This study addresses the impact of certain audit committee characteristics identified by the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees (BRC) on the likelihood of financial misstatement. We examine 41 firms which issued fraudulent reports and 88 firms which restated annual results (without allegations of fraud) in the period 1991-1999, together with matched pairs control groups of similar size, exchange listing, industry and auditor type. We find that the independence of the audit committee and whether the committee meets at least four times per year exhibit a significant and negative association with the occurrence of financial reporting restatements. We also document a significant positive association between an audit committee that lacks a member with financial expertise and the occurrence of financial reporting restatements. However, only audit committee independence and the lack of financial expertise exhibit a negative (positive) association with financial reporting fraud. Our results underscore the importance of the BRC's first two recommendations, both of which concern audit committee independence. Our results also highlight the need for financial expertise as a means of strengthening the monitoring and oversight role that the audit committee plays in the financial reporting process.
Financial reporting comparability is one of the key qualitative characteristics that allows accounting information users to identify and understand similarities and differences in the financial performance of two firms. While prior studies manily focus on the role of accounting standards in the production of comparability, the role of economic agents and institutional incentives has been largely overlooked. To fill this gap, this study argues that a firm's audit committee, as an economic agent within the firm, is important in shaping financial reporting comparability because the audit committee oversees the financial reporting and disclosure process, and monitors the choice od accounting policies and principles.
In this paper, we empirically examine the relationship between two audit committee characteristics - the composition (expertise and independence) and size of the audit committee - and the quality of financial reporting. We show that after controlling for firm size, board composition, a measure of management's commitment to transparency (the existence of an ethics program) and institutional ownership, the percentage of audit committee members having expertise in accounting or financial management is positively related to financial reporting quality. We also find some evidence of a positive relationship between the size of the audit committee and financial reporting quality. However, audit committee independence is not related to financial reporting quality. We also verify that our results are robust across different measures of financial reporting quality. Our results suggest that mandating greater expertise on audit committees rather than simply requiring one expert on the audit committee may be beneficial to investors. In addition, our results also provide weak support for the recommendation of the Blue Ribbon Committee that firms devote significant directorial resources to the audit committee. Given the prior evidence of a negative relationship between financial reporting quality and cost of capital, firms could improve their reporting quality by appropriately structuring their audit committees, thus reducing their cost of capital.
This thesis examines the impact of audit committee characteristics on financial reporting quality in the context of a large sample of UK companies over the period 2007-2010. The notion of financial reporting quality is assessed by looking at the audit quality and earnings quality of the firms. This study utilises the audit fee and non-audit fee ratio as its proxies for audit quality and accruals based earnings management models as its proxies for earnings quality. The findings from the multivariate analysis show that audit committee meetings and financial expertise exert a significant positive impact on audit fees. Investigating expertise further, this study finds no support for the notion that accounting expertise influences audit fees, however a significant positive influence on audit fees is recorded for the non-accounting financial expertise. However, the holding of additional directorships has a significant negative impact on audit fees. This study also finds that audit committee members' financial expertise has a negative and significant impact on non-audit fee ratio suggesting a strong support of members with financial expertise on issues relating to auditor independence. The study also documents that audit committee members serving longer on the boards do not prefer to purchase high amount of non-audit services from the incumbent auditor. This study also records a significant positive impact of the holding of additional directorships on the provision of non-audit fee ratio, thus signifying a profound support for the busyness hypothesis which argues that overstretched directors are not very good monitors of financial reporting quality. Furthermore, this study finds broadly consistent evidence that audit committees meeting three or more times per year and fully independent audit committees exert a significant positive impact on the quality of reported earnings. This study also finds some evidence (depending on the earnings model used) that the level of ownership of audit committee members also exerts a positive impact on the quality of reported earnings, highlighting the fact that audit committee members with an equity stake in their companies are considered more effective in their oversight of the financial reporting process. On the other hand, this study finds evidence that the busyness of audit committee members (busyness defined in terms of the holding of board seats in other companies) has a significant negative impact on the quality of reported earnings. The composite variables (i.e. ACE1, ACE2, ACE3 and ACE4) representing those companies that satisfy all aspects of current best practice in terms of audit committee composition and operation, has a positive impact on the quality of reported earnings. This study covers the period 2007 to 2010 and therefore offers a contemporary analysis of the influence of audit committee characteristics on financial reporting quality. The study is very comprehensive in its scope not only in the selection of audit committee characteristics and methods employed to quantify these characteristics, but also in the use of various proxies developed to capture the true essence of financial reporting quality. The choice of multiple measurement methods both for the dependent and independent variables facilitates a much richer investigation into the relationship between governance and financial reporting quality variables. Therefore this study makes a major contribution to our understanding of the association between the various audit committee characteristics and financial reporting quality in the wake of recently introduced regulatory recommendations. These findings will also have policy implications as regulators around the world continue to define and refine the desired characteristics and behaviour of audit committees. Therefore, the findings of this study will ensure future policy changes regarding audit committees are adequately informed.