Regulator-Cited Cooperation Credit and Firm Value: Evidence from Enforcement Actions

2018 ◽  
Vol 94 (4) ◽  
pp. 275-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Files ◽  
Gerald S. Martin ◽  
Stephanie J. Rasmussen
Keyword(s):  
Firm Value ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Department Of Justice ◽  
Negatively Associated ◽  
Private Action ◽  
Firm Cooperation ◽  
Remedial Actions ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Jel Classifications

ABSTRACT Regulators claim to reward firm cooperation in the enforcement process. However, critics question which actions constitute firm cooperation and contend that cooperation leads to “harsh” and “unfair” outcomes. Examining 1,162 enforcement actions for financial misrepresentation initiated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and Department of Justice, we find that regulator-cited cooperation credit is best explained by remedial actions and self-reported law violations. Cooperation credit is negatively associated with firm monetary penalties assessed by regulators. Our estimates suggest that firms with cooperation credit realize an average penalty reduction of $23.8 million (49 percent). We also estimate that average reputation-related losses are $756 million (70 percent) lower for firms with cooperation credit. We find no association between cooperation credit and related private action outcomes. Our results provide important insight into what constitutes meaningful cooperation with regulators, and suggest that the benefits can be substantial for firms deemed to be cooperative. JEL Classifications: G38; K22; K42; M41.

Critical Accounting Estimate Disclosures and the Predictive Value of Earnings

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Glendening
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Uncertainty ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Cash Flows ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Negatively Associated ◽  
Accounting Measurement ◽  
Accounting Estimates ◽  
Future Cash Flows ◽  
Disclosure Practice ◽  
Jel Classifications

SYNOPSIS In the early 2000s, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) called on firms to provide new Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) disclosures about their critical accounting estimates (CAEs). The quantitative sensitivity disclosures outline reasonably likely changes in firms' highly uncertain accounting estimates and allow firms to communicate with users about accounting measurement uncertainty. Using a sample of S&P 500 firms, I find that the predictive value of earnings with respect to future cash flows is negatively associated with the presence of a CAE disclosure. Consistent with the SEC's intended purpose of the new disclosure practice, this finding suggests that CAE disclosures convey instances of heightened accounting measurement uncertainty and potentially aid users in assessing the level of uncertainty in accounting estimates. JEL Classifications: M41.

Determinants and Consequences of Quantitative Critical Accounting Estimate Disclosures

2019 ◽  
Vol 94 (5) ◽  
pp. 189-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Glendening ◽  
Elaine G. Mauldin ◽  
Kenneth W. Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Audit Committee ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Financial Reports ◽  
The Public ◽  
Estimation Uncertainty ◽  
Earnings Surprises ◽  
Accounting Expertise ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Jel Classifications

ABSTRACT The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recommends that firms provide MD&A disclosures quantifying the earnings effect of reasonably likely changes in critical accounting estimates (quantitative CAE). This paper examines the determinants and consequences of quantitative CAE. We find that quantitative CAE are negatively associated with management's incentives to misreport (proxied by portfolio vega) and positively associated with audit committee accounting expertise and with audit offices with multiple quantitative CAE clients. These findings hold for the presence, initiation, number, and magnitude of quantitative CAE, and for both pension and non-pension quantitative CAE. We also find that incidences of AAERs, misstatements, and small positive earnings surprises decrease after initiation of quantitative CAE. Collectively, our findings provide insight into the use of quantitative disclosure to inform users about accounting estimation uncertainty in financial reports. JEL Classifications: M41; M42; M48. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.

scholarly journals The Benefits of Conservative Accounting to Shareholders: Evidence from the Financial Crisis

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bill Francis ◽  
Iftekhar Hasan ◽  
Qiang Wu
Keyword(s):  
Financial Crisis ◽  
Firm Value ◽  
Governance Mechanism ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
Stock Performance ◽  
Conservative Accounting ◽  
Alternative Measures ◽  
Recent Financial Crisis ◽  
And Control ◽  
Jel Classifications

SYNOPSIS Using the recent financial crisis as a natural quasi-experiment we test whether, and to what extent, conservative accounting affects shareholder value. We find that there is a significantly positive and economically meaningful relation between conservatism and firm stock performance during the current crisis. The result holds for alternative measures of conservatism and is validated in a series of robustness checks. We further find that the relation between conservatism and firm value is more pronounced for firms with weaker corporate governance or higher information asymmetry. Overall, our paper complements LaFond and Watts (2008) by providing empirical evidence to their argument that conservatism is an efficient governance mechanism to mitigate information risk and control for agency problems, and that shareholders benefit from it. JEL Classifications: M41; M48; G01.

