Comparing the Auditor Quality of Arthur Andersen to that of the Big 4

2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross D. Fuerman
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Securities Litigation ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Auditor Quality ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Arthur Andersen

This study compares the audit quality of Arthur Andersen with that of the Big 4 accounting firms. An expanded indicator of audit quality is developed based on the law of business misconduct literature and the legal process literature. A representation of audit quality is derived from an analysis of the legal actions initiated against these five large public accounting firms from 1996 to 2004. The legal action was partitioned into three year periods. In the first period, Arthur Andersen and the Big 4 evidenced no quality differential. In the second and third periods, the Big 4, in aggregate, rated higher on the audit quality indicator than did Andersen. The robustness of these findings is substantiated using multiple logistic regression and sensitivity analysis. When the individual firms are compared with Andersen, all four evidenced higher audit quality; three of the firms are significantly higher. This suggests that Andersen represents an outlier within the audit population. However, the analysis also indicates that overall audit quality declined in the period immediately following the passage of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. This suggests that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act provisions directed toward remedying auditing deficiencies is justified and not an overreaction to a “few bad apples.”

Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on the PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 31: PCAOB Release No. 2010-005, Application of the “Failure to Supervise” Provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Solicitation of Comment on Rulemaking Concepts

2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. C11-C15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Brazel ◽  
James Bierstaker ◽  
Paul Caster ◽  
Brad Reed
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Exposure Period ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Accounting Firm ◽  
The Public ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Supervision Practices

SUMMARY: Recently, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB” or “Board”) issued a release to address, in two ways, issues relating to the responsibilities of a registered public accounting firm and its supervisory personnel with respect to supervision. First, the release reminds registered firms and associated persons of, and highlights the scope of, Section 105(c)(6) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“the Act”), which authorizes the Board to impose sanctions on registered public accounting firms and their supervisory personnel for failing to supervise reasonably an associated person who has violated certain laws, rules, or standards. Second, the release discusses and seeks comment on conceptual approaches to rulemaking that might complement the application of Section 105(c)(6) and, through increased accountability, lead to improved supervision practices and, consequently, improved audit quality. The PCAOB provided for a 91-day exposure period (from August 5, 2010, to November 3, 2010) for interested parties to examine and provide comments on the conceptual approaches to rulemaking that might complement the application of Section 105(c)(6). The Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association provided the comments in the letter below to the PCAOB on the PCAOB Release No. 2010-005, Application of the “Failure to Supervise” Provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Solicitation of Comment on Rulemaking Concepts.

Market Reaction to Auditor Switching from Big 4 to Third-Tier Small Accounting Firms

2010 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsihui Chang ◽  
C. S. Agnes Cheng ◽  
Kenneth J. Reichelt
Keyword(s):  
Stock Market ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Market Reaction ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Auditor Switching ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Period 2 ◽  
Prior Literature ◽  
Second Tier

SUMMARY: After the demise of Arthur Andersen, the public accounting industry has witnessed a significant migration of public clients to second-tier (Grant Thornton and BDO Seidman) and smaller third-tier accounting firms. While prior literature documents that smaller auditors are perceived by the stock market as an inferior substitute for a Big 4 auditor, this perception appears to have changed in recent years. In this paper, we analyze market responses to auditor switching from Big 4 to smaller accounting firms during 2002 to 2006. We break our sample period into two separate periods (Periods 1 and 2) based on when regulatory changes occurred. These changes included Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) 404 implementation, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) inspections, and a tightened Form 8-K filing deadline. We find a relatively more positive stock market reaction to clients switching from a Big 4 to a smaller third-tier auditor in Period 2. This relatively more positive reaction in Period 2 reflects companies seeking better services rather than a lower audit fee, when an audit quality drop is less likely. Overall, our results suggest that companies and investors have become more receptive to smaller accounting firms.

