Auditor Reputation,Auditor Independence,and the Stock‐Market Impact of Andersen's Indictment on Its Client Firms*

In this paper, we study a broad sample of Arthur Andersen clients and investigate whether the decline in Andersen's reputation, due to its criminal indictment on March 14, 2002, adversely affected the stock market's perception of its audit quality. Because these reputa‐tional concerns are more of an issue if an auditor's independence is impaired, we investigate the relationship between the abnormal market returns for Andersen clients around the time of the indictment announcement and several fee‐based measures of auditor independence. Our results suggest that when news about Andersen's indictment was released, the market reacted negatively to Andersen clients. More importantly, we find that the indictment period abnormal return is significantly more negative when the market perceived the auditor's independence to be threatened. We also examine the abnormal returns when firms announced the dismissal of Andersen as an auditor. Consistent with the audit quality explanation, we document that when firms quickly dismissed Andersen, the announcement returns are significantly higher when firms switched to a Big 4 auditor than when they either switched to non‐Big 4 auditors or did not announce the identity of the replacement auditor. Our empirical results support the notion that auditor reputation and independence have a material impact on perceived audit quality and the credibility of audited financial statements, and that the market prices this.     

Auditor Conservatism,Asymmetric Monitoring,and Earnings Management*

In this paper, we investigate whether, and how, audit effectiveness differentiation between Big 6 and non‐Big 6 auditors is influenced by a conflict or convergence of reporting incentives faced by corporate managers and external auditors. In so doing, we incorporate into our analysis the possibility that managers self‐select both external auditors and discretionary accruals, using the two stage “treatment effects” model. Our results show that only when managers have incentives to prefer income‐increasing accrual choices are Big 6 auditors more effective than non‐Big 6 auditors in deterring/monitoring opportunistic earnings management. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we find Big 6 auditors are less effective than non‐Big 6 auditors when both managers and auditors have incentives to prefer income‐decreasing accrual choices and thus no conflict of reporting incentives exists between the two parties. The above findings are robust to different proxies for opportunistic earnings management and different proxies for the direction of earnings management incentives.     

The Impact of R&D Intensity on Demand for Specialist Auditor Services*

The audit fee research literature argues that auditors' costs of developing brand name reputations, including top‐tier designation and recognition for industry specialization, are compensated through audit fee premiums. Audited firms reduce agency costs by engaging high‐quality auditors who monitor the levels and reporting of discretionary expenditures and accruals. In this study we examine whether specialist auditor choice is associated with a particular discretionary expenditure ‐ research and development (R&D). For a large sample of U.S. companies from a range of industries, we find strong evidence that R&D intensity is positively associated with firms' choices of auditors who specialize in auditing R&D contracts. Additionally, we find that R&D intensive firms tend to appoint top‐tier auditors. We use simultaneous equations to control for interrelationships between dependent variables in addition to single‐equation ordinary least squares (OLS) and logistic regression models. Our results are particularly strong in tests using samples of small firms whose auditor choice is not constrained by the need to appoint a top‐tier auditor to ensure the auditor's financial independence from the client.     

Market Response to Earnings Surprises Conditional on Reasons for an Auditor Change*

Our interest in this study is the relative informativeness of earnings announcements reported before and after Form 8‐K disclosures of the reason for an auditor change. We appeal to several models that predict that the market's response to an earnings surprise is positively related to the perceived precision of the earnings report. We predict that the Form 8‐K reason disclosures aid investors in updating their expectations of earnings precision by providing useful information about the financial reporting process that produces the earnings report. For 802 auditor changes from late 1991 through late 1997, the average price response per unit of earnings surprise is lower subsequent to an auditor change for companies that switched for disagreement‐related or fee‐related reasons and higher for those that switched for service‐related reasons. This paper provides further evidence on the effects of differential earnings quality on differences in the returns‐earnings relation across companies and over time as well as the efficacy of Form 8‐K disclosures of reasons for auditor changes.     

The Association between Auditor Choice,Ownership Retained,and Earnings Disclosure by Firms Making Initial Public Offerings*

Using a system of three simultaneous equations, we test the predictions of Datar, Feltham, and Hughes 1991 and Hughes 1986 between auditor choice, earnings disclosures, and retained ownership in U.S. firms making initial public offerings of securities. Using a sample of initial public offerings between 1990 and 1997, we find that the demand for high‐quality auditors increases with firm risk. Additionally, we find that auditor choice, earnings disclosure, and risk are determinants of retained ownership, which is consistent with the predictions of Datar et al. and Hughes that auditor choice and direct disclosure are substitute signals for ownership retention. Further, our results suggest that the signals chosen (i.e., retained ownership, auditor choice, and disclosure) are related through their cost structures and are chosen jointly to minimize the overall cost to the entrepreneur.     

