Auditor litigation: Evidence that revenue restatements are determinative

This study extends the Palmrose and Scholz (2004) general litigation and general restatements study by focusing on auditor litigation and revenue restatements. We investigate all potential accounting issues, individually, instead of by their group method, with regard to auditor litigation. The impact of the individual accounting issues implicated in restatements is of concern to auditors and audit standard setters in gauging auditor litigation risk and audit risk. It also is important for financial analysis and securities valuation because investors' losses are greater, and recovery of losses on a percentage basis is lower, when the auditor is a defendant, and especially when the auditor has a more severe, negative litigation experience (Commolli et al., 2012). We examine financial reporting lawsuits filed from 2001 to 2008 and find that revenue restatements—far more than any other kind of restatements—are associated with auditors being named defendants and also auditors experiencing a more severe, negative outcome in the litigation.     

Securities class actions and conditional conservatism: Evidence from two legal events

We use two US court rulings as exogenous shocks to firms' litigation environment and examine the changes in conservative financial reporting following these court decisions. The Silicon Graphics ruling in 1999 imposed a heightened pleading standard and discouraged the filing of shareholder lawsuits against firms with headquarters in the Ninth Circuit. The Tellabs ruling in 2007, however, effectively reversed the Silicon Graphics ruling and made it easier to file securities litigation against Ninth Circuit firms. We predict and find that the reduced litigation risk following the Silicon Graphics ruling discourages conservative reporting for Ninth Circuit firms. By contrast, the elevated threat of shareholder lawsuits following the Tellabs ruling encourages conservative reporting for Ninth Circuit firms relative to non-Ninth Circuit firms. The disciplining effect of the threat of shareholder lawsuits on conservatism is stronger for firms facing higher ex ante litigation risk. The litigation-risk-induced increase (decrease) in reporting conservatism leads to higher (lower) firm valuations.     

Accountability of independent directors: Evidence from firms subject to securities litigation

We examine which independent directors are held accountable when investors sue firms for financial and disclosure-related fraud. Investors can name independent directors as defendants in lawsuits, and they can vote against their reelection to express displeasure over the directors’ ineffectiveness at monitoring managers. In a sample of securities class action lawsuits from 1996 to 2010, about 11% of independent directors are named as defendants. The likelihood of being named is greater for audit committee members and directors who sell stock during the class period. Named directors receive more negative recommendations from Institutional Shareholder Services, a proxy advisory firm, and significantly more negative votes from shareholders than directors in a benchmark sample. They are also more likely than other independent directors to leave sued firms. Overall, shareholders use litigation along with director elections and director retention to hold some independent directors more accountable than others when firms experience financial fraud.     

Seeing is believing? Executives' facial trustworthiness,auditor tenure,and audit fees

Psychology and neuroscience studies document that facial trustworthiness perceptions may affect observers' decision-making process. Our study examines whether auditors' perceptions of client executives' facial trustworthiness are associated with their audit fee decisions. We employ a machine-learning-based face-detection algorithm to measure executives' facial trustworthiness. We find that auditors charge 5.6% less audit fee to firms with trustworthy-looking CFOs than to those with untrustworthy-looking CFOs in initial audit engagements. Auditor tenure weakens the negative association between CFOs' facial trustworthiness and audit fee. Further evidence shows that CFO's facial trustworthiness is associated with neither financial reporting quality nor litigation risk.     

The influence of litigation risk and internal audit source on reliance decisions

External auditor reliance on the work of internal auditors in an integrated audit of the financial statements and internal control is an important audit planning procedure that can impact audit efficiency and effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to examine how perceived auditor litigation risk and internal audit source affect external auditors' reliance decisions in an integrated audit environment under varying levels of risk of material misstatement. In an experimental study using 89 practicing Big 4 auditors, this study finds that auditors who perceive low litigation risk from placing reliance on the work of internal auditors will rely more on outsourced internal auditors than in-house internal auditors. The results also show that auditors' reliance decisions are sensitive to the level of account risk consistent with the risk-based approach to the integrated audit encouraged by the PCAOB.     

