Sarbanes Oxley was created to prevent executives from looting their own companies (a la Enron) and then feigning ignorance and blaming their underlings when everything blew up.
The reason why it seems to be ridiculously onerous is because it gives the government the power to slam execs in jail if they do not have sufficient control over the company.
It's executive bullshit that ruined your day, which is caused by executive paranoia about going to jail which was caused by executives who stole from their own companies.
Has it worked? I'm not supporting any opposition to SOX, however we all know of many processes that offer no real checks or value, but we have to do it...just because why not, you're getting paid for it. In the case of SOX and the like, the argument can be "well everyone else has to do the same illusion of control work, so the drag is similar".
Most businesses are filled with processes that everyone knows are done for absolutely no value to anyone, but we do them anyways and they absolutely sap our soul.
Unfortunately it's not enforced. Obama could slam half of the CEOs of Wall Street in jail with Sarbanes Oxley violations for wilfully looting their own firms exactly as was done to Enron, but he made an executive decision not to (a quick glance at who pays Clinton's $500,000 post presidential speaking fees might give a hint as to why).
Unfortunately the lack of any real enforcement means that it hasn't been all that successful.
The reason why it seems to be ridiculously onerous is because it gives the government the power to slam execs in jail if they do not have sufficient control over the company.
It's executive bullshit that ruined your day, which is caused by executive paranoia about going to jail which was caused by executives who stole from their own companies.