SOX
U.S. law mandating financial reporting controls and accountability
AS9110C
International standard for aviation maintenance quality management systems
Quick Verdict
SOX mandates financial controls and accountability for US public companies via ICFR audits, while AS9110C is a voluntary QMS certification for aerospace MROs ensuring maintenance safety and traceability. SOX prevents fraud legally; AS9110C boosts market access and quality.
SOX
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
Key Features
- Mandates CEO/CFO personal certification of financial reports
- Requires management ICFR assessment and auditor attestation
- Establishes PCAOB for public audit firm oversight
- Prohibits non-audit services to ensure auditor independence
- Imposes criminal penalties for false certifications and tampering
AS9110C
AS9110C: Quality Management Systems for Aviation Maintenance
Key Features
- Risk-based thinking in strategic and operational planning
- Configuration management and traceability controls
- Counterfeit and suspect parts prevention
- Human factors in root cause analysis
- Continuing airworthiness and release requirements
Detailed Analysis
A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.
SOX Details
What It Is
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) is a U.S. federal regulation enacted post-Enron scandals. It mandates corporate accountability through enhanced financial disclosures and internal controls. Primary purpose: protect investors via accurate reporting. Scope covers public companies; uses risk-based, top-down ICFR approach with COSO framework.
Key Components
- **Titles I-XIPCAOB oversight (Title I), auditor independence (Title II), certifications (Sections 302/906), ICFR assessments (Section 404).
- Core areas: entity-level controls, ITGCs, financial close, access controls.
- No fixed controls; focuses key controls preventing material misstatements.
- Compliance via annual management reports, auditor attestations for non-exempt filers.
Why Organizations Use It
Legal mandate for U.S. public issuers; reduces fraud risk, builds investor trust. Strategic benefits: operational efficiency, M&A readiness, lower capital costs. Enhances governance, deters misconduct via penalties.
Implementation Overview
Phased: scoping, documentation, testing, remediation, monitoring. Applies to public firms; scaled for size/exemptions (EGCs, non-accelerated). Requires annual audits, continuous readiness.
AS9110C Details
What It Is
AS9110C (AS9110:2016 Rev C) is an international quality management system (QMS) standard for aviation maintenance organizations, such as repair stations and MRO providers. It builds on ISO 9001:2015 with aerospace-specific requirements for continuing airworthiness, using a risk-based thinking approach across its 10-clause high-level structure.
Key Components
- Core pillars: context, leadership, planning, support, operation, evaluation, improvement.
- Aviation additions: configuration management, counterfeit parts prevention, human factors, traceability, preservation.
- Built on Annex SL framework; no fixed number of controls—focus on documented information and process effectiveness.
- Certification model via IAQG-accredited bodies, listed in OASIS database.
Why Organizations Use It
- Ensures regulatory compliance (FAA/EASA) and customer contracts.
- Mitigates safety risks, improves on-time delivery and customer satisfaction.
- Enables market access to OEMs, airlines; builds stakeholder trust.
Implementation Overview
- Phased: gap analysis, process design, training, audits (6-12 months typical).
- Applies to MROs globally; requires internal audits, management reviews before certification.
Key Differences
| Aspect | SOX | AS9110C |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Financial reporting, ICFR, corporate governance | Aerospace MRO quality management, maintenance controls |
| Industry | Public companies, all sectors, US-focused | Aviation maintenance organizations, global aerospace |
| Nature | Mandatory US federal law, SEC/PCAOB enforced | Voluntary certification standard, IAQG/SAE based |
| Testing | Annual ICFR audits, management assessment, PCAOB standards | Internal audits, certification audits, process verification |
| Penalties | Criminal fines, imprisonment, SEC enforcement | Loss of certification, market exclusion, no legal penalties |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about SOX and AS9110C
SOX FAQ
AS9110C FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...
How to Implement CIS Controls v8.1 as a ‘Control Backbone’ for NIS2 & DORA (Step-by-Step Implementation Guide)
Deploy CIS Controls v8.1 as a control backbone for NIS2 & DORA compliance. Step-by-step roadmap (IG1→IG2), deliverables, metrics & evidence model for hybrid/clo
Thailand PDPA Enforcement Trends 2025: Analyzing 1,048 Complaints, Breach Volumes, and Hidden Lessons for Proactive Compliance
Decode PDPC Thailand's 1,048 complaints & 610 breaches. Uncover consent/security violations, project 2025 enforcement. Risk heatmap, self-assessment & playbook
Proving CIS Controls v8.1 Works: A KPI & Evidence Framework for Board Reporting, Audits, and Continuous Assurance
Prove CIS Controls v8.1 effectiveness with KPI catalog, evidence checklist & reporting cadence. Ideal for board reports, audits & cyber-insurance. Measure outco
Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM
Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform
Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.
Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages
GDPR UK vs CIS Controls
Compare UK GDPR vs CIS Controls: Key differences in principles, enforcement, DPIAs, and cyber hygiene. Align for resilient compliance. Optimize your strategy now!
SAFe vs TISAX
Compare SAFe vs TISAX: Scale enterprise agility with SAFe's Lean-Agile framework or secure automotive supply chains via TISAX assessments. Discover key differences, benefits, and when to choose each for IT success.
ISO 14064 vs ISO/IEC 42001:2023
Discover ISO 14064 vs ISO/IEC 42001:2023—GHG emissions standards meet AI governance. Compare scopes, principles & implementation for compliance & innovation. Dive in!