征求意见是否会损害审计师的独立性?来自避税的证据

IF 2.9 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Heesun Chung , Eugenia Y. Lee
{"title":"征求意见是否会损害审计师的独立性?来自避税的证据","authors":"Heesun Chung ,&nbsp;Eugenia Y. Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.jcae.2023.100398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In this study, we investigate whether a firm’s opportunistic switching of auditors for a favorable audit opinion, known as opinion shopping (OS), affects its tax avoidance activities. Using a sample of Korean firms over the 2006–2018 period, we find that firms that switch auditors for OS purposes engage in more aggressive tax avoidance than other firms. The association between OS-driven auditor switches and tax avoidance is more pronounced for switches to non-Big 4 auditors than to Big 4 auditors. The results are robust to various robustness tests that attempt to control for differences in the characteristics of OS and non-OS firms. Collectively, the findings suggest that auditors hired as a result of OS allow their clients to engage in more aggressive tax avoidance, which is consistent with impaired auditor independence. We contribute to the literature on OS by documenting evidence of the negative consequence of OS on corporate tax compliance. In addition, our findings suggest that firms’ tax and audit behaviors need to be monitored concurrently.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46693,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does opinion shopping impair auditor independence? Evidence from tax avoidance\",\"authors\":\"Heesun Chung ,&nbsp;Eugenia Y. Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcae.2023.100398\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In this study, we investigate whether a firm’s opportunistic switching of auditors for a favorable audit opinion, known as opinion shopping (OS), affects its tax avoidance activities. Using a sample of Korean firms over the 2006–2018 period, we find that firms that switch auditors for OS purposes engage in more aggressive tax avoidance than other firms. The association between OS-driven auditor switches and tax avoidance is more pronounced for switches to non-Big 4 auditors than to Big 4 auditors. The results are robust to various robustness tests that attempt to control for differences in the characteristics of OS and non-OS firms. Collectively, the findings suggest that auditors hired as a result of OS allow their clients to engage in more aggressive tax avoidance, which is consistent with impaired auditor independence. We contribute to the literature on OS by documenting evidence of the negative consequence of OS on corporate tax compliance. In addition, our findings suggest that firms’ tax and audit behaviors need to be monitored concurrently.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1815566923000486\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1815566923000486","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本研究中,我们调查了企业为获得有利的审计意见而伺机更换审计师(即所谓的 "意见购物"(OS))是否会影响其避税活动。通过对 2006-2018 年间韩国公司的抽样调查,我们发现,与其他公司相比,出于 OS 目的更换审计师的公司会采取更激进的避税行为。与四大审计师相比,出于审计目的更换审计师与避税之间的关联在更换为非四大审计师时更为明显。各种稳健性检验试图控制OS公司和非OS公司的特征差异,但结果都是稳健的。总之,研究结果表明,由于 OS 而聘用的审计师允许其客户进行更激进的避税行为,这与审计师独立性受损是一致的。我们通过记录 OS 对企业税务合规性产生负面影响的证据,为有关 OS 的文献做出了贡献。此外,我们的研究结果表明,需要同时监控企业的税务和审计行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does opinion shopping impair auditor independence? Evidence from tax avoidance

In this study, we investigate whether a firm’s opportunistic switching of auditors for a favorable audit opinion, known as opinion shopping (OS), affects its tax avoidance activities. Using a sample of Korean firms over the 2006–2018 period, we find that firms that switch auditors for OS purposes engage in more aggressive tax avoidance than other firms. The association between OS-driven auditor switches and tax avoidance is more pronounced for switches to non-Big 4 auditors than to Big 4 auditors. The results are robust to various robustness tests that attempt to control for differences in the characteristics of OS and non-OS firms. Collectively, the findings suggest that auditors hired as a result of OS allow their clients to engage in more aggressive tax avoidance, which is consistent with impaired auditor independence. We contribute to the literature on OS by documenting evidence of the negative consequence of OS on corporate tax compliance. In addition, our findings suggest that firms’ tax and audit behaviors need to be monitored concurrently.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.00%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信