What is the primary objective of **SOX**?

**The primary objective of SOX is to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures under federal securities laws.** Enacted July 30, 2002, following scandals like Enron and WorldCom, it mandates CEO/CFO certifications (**Section 302**), management assessment of **internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR)** (**Section 404**), auditor independence (**Title II**), and PCAOB oversight (**Title I**) to prevent fraud and ensure transparent financial reporting.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **SOX**?

**SOX applies to all U.S.-listed public companies, including foreign private issuers, and their PCAOB-registered auditors.** Section 404(a) requires all public issuers to assess ICFR annually; **Section 404(b)** mandates external auditor attestation except for non-accelerated filers (public float under $75 million) and Emerging Growth Companies (EGCs, up to 5 years post-IPO unless revenues exceed $1.235 billion). Executives face personal liability under Sections 302/906.

Does **SOX** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**Yes, SOX Section 404(b) requires external auditors to attest to management's ICFR assessment per PCAOB standards for accelerated filers and large accelerated filers.** Non-accelerated filers and EGCs are exempt from this attestation but must comply with Section 404(a) management assessment. PCAOB inspects audit firms annually if auditing >100 issuers, every three years otherwise.

How often should an assessment for **SOX** be performed?

**SOX requires annual management assessment of ICFR effectiveness as of fiscal year-end, reported in Form 10-K under Section 404(a).** Ongoing monitoring includes quarterly CEO/CFO certifications (**Section 302**) for 10-Qs, continuous testing of key controls, and remediation of deficiencies. Mature programs conduct interim testing mid-year and year-end roll-forwards.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **SOX**?

**Non-compliance with SOX triggers civil penalties, criminal fines up to $5 million, and imprisonment up to 20 years for willful false certifications under Section 906 or document tampering under Section 802.** Companies face SEC enforcement, restatements, delisting, investor lawsuits, higher capital costs, and adverse ICFR opinions. Executives risk clawbacks (**Section 304**) and personal bans.

An **SOX** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**No, these SOX FAQs address SOX independently and do not map to other frameworks.** SOX is a U.S. federal statute enforced by SEC/PCAOB, distinct in its ICFR attestation and certification requirements.

What is the first step to begin implementing **SOX**?

**The first step to implement SOX is a top-down risk assessment to scope material financial accounts, processes, and assertions per PCAOB AS 2201.** Form a steering committee, define materiality thresholds (e.g., 5% of assets), map to COSO framework, and document entity-level controls, prioritizing key controls like ITGCs and financial close processes.

What is the primary objective of **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)**?

**The primary objective of MLPS 2.0 is to establish a graded cybersecurity protection system ensuring security controls match the potential harm from system compromise to national security, social order, and public interests.** It classifies systems into five levels (1-5) based on impact severity, mandating commensurate technical, management, physical, and personnel controls via standards like GB/T 22239-2019, with enforcement by Public Security Bureaus.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)**?

**All network operators in mainland China must comply with MLPS 2.0 under Article 21 of the 2017 Cybersecurity Law.** This includes domestic enterprises, foreign-invested firms, cloud providers, and operators of IT, IoT, big data, or industrial systems; critical sectors like finance and energy often classify at Level 3+.

Does **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**Yes, MLPS 2.0 requires external security reviews by licensed Chinese firms for Level 2+ systems, with PSB approval.** Reviews score compliance (minimum 75/100) across technical and management controls; Level 3+ needs annual evaluations per GB/T 28448-2019.

How often should an assessment for **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)** be performed?

**Assessments under MLPS 2.0 must occur biennially for Level 2, annually for Level 3, semi-annually for Level 4, and as mandated for Level 5.** Re-evaluations are also required after major changes; self-inspections apply to all levels.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)**?

**Non-compliance with MLPS 2.0 risks fines up to 100,000 yuan, operational suspensions, system shutdowns, and intensified PSB inspections.** Enforcement ties to license renewals; severe cases involve blacklisting or criminal liability.

