IN THE MATTER OF JAY J. SHAPIRO, CPA, P.C. AND JAY J. SHAPIRO, CPA
Jay J. Shapiro, CPA, and his firm knowingly issued an unregistered audit report for a public company in 2004, violating Sarbanes-Oxley Act Section 102(a), prompting SEC proceedings seeking cease-and-desist orders, practice suspension, and possible disgorgement.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) charged Jay J. Shapiro, CPA, and his firm, Jay J. Shapiro, CPA, P.C., with willfully violating Section 102(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act by issuing an audit report for a public company in 2004 without registering with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), a requirement effective since October 22, 2003. The SEC alleged that Shapiro knowingly caused his firm to engage in unauthorized auditing activity, thereby lacking the legal qualifications to represent clients before the Commission. Proceedings were initiated seeking cease-and-desist orders, potential censure or permanent denial of practice rights before the SEC, and possible disgorgement, though no final sanctions or monetary penalties had been imposed at the time of filing.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) initiated administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings against Jay J. Shapiro, CPA, and his accounting firm, Jay J. Shapiro, CPA, P.C., for violating Section 102(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The violation stemmed from the firm’s preparation and issuance of an audit report for a public company in 2004, despite not being registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), a legal requirement that took effect on October 22, 2003. The SEC alleged that Shapiro knowingly caused his firm to engage in unregistered auditing activity, thereby lacking the requisite qualifications to represent clients before the Commission. The proceedings, filed under Sections 4C and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 102(e), sought to determine whether Shapiro and his firm should be subject to cease-and-desist orders, censure, or permanent denial of the privilege to practice before the SEC. The SEC also considered whether disgorgement of ill-gotten gains should be ordered, though no specific monetary amounts were disclosed. A hearing before an administrative law judge was scheduled to assess the truth of the allegations and determine appropriate sanctions, with an initial decision required within 300 days of service. At the time of the filing, no final outcome or settlement had been reached, and the matter remained pending adjudication.
Extracted insights
- agency the united states securities and exchange commission
- The United States Securities and Exchange Commission Announced the issuance Order Instituting Administrative and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings
- Shapiro P.C. Prepared and issued an audit report on the financial statements of a public company in 2004
- Shapiro P.C. Violated Section 102(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
- The Order Institutes cease-and-desist proceedings against Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
- The Order Determines whether the allegations in the Order are true
- The Order Determines whether a cease-and-desist order should be entered against Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro
- The Order Determines whether they should be censured or temporarily or permanently denied the privilege of appearing or practicing before the Commission as an accountant
- The Order Determines whether they should be ordered to pay disgorgement
- A hearing Will be scheduled before an administrative law judge
- The Order Directs the Administrative Law Judge to issue an initial decision in this matter no later than 300 days from the date of service of the Order
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Release No. 56432 / September 13, 2007 ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING ENFORCEMENT Release No. 2712 / September 13, 2007 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING File No. 3-12793 IN THE MATTER OF JAY J. SHAPIRO, CPA, P.C. AND JAY J. SHAPIRO, CPA The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) announced the issuance of an Order Instituting Administrative and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Sections 4C and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 102(e) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice (Order) against Jay J. Shapiro, CPA, P.C. (Shapiro P.C.) and Jay J. Shapiro, CPA (Shapiro). The Order alleges that Shapiro, a certified public accountant, knowingly caused his accounting firm, Shapiro P.C., to prepare and issue an audit report on the financial statements of a public company in 2004, without first registering with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (Board). Section 102(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Sarbanes-Oxley Act) prohibits accounting firms not registered with the Board from preparing or issuing audit reports with respect to any issuer after October 22, 2003. The Order alleges that, by this conduct, Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro lacked the requisite qualifications to represent others and that Shapiro P.C willfully violated Section 102(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Based on the above, the Order institutes cease-and-desist proceedings against Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), as well as proceedings under Section 4C(a)(1) of the Exchange Act and Rule 102(e)(1)(i) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice against Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro, and additionally as to Shapiro P.C., Section 4C(a)(3) of the Exchange Act and Rule 102(e)(1)(iii) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, to determine: whether the allegations in the Order are true; whether a cease-and-desist order should be entered against Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro; whether they should be censured or temporarily or permanently denied the privilege of appearing or practicing before the Commission as an accountant; and whether they should be ordered to pay disgorgement. A hearing will be scheduled before an administrative law judge to determine whether the allegations in the Order are true, to provide Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro an opportunity to dispute these allegations, and to determine what sanctions, if any, are appropriate. The Order directs the Administrative Law Judge to issue an initial decision in this matter no later than 300 days from the date of service of the Order.
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Release No. 56432 / September 13, 2007 ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING ENFORCEMENT Release No. 2712 / September 13, 2007 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING File No. 3-12793 IN THE MATTER OF JAY J. SHAPIRO, CPA, P.C. AND JAY J. SHAPIRO, CPA The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) announced the issuance of an Order Instituting Administrative and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Sections 4C and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 102(e) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice (Order) against Jay J. Shapiro, CPA, P.C. (Shapiro P.C.) and Jay J. Shapiro, CPA (Shapiro). The Order alleges that Shapiro, a certified public accountant, knowingly caused his accounting firm, Shapiro P.C., to prepare and issue an audit report on the financial statements of a public company in 2004, without first registering with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (Board). Section 102(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Sarbanes-Oxley Act) prohibits accounting firms not registered with the Board from preparing or issuing audit reports with respect to any issuer after October 22, 2003. The Order alleges that, by this conduct, Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro lacked the requisite qualifications to represent others and that Shapiro P.C willfully violated Section 102(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Based on the above, the Order institutes cease-and-desist proceedings against Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), as well as proceedings under Section 4C(a)(1) of the Exchange Act and Rule 102(e)(1)(i) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice against Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro, and additionally as to Shapiro P.C., Section 4C(a)(3) of the Exchange Act and Rule 102(e)(1)(iii) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, to determine: whether the allegations in the Order are true; whether a cease-and-desist order should be entered against Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro; whether they should be censured or temporarily or permanently denied the privilege of appearing or practicing before the Commission as an accountant; and whether they should be ordered to pay disgorgement. A hearing will be scheduled before an administrative law judge to determine whether the allegations in the Order are true, to provide Shapiro P.C. and Shapiro an opportunity to dispute these allegations, and to determine what sanctions, if any, are appropriate. The Order directs the Administrative Law Judge to issue an initial decision in this matter no later than 300 days from the date of service of the Order.