SEC credits self-reporting and cooperation in not imposing penalty on ICO sponsor

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 13-15
Author(s):  
Daniel Hawke
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Expert Analysis ◽  
Securities Laws ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Civil Penalty ◽  
Do So

Purpose To explain a February 20, 2019 US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) settled enforcement action against Gladius Network LLC for failing to register an initial coin offering (ICO) under the federal securities laws, in which Gladius was able to avoid a civil penalty by self-reporting the violation and cooperating with the SEC enforcement staff. Design/methodology/approach Explains Gladius’ self-reporting, cooperation and remedial steps; why the SEC imposed no civil penalty on Gladius; and two similar cases the SEC instituted in July 2018 against companies that conducted unregistered ICOs, did not self-report, and were penalized. Provides analysis and conclusions. Findings The Gladius case offers important insight into how the SEC and its staff think about cooperation credit in resolving SEC enforcement actions and sends a clear message that self-reporting to the SEC can result in meaningful cooperation credit. In three recent cases, the Commission has made clear that once it put the industry on notice that ICOs could be securities that must be registered under the federal securities laws, a party risks enforcement action by failing to do so. Originality/value Expert analysis and guidance from an experienced securities lawyer who counsels clients on all manner of SEC enforcement, examination and regulatory policy matters.

SEC flexes its muscle on accounting fraud and targets more individuals

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 50-53
Author(s):  
David Woodcock ◽  
Joan McKown
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Internal Controls ◽  
Accounting Fraud ◽  
Department Of Justice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
A Priority

Purpose To note the increase in accounting and financial reporting matters at the Securities and Exchange Commission by highlighting a number of recent cases filed by the agency. Design/methodology/approach The SEC recently announced the settlement or filing of a number of significant accounting fraud cases. Coupled with recent statements by the SEC and the Department of Justice, it is clear that accounting fraud is a priority and that individuals are in the cross-hairs. This article discusses a few of the recent cases and the trend toward more financial reporting and issuer disclosure cases. Findings The number of financial reporting and issuer disclosure cases will likely continue to increase. Individuals will be targeted in more of those cases, internal controls will be a focus, whistleblowers will continue to be important in this area, and SOX 304 clawbacks will continue to be a weapon for the SEC. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced securities and financial services lawyers.

Settlement payouts will promote US whistle-blowing

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Class Action ◽  
Department Of Justice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Whistle Blowing ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Residential Mortgage ◽  
Mortgage Backed Securities ◽  
Limited Class ◽  
A Company

Significance The marked increase in 2015 expenses stems in part from Goldman's 5.1-billion-dollar settlement with the Department of Justice (DoJ) and various federal and state regulators announced on January 14 relating to the firm's securitisation, underwriting and sale of residential mortgage-backed securities from 2005 to 2007. On January 15, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced a 700,000-dollar award to a whistle-blower, the first-ever such award to a company outsider for analysis that led to a successful enforcement action. Impacts The SEC's whistle-blower payout to an outsider may incentivise further 'bounty-hunting' against corporations by external experts. Business-friendly judicial decisions that have limited class action recoveries will not necessarily restrict whistle-blower claims. The salience of the Sanders campaign among primary voters skews post-election political headwinds against deregulation-friendly Democrats.

Tangible Long-Lived Asset Impairments and Future Operating Cash Flows under U.S. GAAP and IFRS

2017 ◽  
Vol 93 (1) ◽  
pp. 187-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Gordon ◽  
Hsiao-Tang Hsu
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Value ◽  
Cash Flows ◽  
Negative Association ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Economic Factors ◽  
Negatively Associated ◽  
Operating Cash Flows ◽  
Reporting Incentives ◽  
Asset Impairments ◽  
Jel Classifications

ABSTRACT This paper investigates the predictive value of tangible long-lived asset impairments for changes in future operating cash flows under U.S. GAAP and IFRS. We find that impairments reported under IFRS are negatively associated with changes in future operating cash flows, whereas those under U.S. GAAP, on average, are not. We investigate whether differences in the predictive value are attributable to differences in recognition or measurement, providing evidence suggesting that impairment recognition under U.S. GAAP is delayed. Evidence also suggests that the value-in-use measurement attribute, allowed under IFRS, does not induce under-impairing as IFRS and U.S. GAAP impairments are similarly related to future impairments. The main result of a negative association under IFRS, but not U.S. GAAP, holds after considering future impairments to control for measurement differences, macro-economic factors, and firm reporting incentives. Further, impairment losses under IFRS are more predictive in high-enforcement countries. JEL Classifications: D78; F02; M16; M41; G38. Data Availability: Data used are available from sources identified in the paper.

U.S. Audit Partner Rotations

2016 ◽  
Vol 92 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry Laurion ◽  
Alastair Lawrence ◽  
James P. Ryans
Keyword(s):  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Listed Firms ◽  
Deferred Tax ◽  
Audit Partner Rotation ◽  
Jel Classifications

ABSTRACT We investigate the effects of audit partner rotation among U.S. publicly listed firms, utilizing the fact that audit partners are periodically copied by name in public correspondence between issuers and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Relative to non-rotation firms, we find no evidence of a change in the frequency of misstatements following the partner rotation; however, there is an increase in the frequency of restatement discoveries and announcements. We also find an increase in deferred tax valuation allowances. Overall, the results provide some evidence suggesting that U.S. partner rotations support a fresh look at the audit engagement. JEL Classifications: M41; M42; M48. Data Availability: Data are publicly available from sources identified in the article.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document