Can **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, MLPS 2.0 control domains align with ISO 27001 Annex A and NIST CSF categories.** Organizational, physical, and technical controls map closely, enabling gap analysis via Statement of Applicability, though MLPS adds prescriptive grading and PSB oversight.

What is the first step to begin implementing **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)**?

**The first step is conducting a provisional self-assessment to classify systems into Levels 1-5 based on impact to national security and public interests.** Inventory assets, document rationale per GB/T 22239-2019, then file with local PSB within 30 days for Level 2+.

SOX vs MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)

Standards Comparison

SOX

Mandatory

2002

US federal law mandating financial controls and disclosures

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)

Mandatory

N/A

China's mandatory graded cybersecurity protection scheme

Quick Verdict

SOX mandates financial reporting controls for U.S. public firms via CEO/CFO certifications and ICFR audits, ensuring investor trust. MLPS 2.0 requires graded cybersecurity for China networks, with PSB oversight. Companies adopt SOX for listings, MLPS for China operations.

Financial Reporting

SOX

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

Medium

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Mandates CEO/CFO personal certification of financial reports (Section 302)
Requires management assessment of ICFR effectiveness (Section 404(a))
Demands external auditor ICFR attestation (Section 404(b))
Establishes PCAOB for audit firm oversight and standards
Enforces auditor independence and partner rotation (Title II)

Standard

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)

Multi-Level Protection Scheme 2.0

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

Medium

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Five impact-based protection levels (1-5)
Mandatory classification and PSB registration
Third-party audits for Levels 2+ (75/100 score)
Extended controls for cloud, IoT, big data
Ongoing re-evaluations and law enforcement oversight

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 US federal statute establishing corporate accountability standards for public companies. It aims to protect investors via accurate financial disclosures and robust internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR). SOX uses a risk-based, control-oriented approach integrated with SEC rules and PCAOB standards.

Key Components

**11 TitlesPCAOB creation (Title I), auditor independence (Title II), certifications (Sections 302/906), ICFR assessments (Section 404), whistleblower protections (Section 806).
Relies on COSO framework for control design.
Compliance via annual management reports, auditor attestations (404(b) filers), and enforcement penalties.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for US-listed firms to avoid criminal fines, imprisonment, restatements, delisting. Drives investor confidence, fraud deterrence, process efficiency, M&A readiness, lower capital costs.

Implementation Overview

Top-down risk scoping, documentation, testing, remediation, continuous monitoring. Targets public issuers; exemptions for smaller/EGCs. Annual 404 audits required for accelerated filers.

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme) Details

What It Is

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme 2.0) is China's legally mandated cybersecurity framework under the 2017 Cybersecurity Law (Article 21). It requires network operators to classify systems into five protection levels based on potential harm to national security, social order, and public interests, implementing graded technical, organizational, and governance controls.

Key Components

Core domains: physical security, network protection, data security, access control, monitoring, governance.
Standards: GB/T 22239-2019 (basics), GB/T 25070-2019 (technical), GB/T 28448-2019 (evaluation).
Five levels with common baselines plus extended requirements for cloud, IoT, big data.
Compliance via self-classification, third-party audits (75/100 score), PSB approval.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for China operations; non-compliance risks fines, suspensions.
Enhances resilience, supports market access, aligns with data laws.
Builds regulator trust, reduces breach risks.

Implementation Overview

Phased: scoping, classification, gap analysis, remediation, audits, ongoing monitoring.
Applies to all network operators in China; higher costs/audits for Levels 3+.
Involves local PSB filing, re-evaluations (annual for Level 3).

Key Differences

Aspect	SOX	MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)
Scope	Financial reporting internal controls (ICFR)	Graded cybersecurity for all networks/systems
Industry	U.S. public companies, all sectors	All network operators in China, all sectors
Nature	U.S. federal statute, mandatory for issuers	Chinese regulation, mandatory for networks
Testing	Annual ICFR audits by PCAOB auditors	Level-based third-party security assessments
Penalties	Criminal fines/imprisonment for executives	Fines, operational suspension by PSBs