Determinants of Audit Quality at Public Accounting Firms

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 134-143
Author(s):  
Audrey Michelle Wenny Yolanda ◽  
Kartini Kartini ◽  
Grace T. Pontoh
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Sampling Technique ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Education Experience ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
Public Accounting Firms

Objective – This study aims to examine and prove the effect of education, experience and audit fee on audit quality. Methodology – The data used are primary data in the form of questionnaires distributed to auditors, both senior and junior auditors at Public Accounting Firms located in Sulawesi. The questionnaires distributed to respondents were 46 auditors and 42 questionnaires were returned and able to processed. Findings – This research used a quantitative approach by measuring the objective data through scientific calculations, derived from samples of certain objects to answer a number of questions. The sampling technique used in this study is purposive sampling by using certain criteria and the model used is multiple linear regression analysis. The results of this study indicate that education, experience and audit fee have an effect on audit quality. Novelty – Audit quality is a representation of the auditor's performance as an audit service provider and also the auditee as an audit service user. As a liaison between the interests of financial statement users and the company, auditors are required to improve the quality of their services which in turn will have an impact on quality of the audit results. Auditors with adequate education and experience and appropriate audit fee in performing audit services will have an effect on the quality of the resulting audit. Type of Paper: Empirical JEL Classification: M40, M49. Keywords: Audit, Education; Experience; Fee; Quality

Non-CPAs and Office Audit Quality

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 169-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew G. Sherwood ◽  
Albert L. Nagy ◽  
Aleksandra B. Zimmerman
Keyword(s):  
Human Resources ◽  
Growth Regulators ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
External Audit ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Jel Classifications

SYNOPSIS During the time surrounding the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Big 4 firms either spun-off or downsized their consulting practices. However, in recent years, consulting service lines of the large accounting firms have seen a dramatic resurgence and growth. Regulators have taken notice of, and expressed concern over, this renewed focus on consulting. The accounting firms claim that such services enhance audit quality, mainly due to the prominent role of non-accounting specialists in today's external audit function. This study examines whether the availability of non-CPAs in U.S. Big 4 firm offices is associated with audit quality. We find that greater access to non-CPAs in the office is associated with higher audit quality and conclude that office audit quality is not just a function of audit-specific human resources but also the availability of non-CPAs to support audit engagement teams. JEL Classifications: M41; M42. Data Availability: All data are publicly available from sources identified in the study.

scholarly journals An Updated Analysis of Enforcement Actions against Engagement Quality Reviewers

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. A1-A12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Kraussman ◽  
William F. Messier
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Small Firms ◽  
Control Mechanism ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Quality Review ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Quality Control Mechanism

SUMMARY Engagement quality review (EQR) is designed to be a quality control mechanism for improving the quality of audit engagements. This paper updates the findings of Messier, Kozloski, and Kochetova-Kozloski (2010) on enforcement actions against engagement quality (EQ) reviewers, especially in light of the December 2009 implementation of the new standard on engagement quality review, Auditing Standard No. 7 (AS7). We identified 16 enforcement actions since 2009 that involve some type of sanction against an EQ reviewer. Only two cases involved a Big 4 firm. Thus, the vast majority of cases involved EQRs from smaller public accounting firms. Six cases occurred prior to the implementation of AS7, nine cases occurred after AS7 took effect, and one case involved violations both prior to and after AS7 implementation. All of the pre-AS7 cases involved sanctions resulting from an inadequate EQR. In contrast, all of the post-AS7 cases involved sanctions resulting from a failure to perform an EQR. Our review of these post-AS7 cases suggests that some small firms were either unable or unwilling to bring in qualified outside reviewers. Our findings provide important implications for practitioners, regulators, and researchers interested in engagement quality review and in improving the overall quality of audit engagements. Data Availability: The cases included in this study are available from public sources.

scholarly journals PENGARUH AUDIT TENURE, REPUTASI KANTOR AKUNTAN PUBLIK, DAN KELENGKAPAN KERTAS KERJA PERMANEN TERHADAP KUALITAS AUDIT (STUDI KASUS PADA PERUSAHAAN LQ45 YANG TERDAFTAR DI BEI TAHUN 2009-2014)