Corporate employment,red flags,and audit effort

U.S. regulatory agencies and congressional oversight committees have expressed concerns that auditors often neglect red flags embedded in the operating characteristics of firms that misstate their financial reports. This study examines whether labor employment decisions, a major part of a firm’s operations, help predict accounting improprieties and consequently play a role in audit planning and pricing. We find that negative abnormal employment changes are associated with a higher likelihood of subsequent financial restatements, accounting irregularities, and lawsuits related to accounting fraud, and generally require greater effort from auditors as manifested by higher audit fees and longer audit report lags. Positive abnormal employment changes are associated with subsequent restatements and longer audit report lags, but not associated with fraud or audit fees. Taken together, the results are consistent with auditors recognizing the individual misstatement risks pertaining to companies’ employment decisions. These results suggest that standard setters, regulators, and practitioners should devote more attention to operational statistics to identify potential red flags.     

签字注册会计师的自然轮换状态与强制轮换政策的初步影响

本文考察了中国证券市场中签字注册会计师的自然轮换规律以及强制轮换政策产生的初步影响。自然轮换状态下的经验证据显示,会计师事务所与上市客户之间的长期业务关系普遍以个别签字注册会计师的长期连续签名方式维系。强制轮换政策施行后,各证券特许会计师事务所对该政策的遵循程度从2003年审中的50%左右提高到了2004年审中的80%左右。通过观察签字注册会计师强制轮换前后的审计结果变化,我们初步估计签字注册会计师的强制轮换对提高证券特许会计师事务所公开报告上市公司潜在财务报告问题的促进作用是有限的。     

Accounting misstatements following lawsuits against auditors

This study investigates whether an auditor's experience of litigation in the recent past affects subsequent financial reporting quality. At the audit firm level, we find accounting misstatements occur significantly less (more) often after audit firms are sued (not sued). At the audit office level, the negative association between past litigation and future misstatements is stronger for offices who were directly implicated in the litigation than for the non-accused offices of sued audit firms. Therefore, the litigation experiences of both audit firms and audit offices are incrementally significant predictors of future financial reporting quality.     

Institutional monitoring through shareholder litigation

This paper investigates the effectiveness of using securities class action lawsuits in monitoring defendant firms by institutional lead plaintiffs from two aspects: (1) immediate litigation outcomes, including the probability of surviving the motion to dismiss and the settlement amount, and (2) subsequent governance improvement such as changes in board independence. Using a large sample of securities lawsuits from 1996 to 2005, we show that institutional investors are more likely to serve as the lead plaintiff for lawsuits with certain characteristics. After controlling for these determinants of having an institutional lead plaintiff, we show that securities class actions with institutional owners as lead plaintiffs are less likely to be dismissed and have larger monetary settlements than securities class actions with individual lead plaintiffs. This effect exists for various types of institutions including public pension funds. We also find that, after the lawsuit filings, defendant firms with institutional lead plaintiffs experience greater improvement in their board independence than defendant firms with individual lead plaintiffs. Our study suggests that securities litigation is an effective disciplining tool for institutional owners.     

Board, audit committee and restatement-induced class action lawsuits

We examine the influence of monitoring provided by the board and audit committee on the probability of restatement-induced securities class action lawsuits using a sample of firms that have restated earnings in the period of 1997-2002. Logistic regression of the probability of restatement-induced class action lawsuits indicates a negative association between proportion of independent board members and the likelihood of restatement-induced class action lawsuits. We also find that when the market reacts more negatively to restatement announcements, shareholders are more likely to initiate a class action lawsuit. Finally, we document that restatement of revenues is positively associated with the likelihood of restatement-induced shareholder litigation. Our results are robust after controlling for the restatement initiator, restatements categorized as irregularities and Blue Ribbon Recommendations.     