A Reexamination of Behavior in Experimental Audit Markets: The Effects of Moral Reasoning and Economic Incentives on Auditor Reporting and Fees*

This study uses experimental markets to investigate how moral reasoning influences auditor reporting under different levels of economic incentives. In each multiperiod market, auditor subjects could either (1) misreport low observed outcomes as high and thereby reap economic advantages at the expense of third‐party investors, or (2) truthfully report low observed outcomes as low but thereby forgo the economic advantages of misreporting. We extend the Calegari, Schatzberg, and Sevcik 1998 experimental‐markets setting to incorporate moral reasoning, and test hypotheses based on the economic model of Magee and Tseng 1990 and the neo‐Kohlbergian moral reasoning framework of Rest, Narvaez, Bebeau, and Thoma 1999. We document a significant effect of moral reasoning on auditor behavior. Specifically, we find that misreporting and premium fees are more likely with higher than with lower moral reasoning subjects, and the moral reasoning effect diminishes as economic penalties increase in the market. These findings provide valuable insights for specifying the determinants of auditor misreporting, the observable behaviors that signal its existence, and the institutions that can prevent its occurrence in the market. We conclude that the relation between moral reasoning and behavior is more complex than commonly assumed in the accounting literature, and identify directions for future research.     

An Experimental Test of the Interaction of the Insurance and Information‐Signaling Hypotheses in Auditing*

Three incentives for hiring auditing services have been proposed in the literature: (1) to signal outsiders about the company's prospects, (2) to provide a potential source of loss recovery for investors (insurance), and (3) to reduce agency costs. The objective of this study is to examine the potential for the first two (signaling and insurance) to interact while controlling for agency costs. We conduct an experiment in which highly experienced financial analysts provide stock price estimates for a company that is under financial stress. We manipulate, between participants, the signal provided by the audit opinion (going‐concern modification, yes/no) and the ability of investors to recover losses from auditors. The key finding is that the effect of the going‐concern opinion on investor value judgements is moderated by the extent to which the auditor provides an insurance function. Specifically, the negative effect of a going‐concern opinion on the analysts' stock price estimates is reduced by the extent that the environment treats the auditor as an insurer.     

官员腐败、审计师选择与公司价值

本文根据近年来披露的腐败官员的案例为基础,以涉及省部级腐败官员的上市公司为样本,实证分析了官员腐败、审计师选择与公司价值三者之间的关系。研究发现,行贿的公司倾向于选择低质量的审计师,非行贿的公司倾向于选择高质量的审计师;行贿公司的公司价值在短期内显著高于非行贿公司;以审计师选择为传导机制与实现途径,官员腐败对公司价值的影响会显著提高。     

侵权法“过错证明负担规则”缺陷之矫正——基于比较法上的考察

各国侵权法规则适用于产品责任领域最突出的缺陷在于原告承受对被告过错的证明负担,如原告不能满足举证要求,将面临损害不能获得赔偿的风险。在现代化、不透明生产条件下,由原告证明被告的过错,不仅非常困难,而且违背公平理念。在保护消费者利益的目标引导下,各国对于侵权法规则缺陷的弥补均致力于减轻原告对被告过错进行证明的负担,例如英美的事实自证原则,德日的过错推定和举证责任倒置规则以及法国的缺陷即过错,均志在为遭遇举证困难缺陷产品的受害人提供证明之帮助。     

The Investment Opportunity Set and Acquired Goodwill*

This paper examines how managers in New Zealand allocate the cost of firms' investments in subsidiaries between net tangible assets and acquired goodwill. We find a negative relation between acquired goodwill and leverage. This could be interpreted as the result of managers of highly leveraged acquiring firms opportunistically allocating a lower portion of the acquisition price to acquired goodwill. However, this analysis, like much of the research on accounting choice, suffers from an omitted variables problem. We present evidence that the observed negative relation between acquired goodwill and leverage may stem from each variable's relation to the investment opportunity set. Further, we find no evidence that acquired goodwill is related to the existence of debt covenants. Together, these results suggest an endogenous relation between the firm's asset structure, its financing policy, and the allocation of acquisition price to acquired goodwill.     

