审计公司的政治关系和PCAOB检查报告

IF 3.6 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
W. Robert Knechel , Hyun Jong Park
{"title":"审计公司的政治关系和PCAOB检查报告","authors":"W. Robert Knechel ,&nbsp;Hyun Jong Park","doi":"10.1016/j.aos.2022.101335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We examine the effect of audit firm political connections on the harshness of Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) inspection reports. Relying on <em>Regulatory Capture Theory</em> and <em>Motivated Reasoning Theory</em>, we show audit firm political connections, as measured through PAC contributions, are <em>negatively</em> associated with the harshness of Part I reports. Our results are robust to instrumentation and are not due to movements of personnel between the PCAOB and audit firms or improvements in a firm's audit quality. In supplementary tests, we show the negative relation is stronger when we consider the directed nature of PAC contributions to members of Congress who exercise SEC oversight and robust to alternative measures. Finally, we consider the harshness of Part II inspection reports and find no association with political connections. Collectively, our results suggest audit firm political connections induce favorable influence over Part I findings of PCAOB inspection reports.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48379,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Organizations and Society","volume":"100 ","pages":"Article 101335"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Audit firm political connections and PCAOB inspection reports\",\"authors\":\"W. Robert Knechel ,&nbsp;Hyun Jong Park\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.aos.2022.101335\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We examine the effect of audit firm political connections on the harshness of Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) inspection reports. Relying on <em>Regulatory Capture Theory</em> and <em>Motivated Reasoning Theory</em>, we show audit firm political connections, as measured through PAC contributions, are <em>negatively</em> associated with the harshness of Part I reports. Our results are robust to instrumentation and are not due to movements of personnel between the PCAOB and audit firms or improvements in a firm's audit quality. In supplementary tests, we show the negative relation is stronger when we consider the directed nature of PAC contributions to members of Congress who exercise SEC oversight and robust to alternative measures. Finally, we consider the harshness of Part II inspection reports and find no association with political connections. Collectively, our results suggest audit firm political connections induce favorable influence over Part I findings of PCAOB inspection reports.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48379,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounting Organizations and Society\",\"volume\":\"100 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101335\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounting Organizations and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361368222000022\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"Accounting Organizations and Society","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361368222000022","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

我们研究了审计公司政治关系对上市公司会计监督委员会(PCAOB)检查报告的严谨性的影响。根据监管捕获理论和动机推理理论,我们表明审计事务所的政治联系,通过PAC捐款衡量,与第一部分报告的严厉程度呈负相关。我们的结果对工具是稳健的,而不是由于PCAOB和审计事务所之间的人员调动或事务所审计质量的提高。在补充测试中,我们表明,当我们考虑到PAC对行使SEC监督和对替代措施稳健的国会议员的捐款的直接性质时,这种负相关关系更强。最后,我们考虑了第二部分检查报告的严厉程度,发现与政治关系没有关联。总的来说,我们的研究结果表明,审计事务所的政治关系对PCAOB检查报告的第一部分结果产生了有利的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Audit firm political connections and PCAOB inspection reports

We examine the effect of audit firm political connections on the harshness of Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) inspection reports. Relying on Regulatory Capture Theory and Motivated Reasoning Theory, we show audit firm political connections, as measured through PAC contributions, are negatively associated with the harshness of Part I reports. Our results are robust to instrumentation and are not due to movements of personnel between the PCAOB and audit firms or improvements in a firm's audit quality. In supplementary tests, we show the negative relation is stronger when we consider the directed nature of PAC contributions to members of Congress who exercise SEC oversight and robust to alternative measures. Finally, we consider the harshness of Part II inspection reports and find no association with political connections. Collectively, our results suggest audit firm political connections induce favorable influence over Part I findings of PCAOB inspection reports.

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
7.80
自引率
6.40%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Accounting, Organizations & Society is a major international journal concerned with all aspects of the relationship between accounting and human behaviour, organizational structures and processes, and the changing social and political environment of the enterprise.
×
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