What are the pros/cons of using a Filer API token versus the Workiva API token?
In order to use the Workiva Filer API token, EDGAR Next requires that your EDGAR Account (CIK) performs a one-time, non-expiring delegation process to Workiva. This authorizes Workiva to submit filings on your behalf, and allows your users to use only their personal User Tokens in the Test and Live Filing steps, or optionally choose to use the “File With Workiva” feature.
The “pros” are considerable - by delegating to Workiva, you have the option of submitting filings using your own Filer API and User Tokens, only your User Token, or utilize the “File With Workiva” feature and supply no tokens. All filings continue to require a valid CCC in the filing package, so no entity whom you have delegated to can not successfully file as your company without the valid CCC. By delegating, you also eliminate the need to specify two or more Technical Administrators in the EDGAR Filer Management dashboard as well as maintaining your Filer API Token, which expires on a yearly basis.
The “cons” are primarily theoretical - by delegating to another entity, you are authorizing that entity to submit filings on your behalf. But without a valid CCC in the filing package, even a delegated entity is unable to successfully file as your company, so this is really no different than the pre-EDGAR Next environment.
-
I think this post suggests that a delegatee can't access the CCC, but I don't think that's correct.
0Du måste logga in om du vill lämna en kommentar.
Kommentarer
1 kommentar