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-91
Author(s):  
Budi Supri Handoko
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Purposive Sampling ◽  
Working Paper ◽  
Permanent Working ◽  
Paper Work ◽  
Public Accountant

This study examines the influence of tenure and reputationof public accounting firms and thecompleteness of the permanent working paper on quality auditing. This study is focused on LQ 45 company that has been listed on The Indonesia Stock Exchangeduring 2009 until 2014. Moreover, by using a purposive sampling metode is gained 234 research samples. The hypothesis testing in this study is using multiple regression analysis. The test results indicate that audit tenure has no effect to the quality of the audit, the reputation of public accountant to audit quality while the completeness of paper work does not affect the quality of the audit Penelitian ini menguji mengenai pengaruh audit tenure, reputasi kantor akuntan public dan kelengkapan kertas kerja permanen terhadap kualitas audit. Peneltian ini di fokuskan pada perusahaan LQ 45 yang terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia tahun 2009 sampai dengan 2014, dengan mengggunakan metunakan metode purposive sampling diperoleh 234 sampel penelitian. Pengujian hipotesis dalam penelitian ini menggode purposive sampling diperoleh 234 sampel penelitian. Pengujian hipotesis dalam penelitian ini menggunakan analisis regresi berganda. Hasilpengujian menunjukkan bahwa audit tenure tunakan analisis regresi berganda. Hasilpengujian menunjukkan bahwa audit tenure tidak berpengaaruh terhadap kualitaas audit, reputasi berpengaruh terhadap kualitas audit sedangkan kelengkapan kertas kerjatidak berpengaruh terhadap kualitas audit.

WARREN W. NISSLEY: A CRUSADER FOR COLLEGIATE EDUCATION

1996 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elliott L. Slocum ◽  
Alfred R. Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Independent Schools ◽  
College Graduates ◽  
Accounting Education ◽  
Graduate Level ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Public Accounting Firms ◽  
College Programs

Warren W. Nissley's intense dedication to public accounting led him to crusade for development of schools of accountancy and improvement of education of accountants. Nissley conceived and championed the Bureau for Placements, 1926–1932, which resulted in: public accounting firms recruiting college graduates and developing permanent professional staffs, publishing the first Institute career publication, academic and student awareness of public accounting, and improved quality of college programs and graduates. Nissley's campaign for independent schools of accountancy, 1928–1950, influenced the Institute's committee on education. Many elements of his recommendations may be recognized in the evolution and current developments of accounting education. However, Nissley would continue to express disappointment in the failure to establish separate professional, graduate level, schools of accountancy for public accounting.

A Contemporary Analysis of Accounting Professionals' Work-Life Balance

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Buchheit ◽  
Derek W. Dalton ◽  
Nancy L. Harp ◽  
Carl W. Hollingsworth
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Support ◽  
Work Life ◽  
Work Life Balance ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Important Distinction ◽  
Life Balance ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Accounting Professionals ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Public Accounting Firms

SYNOPSIS In recent years, work-life balance surpassed compensation as the most important job satisfaction factor among AICPA members (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants [AICPA] 2004). Despite the continued importance of this issue in the accounting profession (AICPA 2011), prior research has not examined work-life balance perceptions across different segments of the profession. We survey 1,063 practicing CPAs in order to assess the comparative work-life balance perceptions across (1) Big 4 versus smaller public accounting firms, (2) audit versus tax functions, and (3) public accounting versus industry work contexts. Consistent with predictions based on institutional logics theory, we find that work-family conflict and job burnout perceptions (our proxies for work-life balance) are highest in the Big 4. We are the first study to measure both support-for and viability-of traditional alternative work arrangements (AWAs), and we report an important distinction between these two constructs. Specifically, while CPAs across all public accounting firms (i.e., Big 4, national, regional, and local firms) report similar levels of organizational support-for AWAs, Big 4 professionals report significantly lower perceived viability-of AWAs (i.e., the ability to use AWAs and remain effective at one's job) compared to accounting professionals at smaller public accounting firms. Further, we find no differences between audit and tax professionals' perceptions across any of our work-life balance measures. We also document nuanced differences regarding work-life balance perceptions in public accounting versus industry. For example, contrary to conventional wisdom, work-life balance is not uniformly “better” in industry (e.g., burnout is actually lower in smaller public accounting firms compared to industry). Finally, we use open-ended responses from a follow-up survey to provide several recommendations for firms to improve their work-life balance efforts.

