Audit demand and monitoring mechanisms: evidence from SEC comment letters and short sellers

被引:2
|
作者
Skomra, Justyna [1 ]
Alam, Pervaiz [2 ]
Skomra, Piotr Antoni [3 ]
机构
[1] Penn State Univ, Behrend Coll, Dept Accounting & MIS, Erie, PA 16563 USA
[2] Kent State Univ, Dept Accounting, Kent, OH 44242 USA
[3] Case Western Reserve Univ, Dept Accountancy, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
关键词
Audit quality; SEC comment letters; Short sellers; INDUSTRY EXPERTISE; CLIENT; SPECIALIZATION; INFORMATION; DISCLOSURE; QUALITY; COSTS; LEVEL;
D O I
10.1108/MAJ-09-2020-2836
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Purpose - The paper aims to explore the impact of two types of monitoring mechanisms, namely, Securities and Exchange Commission SEC) comment letters (CLs) and short sellers, on managment's demand for audit quality. Design/methodology/approach - Using information on the short interest positions and a panel data of SEC CLs between 2005 and 2015, this study applies logit regression model to estimate the likelihood of hiring Big 4 and industry expert audit firm. This study also applies an ordinary least squares regression technique to estimate audit fees. Findings - Consistent with disclosure and agency theories, results from empirical analyses provide that management demands higher quality audits measured by higher audit fees, and higher likelihood to hire Big 4 and industry expert audit firm. However, this study finds that the effect varies depending on the specific monitoring mechanisms. Additionally, when both monitoring mechanisms are in plate, the SEC CLs drive the overall direction of the demand for audit quality when audit demand is captured by propensity to hire Big 4/industry expert audit firm. Research limitations/implications - This study provides researchers with enhanced understanding of the factors having effect on the demand side for audit quality. Furthermore. it adds to the stream of literature on economic consequences of SEC CLs and short selling. Originality/value - To the best of authors knowledge, this is the first comprehensive study to document the effect of two types of monitoring mechanisms, namely, SEC CLs and short selling, on the demand for audit quality.
引用
收藏
页码:700 / 720
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Audit Firm Assessments of Cyber-Security Risk: Evidence from Audit Fees and SEC Comment Letters
    Rosati, Pierangelo
    Gogolin, Fabian
    Lynn, Theo
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING, 2019, 54 (03):
  • [2] Discussion of "Audit Firm Assessments of Cyber-Security Risk: Evidence from Audit Fees and SEC Comment Letters"
    Yoon, Aaron
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING, 2020, 55 (03):
  • [3] The Materiality of Accounting Errors: Evidence from SEC Comment Letters
    Acito, Andrew A.
    Burks, Jeffrey J.
    Johnson, W. Bruce
    CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, 2019, 36 (02) : 839 - 868
  • [4] Styles of Regulators: Evidence from the SEC's Comment Letters†
    Do, Truc Thuc
    Zhang, Huai
    CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, 2022, 39 (02) : 789 - 825
  • [5] The spillover effect of SEC comment letters through audit firms
    Bills, Kenneth L.
    Cating, Ryan
    Lin, Chenxi
    Seidel, Timothy A.
    REVIEW OF ACCOUNTING STUDIES, 2025, 30 (01) : 311 - 351
  • [6] Evaluating the SEC Review of Commercial Banks: Evidence from Comment Letters
    Valdivia, Victor
    ECONOMICS BULLETIN, 2010, 30 (01): : 234 - 246
  • [7] The oversight role of regulators: evidence from SEC comment letters in the IPO process
    Li, Bing
    Liu, Zhenbin
    REVIEW OF ACCOUNTING STUDIES, 2017, 22 (03) : 1229 - 1260
  • [8] The role of external regulators in mergers and acquisitions: evidence from SEC comment letters
    Tingting Liu
    Tao Shu
    Erin Towery
    Jasmine Wang
    Review of Accounting Studies, 2024, 29 : 451 - 492
  • [9] The role of external regulators in mergers and acquisitions: evidence from SEC comment letters
    Liu, Tingting
    Shu, Tao
    Towery, Erin
    Wang, Jasmine
    REVIEW OF ACCOUNTING STUDIES, 2024, 29 (01) : 451 - 492
  • [10] Auditor Style and Common Disclosure Issues: Evidence from SEC Comment Letters
    Baugh, Matthew D.
    Schmardebeck, Roy
    ACCOUNTING REVIEW, 2023, 98 (05): : 61 - 97