPA firms from conducting specified non-audit services for a securities issuer contemporaneously with either: (1) auditing the issuer; or (2) receiving general revenues from it.Prohibits a RIPA firm from performing auditing services for an issuer if any management-level personnel of that issuer had been an employee of the RIPA during the 2-year period preceding such audit (thereby preventing revolving-door conflicts-of-interest).Sets forth procedures for: (1) mandatory registration of RIPA firms with IPAB; and (2) IPAB investigations and disciplinary proceedings.Directs the SEC to recognize generally accepted accounting principles established by a U.S. standard setting body that meets prescribed criteria.Makes it unlawful for any officer, director, or affiliated person of an issuer registered with the SEC to make material misrepresentations to a RIPA.Increases the number of SEC professional accountant positions to provide enhanced oversight of auditors and auditing services.Instructs the SEC to require issuers to submit periodic financial disclosures pertaining to transactions and relationships: (1) likely to expose the issuer to liability or impaired financial status; and (2) necessary for an understanding of their business purpose and economic substance.Mandates prompt electronic disclosure of affiliate transactions.Directs the SEC to submit recommendations to IPAB regarding: (1) the treatment of stock options; and (2) the consolidation and disclosure of special purpose entities and similar types of affiliates or related parties under IPAB accounting standards.
People & committees
Sen. Dodd, Christopher J. [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S8-10)
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.2004 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.2004 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.2004 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.2004 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.