Determinants and implications of long audit reporting lags: evidence from China

Audit reporting lag is the single most important determinant influencing the timeliness of the release of financial statements. In this study, we first explore the determinants of audit reporting lags in China where the audit market for listed firms is dominated by non-Big 4 auditors. We then examine the implications of long audit reporting lags in subsequent years. We find that selected measures of audit risk and complexity, and auditor expertise are all associated with the length of audit reporting lags in China. Firms with long audit reporting lags are more likely to have the receipt of non-standard opinions in subsequent periods. There is also evidence that firms with extremely long audit reporting lags tend to have more restatements in the subsequent year. As prior research has not specifically investigated the consequences of long audit reporting lags in subsequent years, this study makes an important contribution to the literature in this area.     

Do goodwill impairments affect audit opinions? Evidence from China

There has been a steady growth of goodwill impairments in the Chinese stock market since the adoption of the impairment approach in accounting. The influence of goodwill impairments on a firm’s financial position and profitability give reason to doubt its current and future performance. We examine whether auditors, as a crucial external monitor, identify the information risks of goodwill impairments and express their concerns about financial reporting quality in their audit opinions. Using a sample of firms listed on China’s A-share market from 2007 to 2017, we test the association between goodwill impairments and the type of audit opinion received in the same financial period. Our findings are as follows. First, the probability of receiving a modified opinion increases with the amount of goodwill impairments. Second, the positive association between goodwill impairments and modified audit opinions is driven primarily by earnings management risks. Third, this positive association is more salient when auditors are industry experts and there is no auditor–client mismatch. Fourth, auditors are more sensitive to the amount of goodwill impairments than to their mere existence. Overall, we document that auditors perceive goodwill impairments as a signal of information risks and communicate their concerns to investors to avoid litigation.     

Ownership Concentration in Privatized Firms: The Role of Disclosure Standards, Auditor Choice, and Auditing Infrastructure

We rely on a unique data set to estimate the impact of disclosure standards and auditor‐related characteristics on ownership concentration in 190 privatized firms from 31 countries. Accounting transparency can help alleviate the agency conflict between minority investors and controlling shareholders, which is evident in the extent of ownership concentration, since the expropriation of corporate resources hinges on these private benefits remaining hidden. After controlling for other country‐level and firm‐level determinants, we find weak (no) evidence that extensive disclosure standards (auditor choice) reduce ownership concentration. In contrast, we report strong, robust evidence that ownership concentration is lower in countries with securities laws that specify a lower burden of proof in civil and criminal litigation against auditors, consistent with Ball's [2001] predictions. Collectively, our research implies that minority investors worldwide value legal institutions that discipline auditors in the event of financial reporting failure over both the presence of a Big 5 auditor and better disclosure standards. Re‐estimating our regressions on a broad sample of western European public firms provides similar evidence on all of our predictions.     

Corporate social responsibility and litigation risk: Evidence from securities class action lawsuits

This study examines whether corporate social responsibility (CSR) is associated with the likelihood and outcomes of securities class action lawsuits. We find a lower likelihood of securities litigation for firms with higher CSR. This effect is larger for companies with lower levels of financial distress, companies with larger proportions of institutional investors, and for internal CSR. Additionally, CSR has a mitigating effect on negative market assessments around the filing dates of securities litigation. The results suggest that higher CSR firms are less likely to engage in financial misconduct, and investors are less likely to penalise them for such occurrences.     

Audit litigation research: Do the merits matter? An assessment and directions for future research

This article reviews audit litigation research and discusses suggestions for future research. Recent reforms in federal and state laws related to accounting and auditing services increase the opportunities for research. An overarching issue in the public policy debate over legal reforms is the role of merits in bringing and resolving lawsuits against auditors; this issue frames the discussion of audit litigation research.     

Financial reporting consequences of natural disasters: Evidence from the impact of resource constraints at audit offices on non-affected clients

Disaster-affected clients demand significant additional effort from their audit office, and hence strain the audit office’s resources available to other non-disaster-affected clients. We consider audit offices with disaster-affected clients to be strained offices and find that, compared with clients audited by non-strained audit offices, non-disaster-affected clients audited by strained audit offices are more likely to have their financial statements restated. This result suggests the financial reporting quality of companies not directly exposed to disasters could also be negatively affected by the disasters, due to their auditors’ strained-resource issue. We further find such a negative effect is more pronounced when the degree of resource constraints is greater and when the audit office lacks client experience or industry expertise. We offer novel evidence of financial reporting consequences of natural disasters, focusing on the externality of disasters on companies not directly affected by disasters. The findings have important implications for regulators in making disaster-related policies, for auditors in managing their client portfolios, and for companies in making auditor choice decisions.     