Nonaudit Services and Earnings Conservatism: Is Auditor Independence Impaired?*

We examine whether the provision of nonaudit services (NAS) by incumbent auditors is associated with a reduction in the extent to which earnings reflect bad news on a timely basis (that is, news‐based conservatism). Reduced conservatism is expected to occur if relatively high levels of NAS result in reduced auditor independence and, ultimately, lower‐quality auditing. Because client‐specific demand for NAS is expected to vary, our proxy for the auditor‐client economic bond is the extent to which NAS purchases (relative to audit fees) are greater or less than expected. Using several different methods for identifying news‐based conservatism, we consistently find that higher than expected levels of NAS are not associated with reduced conservatism. This result is robust to allowing for endogenous NAS demand, as well as several explicit factors that may be associated with differences in conservatism. Similar conclusions arise from tests that use alternative measures of the economic bond between auditors and their clients, as well as in tests confined to either the Big 6 or non‐Big 6 audit firms. Our results are consistent with factors such as market‐based incentives, the threat of litigation, and alternative governance mechanisms offsetting any expected benefits to the audit firm from reducing its independence. We therefore conclude that recent legislative intervention aimed at restricting the supply of NAS is unlikely to result in increased independence in fact, although independence in appearance may be improved.     

审计师行业专长、客户重要性与审计质量

本文以中国上市公司2006--2009年数据为样本,检验了审计师行业专长、客户重要性对审计质量的影响以及审计师行业专长对审计质量的影响是否受制于客户重要性。研究结果发现,总体而言,审计师行业专长能够抑制客户的盈余管理行为,提高审计质量,审计师对客户的经济依赖性并不会影响到独立审计判断。但行业专长审计师只针对大客户提供高质量审计服务,而对小客户这种效应则并未体现,这是具有行业专长审计师基于中国审计市场环境作出的最优选择。进一步研究发现,上述研究结论仅存在于“十大”样本组中。     

Disclosure and Recognition Requirements: Corporate Investment Decisions with Externalities*

This paper examines the effects of disclosure and recognition requirements on investment decisions when shareholders have limited liability. Firms' investment projects have either high initial pollution prevention costs or high subsequent clean‐up costs, and their liability for clean‐up costs may be either individual or joint and several. Even with individual liability for clean‐up costs, shareholders' limited liability creates an incentive to select the latter project type and to impose costs on the rest of the economy. This tendency is exacerbated when clean‐up liability is joint and several. We show that a disclosure requirement cannot have an unambiguous effect on the selection of the “cleaner” project. However, an accrual requirement, together with an accounting‐based dividend restriction, is shown to promote choice of the project that imposes lower expected costs on the rest of the economy. Moreover, we find that it is possible for a recognition requirement to have a greater impact in a joint‐and‐several liability regime than in an individual liability regime.     

Independence in Appearance and in Fact: An Experimental Investigation*

In this study, we use experimental markets to assess the effect of the Security and Exchange Commission's (SEC's) new independence rule on investors' perceptions of independence, investors' payoff distributions, and market prices. The new rule requires client firms to disclose in their annual proxy statements the amount of nonaudit fees paid to their auditors. The new disclosure is intended to inform investors of auditors' incentives to compromise their independence. Our experimental design is a 2 3 between‐subjects design, where we control the presence (unbiased reports) or absence of auditor independence in fact (biased reports). While independence in fact was not immediately observable to investors, we controlled for independence in appearance by varying the public disclosure of the extent of nonaudit services provided by the auditor to the client. In one market setting, investors were not given any information about whether the auditor provided such nonaudit services; in a second setting, investors were explicitly informed that the auditor did not provide any non‐audit services; and in a third setting, investors were told that the auditor provided nonaudit services that could be perceived to have an adverse effect on independence in fact. We found that disclosures of nonaudit services reduced the accuracy of investors' beliefs of auditors' independence in fact when independence in appearance was inconsistent with independence in fact. This then caused prices of assets to deviate more from their economic predictions (lower market efficiency) in the inconsistent settings relative to the no‐disclosure and consistent settings. Thus, disclosures of fees for nonaudit services could reduce the efficiency of capital markets if such disclosures result in investors forming inaccurate beliefs of auditor independence in fact ‐ that is, auditors appear independent but they are not independent in fact, or vice versa. The latter is the maintained position of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), which argued against the new rule. Further research is needed to assess the degree of correspondence between independence in fact and independence in appearance.     

加害给付法律责任探析

加害给付法律责任是违约责任中的一种特殊形式。我国司法实践中通常将责任竞合理论作为加害给付法律责任承担方式的依据。本文从加害给付法律责任的理论着手,对责任竞合与责任聚合评析后,以加害给付侵害的不同利益为基础,探析其责任的承担方式,最后对我国加害给付法律责任制度提出了改善建议。     