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) continues to reform the corporate governance mechanisms in order to improve the quality of financial reporting and thus, enhance the confidence of investors in the stock market and in the accounting profession. Despite the efforts of the SEC, financial reporting scandals continue with record numbers of financial restatements documented by the General Accounting Office. A financial restatement is a correction of a previously misstated financial statement. There is a small volume of literature examining the effects of corporate governance mechanisms on financial restatements. The results of these studies however, are mixed and possibly explained by their narrow focus and omitted variables that could influence the effectiveness of audit committees. Consequently, this study examines the effects of independent audit committee member characteristics and auditor independence on financial restatements. Specifically, this study investigates the relationship between the likelihood of financial restatements and: (1) the expertise of the independent audit committee members, (2) the expertise and diligence of the independent audit committee members, (3) the reputation of the independent audit committee members, (4) the interaction effect of expertise, diligence and reputation, (5) the tenure of the independent audit committee members, and (6) the cash compensation paid to independent audit committee members. Prior studies have not investigated some of these variables or the interaction effects of independent audit committee member characteristics on financial restatements. This study also investigates the association between auditor independence and financial restatements. The SEC alleges that an increasing number of audit failures are due to the lack of auditor independence. One of the major sources of the lack of auditor independence is the auditor's economic dependency on the client. The provision of non-audit services increases the financial reliance of the auditor on the client. As a result, the auditor may become reluctant to raise issues with the preparation of the financial statements at the risk of foregoing the lucrative non-audit services fees. The SEC believes that longer audit firm tenure can also impair auditor independence and Section 203 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act suggests periodic audit firm rotation. Therefore, auditor independence was measured as: (1) fees paid to the auditor, and (2) audit firm tenure. Finally, this study extends the prior literature by studying the interaction effects of independent audit committee member characteristics and auditor independence on financial restatements. This interaction effect is important because the external auditor and the audit committee are regarded vital governance mechanisms that interact and exchange dialogue in the performance of their respective oversight of the financial reporting process. Prior research has not investigated this important interaction effect. The sample of the study comprises 69 U.S. publicly listed companies that announced their restatement from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2002. These companies were matched with 69 non-restatement companies based on industry and size. The data for the study is derived from SEC filings such as Form 10-K and DEF 14A, and Compustat. The univariate results show that compared to restatement firms, non-restatement firms generally have effective audit committee characteristics. The audit committees of non-restatement firms have members who are experts, diligent, reputable and appropriately compensated. They also pay lower non-audit services and total fees, and have audit firms with longer tenure. The multivariate results show that after controlling for other governance structures and firm specific non-governance variables, the likelihood of financial restatements is related to independent audit committee member characteristics and auditor independence. Specifically, the likelihood of financial restatements decreases when independent audit committee members are: (1) experts, (2) experts and diligent, (3) reputable, (4) experts, diligent and reputable, and (5) appropriately compensated. The audit committee member tenure variable is insignificant. In relation to the auditor independence variables, the multivariate results show that the likelihood of financial restatements increases when the non-audit services and total fees generated by the client are higher. On the other hand, the likelihood of financial restatements decreases when audit firm tenure is longer. The empirical results of this study suggest that independent audit committees are more effective overseers of the corporate financial reporting and auditing processes when: they comprise majority experts, they meet regularly, their members are reputable, and audit committee members are appropriately compensated. On the other hand, external auditors are not deemed to be effective overseers of the corporate financial reporting process when the non-audit services and total fees generated by the client are higher but are effective when audit firm tenure is long. The results support the SEC's concerns regarding the provision of non-audit services impairing auditor independence. The results also support the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 which under Section 201 prohibits external auditors from providing certain non-audit services to its audit client. Overall, these results support the regulatory efforts to increase the quality of financial reporting by enhancing the corporate governance process related to audit committees and auditor independence. However, the results do not support calls to limit the tenure of the auditor. The results of the multivariate interaction effects suggest that, after controlling for other governance structures and firm specific non-governance variables, when the non-audit services and total fees generated by the client are higher, the likelihood of financial restatements increases under conditions when the audit committee is not effective (a non expert audit committee, an audit committee that does not meet regularly, an audit committee whose members are not reputable or an audit committee that is not appropriately compensated). The implication of this result is that it provides evidence of conditions under which restatements take place. Knowledge of such conditions could aid regulators further improve the financial reporting process and corporate governance. This knowledge will support regulators in revising policies that ensure audit committee members are not only independent but also comprise other critical qualities. These improvements to the audit committee coupled with the existing regulations on the provision of non-audit services suggest a company's governance will be more effective. Overall, the results extend current knowledge in the sparse but growing literature related to financial restatements and corporate governance, and extend our understanding of the effectiveness and interaction of governance mechanisms in reducing financial restatements.
Prior research examines the relation between board characteristics and financial reporting violations relating to fraud and earnings overstatement. This paper examines the relation between governance (as measured by board and audit committee characteristics) and accounting quality (as measured by abnormal accruals) where there is no a priori reason to suspect systematic management of earnings. We find both board size and audit committee independence are related to higher quality accounting (i.e., lower abnormal working capital accruals). Furthermore, the relation between audit committee independence and higher quality accounting exists only when the abnormal accruals are income increasing. This suggests that audit committees are effective in the financial reporting process by reducing the level of income increasing abnormal accruals. The results also indicate that audit committees are effective only when they comprise independent directors.