An investigation of independent audit opinions and subsequent independent auditor litigation of publicly-traded failed savings and loans

Failures of savings and loans (S & Ls) have resulted in substantial independent auditor litigation; however, there is limited empirical evidence concerning audit opinions of failed S & Ls. Our study investigates the audit opinions of publicly-traded S & Ls that subsequently failed. We found that the independent auditors of failed S & Ls issued qualified (or modified) going-concern opinions or going-concern disclaimers of opinion on the last audited financial statement prior to failure in 19 of 24 cases. Results of univariate and multivariate analyses are consistent with several predictions concerning economic factors expected to influence the type of audit opinion, and our evidence suggests that auditors rendered going-concern reports to those S & Ls that were most likely to fail ex ante. Analysis of independent auditor litigation data reveals that auditor lawsuits related to these failed S & Ls were filed in seven cases. Five of these seven lawsuits implicated auditors who rendered going-concern reports. This suggests that going-concern reports in the year prior to the failure of an S & L do not prevent auditor litigation. Because it is possible that independent auditors will face situations comparable to the S & L crisis in the future, government regulators and the public accounting profession should be interested in research that enhances the understanding of the audit opinion formulation process in such settings.     

Audit Committee Effectiveness and Financial Reporting Quality: Implications for Auditor Independence

Auditors participating in a survey identified oversight of financial reporting and the external audit process, and ensuring quality internal controls, as the most important functions of effective audit committees. Financial literacy or expertise, independence, and a strong commitment to perform the job effectively were noted as important attributes. The results also suggest that although audit committees have enough power to confront management on contentious issues, they are not very effective in helping to resolve financial reporting disputes. Management was identified as a key influence in affecting the nature, extent, and quality of communication between the auditor and the audit committee. Most auditors believe that it is not important for each member of the audit committee to be an expert, but it is important that they are financially literate.     

Auditors and the post-2002 litigation environment

In the wake of the disclosure of Enron and WorldCom and other dramatic financial reporting frauds, the Sarbanes–Oxley Act was passed on July 30, 2002. Thus, 2002 was a watershed year for auditors. Audits performed after the passage of Sarbanes–Oxley began to be reflected in litigation filed in 2003. Analysis of 1169 lawsuits filed between 2001 and 2008 finds that auditor litigation severity decreased in the lawsuits filed after 2002. Analysis of a reduced sample of 1017 lawsuits – where dollar resolution amounts are available – shows that the magnitude of auditor dollar resolution amounts decreased in the lawsuits filed after 2002. Thus, auditor liability risk decreased after 2002.     

Income smoothing and audit fees

In this study, we examine the effect of income smoothing on auditors' pricing decisions. Analyzing a sample of 12,823 firm-year observations from U.S. companies in non-regulated industries for the period 2000–2018, we find that income smoothing is negatively associated with audit fees, suggesting that auditors favorably view smoothed earnings. This result holds when we control for other variables that have been identified as determinants of audit fees in prior literature, including client-specific (e.g., client size, audit complexity, litigation risk, and corporate governance), auditor-specific (e.g., auditor quality, auditor tenure, and auditor expertise), and engagement-specific (e.g., audit opinion, busy season, reporting lag) factors. Our results also hold across (1) alternative smoothing measures (with and without considering the use of accruals to smooth earnings), (2) different sources of income smoothness (innate vs. discretionary components) and (3) various robustness tests. Overall, our evidence supports the notion that auditors perceive income smoothing as signaling rather than opportunistic behavior, and thus charge lower audit fees. To our knowledge, this is the first study that examines income smoothing directly from the perspective of auditors.