1 / 32

Institutional Environment and the Quality of Big 4 Auditors

Institutional Environment and the Quality of Big 4 Auditors. Bin Ke Nanyang Technological University Clive Lennox Nanyang Technological University Qingquan Xin Chongqing University. Motivational question. Do Big 4 accounting firms provide the same audit quality around the world?

lyris
Download Presentation

Institutional Environment and the Quality of Big 4 Auditors

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Institutional Environment and the Quality of Big 4 Auditors Bin Ke NanyangTechnological University CliveLennox Nanyang Technological University Qingquan XinChongqingUniversity

  2. Motivational question • Do Big 4 accounting firms provide the same audit quality around the world? • Do Big 4 deliver the same quality in China? • Potential economic forces governing Big 4’s quality • Ability • Incentives (litigation risk, reputation, quasi-rent) • Focus of this study is the incentives of Big 4

  3. Is the idea interesting? • I think so because Big 4 auditors play a direct role in determining the quality of financial reporting • There is a debate on whether Big 4 can deliver the same high quality audit in weak investor protection countries as in strong investor protection countries

  4. Is the idea interesting? • Relevance to China and HK: • H shares’ financial reports are allowed to be audited by domestic auditors after December 15, 2010

  5. How to test the idea? • What is the ideal experiment? • The most obvious approach is to compare the audit quality of Big 4 across different countries • Common limitations of cross country studies • Accounting standards • Auditing standards • Other cross-country differences

  6. Prior research • Compare Big4 vs. non-Big4 across countries • This approach does not directly examine the effect of institutional environment on Big 4 • Unclear whether the cross-country differences are effectively controlled for because the effects of country factors could be different for Big4 and non-Big4 • Any differences in results between Big4 vs. non-Big4 could be due to systematic differences of the clients audited by Big4 and non-Big4

  7. Our approach • Publicly traded firms listed on mainland China and audited by a domestic Big4 over 1995-2009 • Pure A shares • AH firms • AB firms

  8. Our specific research question • Do domestic Big4 accounting firms provide the same audit quality in China for • Pure A shares, • AB firms, and • AH firms?

  9. Mainland China Big 4 of Pure A Firm Mainland China

  10. Mainland China Big 4 of AH Firm HK Big 4 of AH firm Hong Kong Mainland China ?

  11. Mainland China Big 4 of AB Firm HK Big 4 of AB firm Hong Kong Mainland China ? ?

  12. Incentives of HK Big4: AH firms versus AB firms

  13. Mainland China Big4 Of ABFirms Mainland China Big4 Of AH Firms Mainland China Big4 Of Pure AFirms Hong Kong Mainland China ?

  14. Advantages of our approach • We directly examine the effect of institutional environment on Big 4’s behavior • We can effectively isolate the country effects because we compare the audit quality of Big4 in the same country • We do not compare Big4 vs. non-Big4 and thus our results cannot be due to systematic differences of the clients audited by Big4 and non-Big4

  15. Pure A share firms (firm years)

  16. AH share firms (firm years) Domestic and HK auditors are the same for 256 firm years

  17. AB firms (firm years)

  18. Research design • Y = α0 + α1 HK_MONITOR + α2 MULTIPLE_OFFICES + CONTROL VARIABLES + u • Dependent variable= • Audit opinion • Earnings management (accruals and loss) • Audit fees (mainland)

  19. Audit opinion model: key variables

  20. Audit opinion model: control variables

  21. Audit opinion model

  22. Signed abnormal accrual model: dependent variable

  23. Signed abnormal accrual model: control variables

  24. Signed abnormal accrual model

  25. Loss model

  26. Loss model

  27. Audit fee model

  28. Audit fee model

  29. Endogeneity of HK_MONITOR • Cross-listing bonding hypothesis would suggest that AH firms are better and thus the self selection would bias against our predictions • assess the severity of endogeneity: • SHORT is 1 if the distance between the fiscal year end and the HK IPO date for all AH firm years is less than 5 years (or 8) and zero otherwise

  30. Endogeneity of HK_MONITOR

  31. Descriptive stat for all regression variables

  32. Descriptive stat for all regression variables

More Related