The effect of audit committee and board of director independence on auditor resignation

Auditing

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 131-146

  Lee, Ho Young ^a   Mande, Vivek ^b   Ortman, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Audit committee and board independence; Auditor resignation; Auditor switches; Litigation risk

Indexed keywords

EID: 8744229747     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/aud.2004.23.2.131     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Abbott, L., and S. Parker. 2000. Audit committee characteristics and auditor selection. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 19 (Fall): 47-66.
2. -, and -. 2001. Audit committee characteristics and auditor switches. Research in Accounting Regulation 15: 151-166.
3. -, -, and G Peters. 2004. Audit committee characteristics and restatements. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 23 (March): 69-87.
4. -, -, -, and K. Raghunandan. 2003. The association between audit committee characteristics and audit fees. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 22 (September): 17-32.
5. Beasley, M. 1996. An empirical analysis of the relation between the board of director composition and financial statement fraud. The Accounting Review 71 (October): 443-465.
6. -, J. Carcello, D. Hermanson, and P. Lapides. 2000. Fraudulent financial reporting: Consideration of industry traits and corporate governance mechanisms. Accounting Horizons 14 (December): 441-454.
7. Beneish, M., P. Hopkins, and I. Jansen. 2001. Do auditor resignation convey private information about continuing audit clients? Working paper, Indiana University.
8. Bockus, K., and F. Gigler. 1998. A theory of auditor resignation. Journal of Accounting Research 36 (Autumn): 191-208.
9. Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees (BRC). 1999. Report and Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees. New York, NY: NYSE and NASD.
10. Carcello, J., D. Hermanson, T. Neal, and R. Riley. 2002. Board characteristics and audit fees. Contemporary Accounting Research 19(Fall): 365-384.
11. -, and T. Neal. 2003. Audit committee characteristics and auditor dismissals following "new" going-concern reports. The Accounting Review 78 (January): 95-117.
12. Cram, D., I. Stuart, and V. Karan 2003. Analysis of matched samples in accounting research. Working paper, California State University, Fullerton
13. Cullinan, C. 1999. Evidence of non-Big 6 market specialization and pricing power in a niche assurance market. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 17 (Supplement): 28-33.
14. DeAngelo, L. 1981. Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics 3 (December): 183-199.
15. Dechow, P., R. Sloan, and A. Sweeney. 1996. Causes and consequences of earnings manipulation: An analysis of firms subject to enforcement actions by the SEC. Contemporary Accounting Research 13 (Spring): 1-36.
16. DeFond, M. 1992. The association between changes in client firm agency costs and auditor switching. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 11 (Spring): 16-31.
17. -, J. Francis, M. Ettredge, and D. Smith. 1997. An investigation of auditor resignations. Research in Accounting Regulation 11: 25-45.
18. Deloitte & Touche. 2003. Audit Committee Resource Guide. February. New York, NY: Deloitte & Touche, LLP.
19. DeZoort, T. 1997. An investigation of audit committees' oversight responsibilities. ABACUS 33: 208-227.
20. Eichenseher, J., and P. Danos. 1981. The analysis of industry-specific auditor concentration: Towards an explanatory model. The Accounting Review 56: 473-192.
21. Frankel, R., M. Johnson, and K. Nelson. 2002. The relation between auditors' fees for nonaudit services and earnings management. The Accounting Review 77 (Supplement): 71-105.
22. Francis, J., and E. Wilson. 1988. Auditor changes: A joint test of theories relating to agency costs and auditor differentiation. The Accounting Review 63: 663-682.
23. Klein, A. 2002. Economic determinants of audit committee independence. The Accounting Review 77: 435-452.
24. -. 2003. Likely effects of stock exchange governance proposals and Sarbanes-Oxley on corporate boards and financial reporting. Accounting Horizons 17 (December): 343-355.
25. Krishnan, J., and J. Krishnan. 1997. Litigation risk and auditor resignations. The Accounting Review 72 (October): 539-560.
26. Levitt, A. 1998. The numbers game. Remarks delivered at the NYU Center for Law and Business, New York, September 28. Available at: http://www.sec.gov/ news/speech/speecharchive/1998/spch220.txt.
27. McMullen, D. 1996. Audit committee performance: An investigation of the consequences associated with audit committees. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 15 (Spring): 87-103.
28. Palmrose, Z-V. 1986. Audit fees and auditor size: Further evidence. Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 97-110.
29. Peasnell, K., P. Pope, and S. Young. 2000. Board monitoring and earnings management: Do outside directors influence abnormal accruals? Working paper, Lancaster University.
30. Raghunandan, K., and D. Rama. 1999. Auditor resignations and the market for audit services. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 18 (Spring): 124-134.
31. Pratt, J., and J. Slice. 1994. The effects of client characteristics on auditor litigation risk judgments, required audit evidence, and recommended audit fees. The Accounting Review 69 (October): 639-656.
32. Scarborough, D., D. Rama, and K. Raghunandan. 1998. Audit committee composition and interaction with internal auditing: Canadian evidence. Accounting Horizons 12 (March): 51-62.
33. Shu, S. 2000. Auditor resignations: Clientele effects and legal liability. Journal of Accounting and Economics 29 (April): 173-205.
34. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 1999a. NASD Rulemaking: Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Amending the Audit Committee Requirements and Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Amendments No. 1 and No. 2 Thereto. SEC Release No. 34-42231; File No. SR-NASD-99-48. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. Available at: http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ nd9948o.htm.
35. -. 1999b. NASD Rulemaking: Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Amending the Audit Committee Requirements and Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Amendments No. 1 and No. 2 Thereto. SEC Release No. 34-42233; File No. SR-NYSE-99-39. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. Available at: http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ny9939o.htm.
36. -. 2003. Standards Relating To Listed Company Audit Committees. Final Rules (April). Release No. 33-8220. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
37. Stice, J. 1991. Using financial and market information to identify pre-engagement factors associated with lawsuits against auditors. The Accounting Review 6 (July): 516-533.
38. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Financial Services. 2002. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Public Law No. 107-204. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
39. Wells, D., and M. Loudder. 1997. The market effects of auditor resignation. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 16 (Spring): 138-144.
40. Whisenant, S., and S. Sankaraguruswamy. 2000. Evidence on whether disclosures by managers about auditor-client frictions are related to changes within and across quality levels. Working paper, Georgetown University.
41. -, -, and K. Raghunandan. 2001. Consequences and information content of the types of FRRNo. 31 reportable events. Working paper, University of Houston.
42. Who Audits America. 2000. 44th edition. Spencer Phelps Harris. Menlo Park, CA: Data Financial Press.
43. Wild, J. 1996. The audit committee and earnings quality. Journal of Accounting, Auditing, & Finance 11: 247-276.