Search results

The current study uses an advanced machine learning method and aims to investigate whether auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based as less risky. More specifically, this study aims to explore the association between principles-based accounting standards and audit pricing and between principles-based accounting standards and the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion.

The study uses an advanced machine-learning method to understand the role of principles-based accounting standards in predicting audit fees and going concern opinion. The study also uses multiple regression models defining audit fees and the probability of receiving going concern opinion. The analyses are complemented by additional tests such as economic significance, firm fixed effects, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, change analysis, yearly regression results and controlling for managerial risk-taking incentives and governance variables.

The paper provides empirical evidence that auditors charge less audit fees to clients whose financial statements are more principles-based. The finding suggests that auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based less risky. The study also provides evidence that the probability of receiving a going-concern opinion reduces as firms rely more on principles-based standards. The finding further suggests that auditors discount the financial numbers supplied by the managers using rules-based standards. The study also reveals that the degree of reliance by a US firm on principles-based accounting standards has a negative impact on accounting conservatism, the risk of financial statement misstatement, accruals and the difficulty in predicting future earnings. This suggests potential mechanisms through which principles-based accounting standards influence auditors’ risk assessments.

The authors recognize the limitation of this study regarding the sample period. Prior studies compare rules vs principles-based standards by focusing on the differences between US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and international financial reporting standards (IFRS) or pre- and post-IFRS adoption, which raises questions about differences in cross-country settings and institutional environment and other confounding factors such as transition costs. This study addresses these issues by comparing rules vs principles-based standards within the US GAAP setting. However, this limits the sample period to the year 2006 because the measure of the relative extent to which a US firm is reliant upon principles-based standards is available until 2006.

The study has major public policy suggestions as it responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks such as climate change.

The study has major public policy suggestions because it demonstrates the value of principles-based standards. The study responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US SEC, to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information as business transactions and investor needs continue to evolve globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the IASB Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks like climate change. The study fills the gap in the literature that auditors perceive principles-based financial statements as less risky and further expands the literature by providing empirical evidence that the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion is increasing in the degree of rules-based standards.

This paper aims to examine the perspectives of auditors, regulators and financial report preparers on the effects of key audit matters (KAMs) reporting on audit effort, fees, quality and report transparency.

The authors conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders (13 Audit Partners, 5 Chief Financial Officers and 3 regulators) and thematically analysed the interviews. They use the frame of “Paradox of Transparency” to explain the findings.

Auditors perceive that the overall quality control of their audits has improved both in the planning and execution stages, and such improvement can mostly be attributed to the coercive pressures from professional bodies and regulators. Nevertheless, audit fee remains unchanged. Auditors disclose industry generic items and descriptions of KAMs, sometimes masking the real problem areas of the clients. Even after improving the performative audit quality, transparency of audit reporting has not improved. Issues that warrant going concern qualifications or audit report modifications are now reported as KAMs. Hence, KAMs reporting might make the audit report less transparent.

Localised audit environments and institutions affect the transparency of KAMs reporting. Without attention to corporate governance and auditors’ independence issues, paradoxically, performative improvement in audit quality (due to the KAMs reporting requirement) does not enhance the transparency of audit reports.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to provide field-level evidence in Bangladesh and other developing countries about the perceptions of auditors, financial report preparers and regulators on the effects of KAMs reporting on audit efforts, fees, quality and report transparency.

This study aims to investigate the association between executives with foreign backgrounds and the audit fees paid by the Chinese-listed firms over the period from 2010 to 2020.

To examine the association between executives’ foreign experience and audit fees, this study constructs the following empirical model: Lnfee_i,t = β₀ + β₁Foreign background_i,t + ∑β_j Control_i,t + YearFE + IndFE + ε_i,t (1).

This study finds that auditors charge higher fees for firms hiring more executives with foreign backgrounds. The results are robust to a battery of robustness checks, including fixed effects, alternative measures of independent variable, controlling for other characteristics of executives and auditors and entropy balancing method.

This study sheds light on how executives’ foreign backgrounds affect audit fees, enriching the literature on executive heterogeneity and audit fees and providing important implications for audit practitioners.

This paper aims to investigate the impact of family involvement in ownership and governance on the quality of internal auditing.

Leveraging a hand-collected data set of listed family firms from 2014 to 2020, this study uses regression analyses to investigate the impact of family ownership, family involvement on the board, family CEO and the generational stage of the family business on the quality of internal auditing.