违约责任归责原则之浅探

归责原则是违约责任制度的核心，本文从两大违约归责原则对比入手，阐述了在我国实行单一归责原则的不足，并进一步指出应以严格责任为主、过错责任为辅归责原则的合理性。     

Legal Damages and Auditor Efforts*

Abstract. Conventional wisdom holds that an auditor's optimal response to an increase in legal exposure is to double his efforts in finding errors in his client's financial reports. This paper's main result is that in a market setting where clients shop for opinions and auditors must compete for clients, the conventional wisdom may fail. Increased damages: affect all auditors reducing the competition among auditors for clients. Thus, an auditor can reduce his legal exposure by reporting more conservatively, instead of working harder. The main result is mitigated if client firms also face legal damages and if clients themselves are more conservative in preparing their unaudited financial statements. If it is more likely that a client claiming “good news” is truly good, the auditor has an incentive to work harder to confirm this good report and satisfy his client. This incentive to work harder to please his client may prevent the auditor from retreating into conservatism when damages are increased. Finally, if the auditors' report space were continuous, as with a continuum of client types, the main result would be reversed: additional damages would (weakly) increase the auditor's efforts. With a continuum of possible reports, the competition is not eliminated as damages increase; only the range of reports that the auditors offer is reduced. Because the competition cannot be eliminated and the incumbent cannot resort to conservatism to reduce his legal exposure, the auditor works hard. Résumé. Par tradition, la sagesse veut que la réaction la plus appropriée d'un vérificateur à une augmentation des risques juridiques soit un redoublement d'efforts pour déceler les erreurs dans les rapports financiers de ses clients. L'auteur en arrive pourtant à la principale conclusion que, dans le contexte d'un marché où les clients font du «magasinage» d'opinion et où les vérificateurs doivent se disputer les clients, la sagesse nous amène à faire fausse route. L'augmentation des dommages touche tous les vérificateurs et atténue la rivalité qui les oppose dans la recherche de clients. Ainsi, un vérificateur peut diminuer le risque juridique auquel il est exposé en usant d'une plus grande prudence dans ses rapports plutôt qu'en travaillant avec plus d'acharnement. L'auteur est cependant moins catégorique à ce sujet lorsque l'entreprise cliente fait aussi l'objet de poursuites en dommages et qu'elle est donc plus prudente dans la préparation de ses états financiers non vérifiés. Il est davantage probable que les nouvelles positives qu'une telle entreprise publie le soient véritablement, de sorte que le vérificateur est, lui, davantage enclin à déployer les efforts nécessaires pour confirmer ces nouvelles positives et satisfaire son client. Cette incitation à travailler avec plus d'énergie pour satisfaire le client peut faire en sorte que le vérificateur ne se replie pas derrière la prudence lorsque les dommages augmentent. Enfin, s'il existe un large éventail de rapports de vérification, comme dans le cas d'une multiplicité de types d'entreprises, la conclusion principale se trouve inversée; l'augmentation des montants de dommages entraîne une (faible) hausse de l'intensité du travail du vérificateur. Dans le cas d'un large éventail de rapports possibles, la concurrence ne s'atténue pas avec l'augmentation des montants de dommages; seul l'éventail des rapports qu'offrent les vérificateurs est réduit. Étant donné que la concurrence ne peut être éliminée, et que le vérificateur attitré ne peut recourir à la prudence pour réduire le risque juridique auquel il est exposé, il redouble d'effort.     

Independence Threats,Litigation Risk,and the Auditor's Decision Process*

This study examines the effect of independence threats and litigation risk on auditors' evaluation of information and subsequent reporting choices. Using a Web‐based experiment, I tracked auditors' information gathering and evaluation leading to a going‐concern reporting decision. Specifically, 48 audit managers assessed client survival likelihood, gathered additional information, and suggested audit report choices. I found that auditors facing high independence threats (fear of losing the client) evaluated information as more indicative of a surviving client and were more likely to suggest an unmodified audit report, consistent with client preferences. In contrast, auditors facing high litigation risk evaluated information as more indicative of a failing client and were more likely to suggest a modified audit report. In addition, the association between risk and report choice was fully mediated by final information evaluation. This suggests that it is unlikely that different reporting choices resulted from a conscious choice bias, but rather that motivated reasoning during evidence evaluation plays a key role in the effect of risk in auditor decision making.     

Experimental Evidence of the Impact of Increasing Auditors' Legal Liability on Firms' New Investments*

This laboratory market study examines the potential effect of increasing auditors' liability on firms' new investments. The experimental hypotheses are derived from Shibano's 2000 model, which predicts that an increase in auditors' liability will decrease the frequency of audit failures and may decrease firms' new investments if the liability level is “excessive”. Results from three experimental market settings (with low, medium, and high liability levels) suggest two major conclusions. First, firms' new investments increase significantly when auditors' liability level increases from low to medium, and decrease significantly as the liability level increases from medium to high. This result provides support for the argument that adequate auditor liability is necessary to motivate firms to invest in new projects. Excessive liability, however, may discourage firms from making new investments. Second, the frequency of audit failure decreases insignificantly when auditors' liability increases. These two results have an important policy implication: the benefit of imposing high liability on the auditor (i.e., an insignificant decrease in audit failure) may be more than offset by its cost (i.e., a significant decrease in new investments).