Sample Solution

Government regulations have had a significant impact on the ability of firms to conduct their normal business operations. In particular, new reporting requirements have been some of the most challenging for companies to comply with, as they often require substantial investments in compliance management and infrastructure.

One recent government regulation that has significantly hindered a firm’s ability to conduct its normal course of business is the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The GDPR regulates how companies collect, store, process, and share data collected from individuals who are located within or interact with businesses located within the EU. Companies must ensure they comply with several key elements including obtaining explicit consent from consumers when collecting personal data; keeping accurate records of processing activities; protecting personal data against misuse and unauthorized access; and allowing individuals to request access to their data as well as make changes or delete it altogether. These stringent reporting requirements can be difficult for businesses if not properly managed due diligence ahead of time. This is especially true for smaller firms who lack resources devoted towards compliance management and may struggle to meet these standards in a timely manner or at all.

Another example would be the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act passed in 2010 following the financial crisis of 2008 which called for a new set of rules designed to strengthen safeguards on consumer finance protection while increasing transparency across financial institutions. One major element was strengthening investor protection by transitioning much more registration information online through EDGAR (Electronic Data Gathering Analysis & Retrieval) filing system so that investors could look further into financial statements required by publicly traded companies— such as annual reports — before making an investment decision. While this could greatly benefit investors, it requires additional compliance efforts from companies leading them needing more personnel dedicated towards regulatory affairs which can increase overhead costs substantially without any direct revenues from such an expenditure .

Classmate 1: Another example of government regulations that have helped firms is The Sarbanes-Oxley Act implementation back in 2002 after Enron’s accounting scandal occurred which held corporate executives accountable for properly assessing internal controls over financial reporting accuracy among other aspects under its scope. This improved confidence in corporate governance principles since stakeholders had assurance now that company leaders were obligated by law – thus having better quality oversight procedures backed up legally – even though those same regulations put extra burden operations wise due to added complexity costing both money & time investments..

Classmate 2: Yes I agree! And another one too would be International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) issued by International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) which provided increased transparency on how corporations reported earnings results worldwide along with consistent measurements & disclosure protocols across multinational industries given global economic growth pushing cross-border transactions requiring additional measures beyond domestic ones already established earlier prior years so overall consistency could remain despite different jurisdictions shifting Nature/ formality depending certain countries’ local laws versus others..

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 WhatsApp Us Now