The results provide evidence that family ownership is positively associated with the quality of internal auditing, while later generational stages of family businesses have the opposite effect. Additional analyses reveal that the presence of a sustainability board sub-committee moderates the relationship between generational stages of family businesses and the quality of internal auditing function.

This paper does not consider country-institutional factors and other potentially family-related antecedents or governance factors that may affect the quality of internal auditing.

The results are informative for investors and non-family stakeholders interested in understanding under which conditions family-related factors influence the quality of internal auditing functions.

This study offers fresh evidence regarding the relationship between family-related factors and the quality of internal auditing and board sub-committees that moderate such a relationship in family businesses.

In recent times, stakeholders have called on corporate organizations especially those charged with governance to embrace full disclosure on non-financial issues, especially sustainability reporting. Based on this premise, this study aims to examine the influence of corporate board and assurance on sustainability reporting practices (SRP) of selected 80 firms from 8 countries in sub-Saharan Africa.

To measure the corporate board, the authors use both board variables and audit committee variables. Also, the authors adapted the sustainability score model as used by previous authors in the field of sustainability disclosure to measure SRPs. The analysis was done using both ordered logistic regression and probit regression models.

The results show that the combination of board corporate and assurance has a positive and significant impact on the sustainability reporting practice of selected firms in sub-Saharan Africa.

The study places emphasis on the need for strong collaboration between the corporate board and external assurance in evaluating and enhancing the quality of sustainability disclosure.

The study bridged the gap in the literature in the area of corporate board, assurance and SRP of corporate firms which has received little attention within sub-Saharan Africa.

This study aims to explore the relationship between firm risk, capital structure, cost of equity capital and social and environmental sustainability during the COVID-19 pandemic for companies listed on Tehran Stock Exchange.

To this aim, the information about 190 companies in 2014–2020 was retrieved to be analyzed. The total risk and systematic risk were used as the indicators of company risk; the industry-adjusted earnings price ratio (IndEP) and GORDON were used for the cost of equity capital. To measure social sustainability and environmental sustainability, the procedure suggested by Arianpoor and Salehi (2020) was used.

Underleveraged firms have had a lower total risk during the COVID-19 pandemic, while overleveraged firms have not had a higher risk during this time. In overleveraged firms, using systematic risk has a negative impact on social sustainability during the COVID-19 pandemic. In overleveraged firms, using total risk and systematic risk has a significant negative impact on environmental sustainability in the pandemic. Besides, overleveraged firms have a lower cost of equity capital (IndEP) during COVID-19.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no similar study has so far examined the joint impact of COVID-19 and corporate risk on social and environmental sustainability and also the joint impact of COVID-19 and capital structure on the cost of equity. This study contributes to the related literature by providing corporations with insightful post-pandemic directions on capital structure decisions and social and environmental activities. Furthermore, this research and the relevant findings can help understand and develop social responsibility in Iran as a developing country.

This study aims to examine the correlation between the readability of financial statements and the likelihood of future stock price crashes in nonfinancial companies listed on the Egyptian Stock Exchange. It further explores the possible moderating effect of audit quality on this relationship.

The study uses ordinary least squares regression, generalized least squares estimation and two-stage least squares methodology to examine and validate the research hypotheses. The sample comprises 107 nonfinancial companies registered on the Egyptian Stock Exchange from 2016 to 2019.

The results reveal a significant negative association between the readability of financial statements and stock price crash risk. This suggests that companies with more complex financial statements tend to experience higher future crash risks. Additionally, the study identifies audit quality as a significant moderating factor. Higher audit quality, often indicated by engagements with Big-4 audit firms, strengthens the influence of financial statements readability on stock price crash risk. This implies that while high audit quality enhances investor confidence and market stability, it also accentuates the negative consequences of complex financial statements.

The findings of this paper have significant implications for regulators and standard-setting bodies in Egypt. They should consider refining and revising existing standards to emphasize the importance of enhancing the readability of financial reports. Additionally, auditing firms should actively engage in efforts to ensure clearer and more transparent financial reporting. These actions are vital for boosting investor confidence, strengthening Egypt’s capital market and mitigating potential risks associated with information opacity and complexity.

This study represents a pioneering endeavor within the Arab and Egyptian financial environments. To the best of the author’s knowledge, it is the first examination of the association between the readability of financial statements and stock price crash risk in these contexts. Furthermore, it explores factors such as audit quality that may influence this connection.

