
The United States
Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"SEC") recently sued Maynard Jenkins, former chief executive officer of
CSK Auto Corporation (
"CSK"), to reimburse CSK and its stockholders for more than $4 million worth of bonuses and stock sales while CSK was allegedly committing accounting fraud. Are you asking yourself "so what's that have to do with me in the construction industry?" Read on and I'll tell you.
According to the SEC's
Complaint, during part of Mr. Maynard's tenure at CSK (parent of auto part stores Checker Auto Parts, Schucks Auto Supply, and Kragen Auto Parts), the company contracted for deferred vendor allowances (i.e., rebates) from various auto part suppliers. The

more CSK bought from a supplier, the bigger the allowance. Receiving allowances lowered CSK's cost of purchasing inventory. That lowered CSK's
cost of goods sold, giving a higher profit margin on sales allowing them to report higher revenue to investors. But trouble started when some suppliers didn't pay their allowances.
The SEC alleges that CSK executives hid uncollectible allowances instead of writing them off as required by Generally Accepted Account Principles. That resulted in CSK reporting better than actual performance to investors. Later, CSK had to re-state their earnings for 2002, 2003, and 2004.
The SEC claims that under the "clawback" provisions in Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("SOX"), Mr. Maynard must give back to CSK:
- Bonuses he received within 12 months after this under-reporting occurred
- Profits he made on the sale of CSK stock during that period
And why should you or I in the construction industry care about the SEC suing a former auto parts store executive?
- For many years various sectors of the construction industry have used rebates, refunds, and discounts like CSK's vendor allowances to sell building materials and equipment. Prime contractors, subcontractors, and material suppliers have all enjoyed these kinds of subsidies and incentives that lower their costs and increase their profit margins. Executives at some could "overlook" writing-down unpaid incentives like management at CSK did. And executives of those who are publicly could also hear from the SEC, just like Mr. Maynard.
- The SEC isn't alleging that Mr. Maynard broke any other securities laws. They're not suing Mr. Maynard for securities fraud. And the Department of Justice hasn't charged him with any criminal offense under the securities laws (though the DoJ did charge others involved). Perhaps this signals a more aggressive SEC enforcement policy, going after reimbursement from executives under Section 304 of SOX without alleging fraud or other securities law violations? In any event, the SEC is serving notice to executives at publicly traded companies that the agency can come and try to clawback money made while under-reporting uncollectible allowances, rebates, and similar incentives; regardless of whether there's any other violation of the securities laws.