{"title":"银行审计委员会的财务专业知识和及时确认贷款损失","authors":"Diana Choi","doi":"10.1111/1911-3846.12977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the effects of audit committee financial expertise on the timeliness of banks' loan loss provisions. I employ two regulatory shocks that mandated audit committee expertise—the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act in 1991 (FDICIA) and a modified listing standard for NYSE and NASDAQ firms in 1999—as quasi‐exogenous settings to investigate the effects of audit committee financial expertise on the timeliness of loan loss provisioning. Using a difference‐in‐differences research design, I find that the timeliness of loan loss provisions increases with audit committee financial expertise both for the FDICIA treatment group, which had larger banks than the control group, and for the NYSE and NASDAQ exchange treatment group, which had smaller banks than the control group. Further, I find that the results are stronger for banks that have lower regulatory scrutiny, are audited by Big 4 auditors, and do not have staggered boards. Finally, I find that audit committee financial expertise decreases discretionary loan loss provisions and financial restatements. Overall, these findings suggest the importance of audit committee financial expertise in loan‐related matters, which is particularly relevant in the context of the recent Current Expected Credit Losses implementation.","PeriodicalId":10595,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Accounting Research","volume":"209 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bank audit committee financial expertise and timely loan loss recognition\",\"authors\":\"Diana Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1911-3846.12977\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study investigates the effects of audit committee financial expertise on the timeliness of banks' loan loss provisions. I employ two regulatory shocks that mandated audit committee expertise—the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act in 1991 (FDICIA) and a modified listing standard for NYSE and NASDAQ firms in 1999—as quasi‐exogenous settings to investigate the effects of audit committee financial expertise on the timeliness of loan loss provisioning. Using a difference‐in‐differences research design, I find that the timeliness of loan loss provisions increases with audit committee financial expertise both for the FDICIA treatment group, which had larger banks than the control group, and for the NYSE and NASDAQ exchange treatment group, which had smaller banks than the control group. Further, I find that the results are stronger for banks that have lower regulatory scrutiny, are audited by Big 4 auditors, and do not have staggered boards. Finally, I find that audit committee financial expertise decreases discretionary loan loss provisions and financial restatements. Overall, these findings suggest the importance of audit committee financial expertise in loan‐related matters, which is particularly relevant in the context of the recent Current Expected Credit Losses implementation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Accounting Research\",\"volume\":\"209 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Accounting Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12977\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Accounting Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12977","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Bank audit committee financial expertise and timely loan loss recognition
This study investigates the effects of audit committee financial expertise on the timeliness of banks' loan loss provisions. I employ two regulatory shocks that mandated audit committee expertise—the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act in 1991 (FDICIA) and a modified listing standard for NYSE and NASDAQ firms in 1999—as quasi‐exogenous settings to investigate the effects of audit committee financial expertise on the timeliness of loan loss provisioning. Using a difference‐in‐differences research design, I find that the timeliness of loan loss provisions increases with audit committee financial expertise both for the FDICIA treatment group, which had larger banks than the control group, and for the NYSE and NASDAQ exchange treatment group, which had smaller banks than the control group. Further, I find that the results are stronger for banks that have lower regulatory scrutiny, are audited by Big 4 auditors, and do not have staggered boards. Finally, I find that audit committee financial expertise decreases discretionary loan loss provisions and financial restatements. Overall, these findings suggest the importance of audit committee financial expertise in loan‐related matters, which is particularly relevant in the context of the recent Current Expected Credit Losses implementation.
期刊介绍:
Contemporary Accounting Research (CAR) is the premiere research journal of the Canadian Academic Accounting Association, which publishes leading- edge research that contributes to our understanding of all aspects of accounting"s role within organizations, markets or society. Canadian based, increasingly global in scope, CAR seeks to reflect the geographical and intellectual diversity in accounting research. To accomplish this, CAR will continue to publish in its traditional areas of excellence, while seeking to more fully represent other research streams in its pages, so as to continue and expand its tradition of excellence.