This study aims to investigate whether social reputation via corporate social responsibility (CSR) awarding facilitates access to debt and decreases the cost of debt and whether governance mechanisms moderate this relationship.

The sample covers the period between 2002 and 2021, during which CSR award data were available in the Thomson Reuters Eikon/Refinitiv database. The empirical models are based on country, industry and year fixed-effects regression.

While the main findings produced an insignificant result for access to debt, they indicated strong evidence for the positive relationship between CSR awarding and the cost of debt. Moreover, the moderating effect highlights that while the sustainability committee helps CSR-awarded companies access debt more easily, independent directors help firms decrease the cost of debt via CSR awarding. Furthermore, the results differ between the US and the non-US samples, earlier and recent periods, high- and low-leverage firms and large and small firms.

For the first time, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the authors assess whether social reputation via CSR awarding facilitates access to debt and decreases the cost of debt in an international and cross-industry sample. Little is known about the effect of social reputation on loan contracting, although social reputation conveys broader information that goes beyond the firm’s internal (performance) and external (reporting) CSR practices. The authors also draw attention to the differing roles of distinct governance mechanisms in leveraging social reputation for loan contracting.

This paper aims to examine whether managerial sentiment, extracted from annual reports, is associated with corporate risk-taking in the context of Chinese companies. This study expands the vein of literature on overconfidence theory.

By leveraging textual analysis on Chinese listed companies’ annual reports, the authors construct firm-level managerial sentiment during 2007 and 2021 to examine how managerial sentiment influences corporate risk-taking after control for firm characteristics. Corporate risk-taking is denoted by corporate investment engagements: capital expenditures and net fixed asset investment.

Results show that incentives for corporate risk-taking are likely to increase with the positive managerial sentiment and decrease with the negative sentiment in companies’ annual reports. Positive managerial sentiment is associated with over-/under-investment and low/high investment efficiency. Further additional tests show that the managerial sentiment effect only holds during low economic uncertain years and samples of private-owned firms. Furthermore, the robust tests indicate that there is no endogenous issue between managerial sentiment and corporate risk-taking.

Annual report textual-based managerial sentiment may not perfectly reflect managers’ lower frequency sentiment (e.g. weekly, monthly and quarterly sentiment). Future studies could attempt to capture managers’ on-time sentiment by using media sources and corporate disclosures.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first research to provide insights into supervising managers’ corporate decisions by observing their textual information usage in corporate disclosure. Moreover, the approach of measuring managerial sentiment might be a solution to monitoring managerial class.

This paper contributes to the literature on accounting and finance studies, adding another piece of empirical evidence on content analysis by examining a unique language and institutional context (i.e. China). Besides, the paper notes that in line with the English version disclosure, based on Chinese semantic words, managerial sentiment in the Chinese-speaking world has magnitude on corporate decisions. The research provides insights into supervising managers’ corporate decisions by observing their textual information usage in corporate disclosure. Moreover, the approach to measuring managerial sentiment may be a practical solution to monitoring managerial class.

This chapter aims to examine the impact of whistleblowing policy (WH) on earnings management (EM) in an emerging market, Egypt. Our sample period from 2014 to 2019: the pre-whistleblowing policy period is 2014–2016 and the post-whistleblowing policy period is 2017–2019 with a total of 780 observations and the data are analyzed using ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis. Data are collected from annual reports, corporate governance reports, and companies’ website. The empirical analysis shows that whistleblowing policy coefficient is negative and significantly impacts EM in Egyptian firms. The result shows that when the firm adopts a whistleblowing policy, it led to decrease in EM. In addition, we provide strong and robust evidence by the difference-in-difference (DID) method to show that whistleblowing is significantly negatively associated with the extent of EM, which indicates that firms have an effective whistleblowing policy and can have several benefits. Firstly, it can help to identify and prevent illegal or unethical behavior within an organization, which can ultimately save the company from potential legal and reputational damage. Secondly, a whistleblowing policy can empower employees to speak up about any concerns they have, without fear of retaliation, which can help to create a more transparent and ethical work environment. Overall, an effective whistleblowing policy can contribute to the long-term success of a company and the broader economy. The findings of this chapter are relevant to policymakers, governments, management, employees, and shareholders to constraining EM in Egyptian firms.