SEC charges Sequential Brands for goodwill impairment failures
By 
Jaclyn Jaeger2020-12-14T17:46:00
The SEC has filed a civil complaint against brand-management company Sequential Brands Group for ignoring “clear, objective evidence of likely goodwill impairment.”
Related articles
-
ArticleCohnReznick fined $1.9M for audit failures at Sequential Brands, Longfin
Audit firm CohnReznick agreed to pay $1.9 million as part of a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission for improper conduct at two of its clients the SEC previously charged with filing fraudulent financial statements.
-
ArticleSequential Brands avoids fine in SEC goodwill impairment case
Sequential Brands won’t be fined as part of a settlement with the SEC over charges it violated accounting principles in securities law when it did not acknowledge goodwill impairment that eventually landed on its balance sheet as a $304 million write-down.
-
ArticleFASB proposes goodwill alternative for certain private companies, nonprofits
The Financial Accounting Standards Board proposed a standard update to provide an accounting alternative to the goodwill triggering event assessment for certain private companies and nonprofit organizations.
More from Regulatory Enforcement
-
News BriefCFPB ends probe into Meta’s financial advertising practices
Meta says it is no longer under investigation by the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the latest instance of the agency scaling back enforcement under President Donald Trump.
-
News BriefTexas sues Johnson & Johnson, Kenvue over alleged misleading marketing of Tylenol
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued two pharmaceutical companies for ”deceptively marketing Tylenol to pregnant mothers” despite risks linked to autism. The filing came two days before HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared to walk back the claims.
-
News BriefCFPB scraps bad-actor registry, citing cost-benefit issues
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau shut down a registry of non-bank financial firms that broke consumer laws. The agency cites the costs being ”not justified by the speculative and unquantified benefits to consumers.”