Auditor independence and auditor-provided tax service: Evidence from going-concern audit opinions prior to bankruptcy filings

Auditing

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 31-54

  Robinson, Dahlia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditor independence; Going concern qualification; Information spillover; Tax service fees

Indexed keywords

EID: 77249085127     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: 15587991     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/aud.2008.27.2.31     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Anakwe, B. 2003. An examination of the factors associated with lawsuits against accountants for nonaudit services. Unpublished dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
2. Antle, R., E. Gordon, G. Narayanamoorthy, and L. Zhou. 2002. The joint determination of audit fees, nonaudit fees, and abnormal accruals. Working paper, Yale School of Management
3. Antle, R., E. Gordon, G. Narayanamoorthy, and L. Zhou, P. Griffin, D. Teece, and O. Williamson. 1997. An Economic Analysis of Auditor Independence for a Multi-Client, Multi-Service Public Accounting Firm. Report prepared on behalf of the AICPA in connection with the presentation to the Independence Standards Board of Serving the Public Interest: A New Conceptual Framework for Auditor Independence. Berkeley, CA: The Law & Economics Consulting Group Inc.
4. Ashbaugh, H., R. Lafond, and B. Mayhew. 2003. Do nonaudit services compromise auditor independence? Further evidence. The Accounting Review 78: 611-639.
5. Behn, B., S. Kaplan, and K. Krumweide. 2001. Further evidence on the auditors' going-concern report: The influence of management plans. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 20: 13-28
6. Belsley, D., E. Kuh, and R. Welsch. 1980. Regression Diagnostics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc
7. Beneish, D., and E. Press. 1993. Costs of technical default. The Accounting Review 68: 233-257
8. Carcello, J., D. Hermanson, and F. Huss. 1995. Temporal changes in bankruptcy-related reporting. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 74: 133-143.
9. Carcello, J., D. Hermanson, and F. Huss, and T. Neal. 2003. Audit committee composition and auditor dismissals following "new" going- concern reports. The Accounting Review 78: 95-117.
10. Chen, K., and B. Church. 1992. Default on debt obligations and the issuance of going-concern opinions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory Fall: 30-49.
11. Chung, H., and S. Kallapur. 2003. Client importance, nonaudit fees, and abnormal accruals. The Accounting Review 78: 931-955.
12. Craswell, A., J. Francis, and S. Taylor. 1995. Auditor brand name reputations and industry specializations. Journal of Accounting and Economics 20: 297-312.
13. DeFond, M., K. Raghunandan, and K. Subramanyam. 2002. Do nonaudit fees impair auditor independence? Evidence from going-concern auditor opinions. Journal of Accounting Research 40: 1247-1274
14. Dietz, D. 2002. Auditors are timid-They failed to warn in most big firm bankruptcies since 1996. Pittsburg Post-Gazette April 26: C8.
15. Firth, M. 1997. The provision of nonaudit services by accounting firms to their audit clients. Contemporary Accounting Research 14: 1-11.
16. Francis, J., and B. Ke. 2003. Do fees paid to auditor increase a company's likelihood of meeting analysts' earnings forecasts? Working paper, University of Missouri.
17. Francis, J., and B. Ke 2004. What do we know about audit quality? The British Accounting Review 36: 345-368.
18. Frankel, R., M. Johnson, and K. Nelson. 2002. The relation between auditors' fees for nonaudit services and earnings management. The Accounting Review 77: 71-105.
19. Geiger, M., K. Raghunandan, and D. Rama. 1998. Costs associated with going-concern modified audit opinions: An analysis of auditor changes, subsequent opinions and client failures. Advances in Ac- counting 16: 117-139.
20. Geiger, M., K. Raghunandan, and D. Rama. 2001. Bankruptcies, audit reports, and the Reform Act. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 20: 187-195.
21. Geiger, M., K. Raghunandan, and D. Rama. 2003. Audit fees, nonaudit fees, and auditor reporting on stressed companies. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 22: 53-69.
22. Geiger, M, K. Raghunandan, and D. Rama. 2005. Recent changes in the association between bankruptcies and prior audit opinions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 24: 21-35.
23. Geiger, M, K. Raghunandan, and D. Rama. 2006. Audit firm size and going-concern reporting accuracy. Accounting Horizons 20: 1-17.
24. Gleason, C., and L. Mills. 2006. Do auditor-provided tax services compromise auditor independence with respect to tax expense? Working paper, University of Arizona and University of Iowa
25. Goldman, D. 2006. Interview comments on information spillover through auditor-provided tax services. October 11.
26. Hausman, J. 1978. Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46: 1251-1271.
27. Hilzenrath, D. 2001. The numbers crunch: After Enron, new doubts about auditors. Washington Post December 5: A1.