Audit Quality of Chinese ADR Engagements

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 25-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aloke (Al) Ghosh ◽  
Elisabeth Peltier ◽  
Cunyu Xing
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Emerging Market ◽  
Financial Statements ◽  
Foreign Firms ◽  
American Depositary Receipts ◽  
Reverse Mergers ◽  
Chinese Companies ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Depositary Receipts

SYNOPSIS The controversy over Chinese reverse mergers has led to concerns about the audit quality of all U.S.-listed Chinese companies. Because a sizeable number of foreign firms cross-list their shares as American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) issued by U.S. depositary banks (as opposed to direct listings), we study how auditors have managed their audits of Chinese ADRs. Our motivation for examining Chinese ADRs is based on the findings that cross-listing via the ADR process is beneficial for U.S. shareholders. We find that relative to ADRs from countries other than China, and relative to directly listed Chinese companies, Chinese ADRs are more likely to be associated with a Big 4 auditor and are less likely to restate prior-period financial statements. We also find that Chinese ADRs pay significantly higher fees than other emerging market ADRs and Chinese direct-listings. Collectively, these results suggest high audit quality for Chinese ADRs, which is in sharp contrast to the Chinese direct-listing results. Using Tobin's Q as a measure of market value, we find that the stock market rewards Chinese ADRs, indicating that investors incorporate the benefits of higher audit quality when evaluating Chinese ADRs.

An Analysis of Cross-Sectional Differences in Big and Non-Big Public Accounting Firms' Audit Programs

2006 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Blokdijk ◽  
Fred Drieenhuizen ◽  
Dan A. Simunic ◽  
Michael T. Stein
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Big 5 ◽  
Public Accounting Firms ◽  
Audit Approach ◽  
Control Risk

A significant body of prior research has shown that audits by the Big 5 (now Big 4) public accounting firms are quality differentiated relative to non-Big 5 audits. This result can be derived analytically by assuming that Big 5 and non-Big 5 firms face different loss functions for “audit failures” and is consistent with a variety of empirical evidence from studies of audit fees, auditor changes, and the stock price reaction to audited earnings. However, there is no existing evidence (of which we are aware) concerning the underlying production differences between Big 5 and non-Big 5 audits. As a result, existing empirical evidence cannot distinguish between the possibility that Big 5 audits are simply perceived to be different (e.g., by investors) or actually differ in how they are produced. Our research objective is to identify the production characteristics of audit engagements that may explain the differences in expected audit quality between Big 5 and non-Big 5 firms. In this archival study, we examine the total audit effort and the allocation of effort to four audit phases—planning, (control) risk assessment, substantive testing, and completion—for a cross-section sample of 113 audits of Dutch companies in 1998/99 by 14 public accounting firms. We find that, after controlling for client characteristics: (1) both types of auditors exert about the same amount of total audit effort; (2) Big 5 auditors allocate relatively more effort to planning and (control) risk assessment, and relatively less to substantive testing and completion; and (3) client size, use of the business-risk-based audit approach, and reliance on client internal controls affect audit hours differently for the two auditor types. We conclude that the Big 5 firms actually produce a higher audit quality level, and that this quality difference is related to how audit hours are deployed in a more contextual and less procedural audit approach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document