28. Hopwood, W., J. McKeown, and J. Mutchler. 1989. A test of the incremental explanatory power of opinions qualified for consistency and uncertainty. The Accounting Review January: 28-48
29. Hopwood, W., J. McKeown, and J. Mutchler. 1994. A reexamination of auditor versus model accuracy within the context of the going-concern opinion modification. Contemporary Accounting Research Spring: 409-431
30. Kida, T. 1980. An investigation of auditors' continuity and related qualification judgments. Journal of Accounting Research Autumn: 506-523.
31. Kinney, W., Z-V. Palmrose, and S. Scholz. 2004. Auditor independence, nonaudit services, and restatements: Was the U.S. Government right? Journal of Accounting Research 42: 561-588.
32. Larcker, D., and S. Richardson. 2004. Fees paid to audit firms, accrual choices and corporate governance. Journal of Accounting Research 42: 625-658.
33. Lindberg, D., and F. Beck. 2004. Before and after Enron: CPA's views of auditor independence. The CPA Journal 74: 36-39.
34. Mishra, S., K. Raghunandan, and D. Rama. 2005. Do investors' perceptions vary with types of nonaudit fees? Evidence from auditor ratification voting. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 24: 9-25
35. Mutchler, J. 1984. Auditors' perceptions of the going-concern decision. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory Spring: 17-29.
36. Mutchler, J. 1985. A multivariate analysis of the auditor's going-concern opinion decision. Journal of Accounting Research Autumn: 668-682.
37. Mutchler, J, W. Hopwood, and J. McKeown. 1997. The influence of contrary information and mitigating factors on audit opinion decisions of bankrupt companies. Journal of Accounting Research 35: 295-310
38. Nelson, F., and L. Olsen. 1978. Specification and estimation of simultaneous equations model with limited dependent variables. International Economic Review 19: 695-710.
39. Oates, M. 2002. Auditor independence, Sarbanes-Oxley, and tax services. The Tax Executive Sept-Oct. Available at: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m6552/is_5_54/ai_94779549
40. Ohlson, J. 1980. Financial ratios and the prediction of bankruptcy. Journal of Accounting Research 18: 109-131.
41. Omer, T., J. Bedard, and D. Falsetta. 2006. Auditor-provided tax services: The effects of a changing regulatory environment. The Accounting Review 81: 1095-1117.
42. Palmrose, Z-V. 2000. Empirical Research on Auditor Litigation: Considerations and Data. Studies in Accounting Research No. 33. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association.
43. Panel on Audit Effectiveness. 2000. The Panel on Audit Effectiveness Report and Recommendations. Stamford, CT: Public Oversight Board.
44. Parkash, M., and C. Venable. 1993. Auditee incentives for auditor independence: The case of nonaudit services. The Accounting Review 68: 113-133.
45. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board PCAOB. 2004. Proposed Ethics and Independence Rules Concerning Independence, Tax Services and Contingent Fees, PCAOB Rulemaking Docket No, 017. PCAOB Release No. 2004-015. Available at: e-linkurlhttp://www.pcaobus.org/Rules-of-the-Board/Documents/Docket-017/Release2004-015.pdf/url/e-link., Dec. 14.
46. Reynolds, K., and J. Francis. 2000. Does size matter? The influence of large clients on office-level auditor reporting decisions. Journal of Accounting and Economics 30: 375-400.
47. Reynolds, K, D. Deis, and J. Francis. 2004. Professional service fees and auditor objectivity. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 23: 29-52.
48. Sage, L., and J. Sage. 2005. Tax service implications of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Managerial Finance 31: 29-34.
49. Securities and Exchange Commission SEC. 2000. Revision of the Commission's Auditor Independence Requirements. Release Nos. 33-7919; 34-43602. Washington, D.C.: SEC.
50. Securities and Exchange Commission SEC, 2006. Rule Filings with Respect to the PCAOB's Proposed Ethics and Independence Rules Concerning Independence, Tax Services, and Contingent Fees. March 28. Washington, D.C: SEC
51. Sharma, D., and J. Sidhu. 2001. Professionalism vs. commercialism: The association between nonaudit services NAS and audit independence. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 28: 595-630
52. Simunic, D. 1984. Auditing, consulting and auditor independence. Journal of Accounting Research 22: 679-702.
53. U.S. House of Representatives. 2002. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Public Law 107-204 H. R. 3763 Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
54. Venuti, E. 2004. The going-concern assumption revisited: Assessing a company's future viability. The CPA Journal May: 40-44.
55. Weil, J. 2001. Going concerns: Did accountants fail to flag problems at dot-com casualties? Wall Street Journal February 9: C1.
56. Weil, J. 2003. Travel-Billing probe has a bigger scope. Wall Street Journal September 26.
57. Whisenant, S., S. Sankaraguruswamy, and K. Raghunandan. 2003. Evidence on the joint determination of audit and nonaudit fees. Journal of Accounting Research 41: 721-744.
58. Zmijewski, M. 1984. Methodological issues related to the estimation of financial distress prediction models. Journal of Accounting Research Supplement: 59-82