IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/abacus/v54y2018i3p353-380.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Oversight of Audit Firms: The Slippery Slope of Enforcing Regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Carlin Dowling
  • W. Robert Knechel
  • Robyn Moroney

Abstract

This study uses the slippery‐slope framework to understand how an oversight regulator's enforcement style influences audit firm compliance. Using data from interviews with audit regulators and audit partners, we find that partners perceive the regulator's enforcement style has shifted from being more collaborative to being more coercive. A consequence of this shift is that partners believe the development of trust between the two parties has been inhibited and a forced compliance climate has emerged. In response, firms have mandated strategies to increase the visibility of compliance, such as increasing mandatory use of checklists. Audit partners express some concern that oversight of the profession has resulted in firms adapting their audit process in ways aimed at minimizing inspection risk and not necessarily improving audit quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlin Dowling & W. Robert Knechel & Robyn Moroney, 2018. "Public Oversight of Audit Firms: The Slippery Slope of Enforcing Regulation," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 54(3), pages 353-380, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:abacus:v:54:y:2018:i:3:p:353-380
    DOI: 10.1111/abac.12130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12130
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/abac.12130?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blankley, Alan I. & Kerr, David S. & Wiggins, Casper E., 2012. "A content analysis of CPA firms’ correspondence following PCAOB inspections: 2004–2010," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 74-89.
    2. Kirchler, Erich & Hoelzl, Erik & Wahl, Ingrid, 2008. "Enforced versus voluntary tax compliance: The "slippery slope" framework," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 210-225, April.
    3. Prinz, Aloys & Muehlbacher, Stephan & Kirchler, Erich, 2014. "The slippery slope framework on tax compliance: An attempt to formalization," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 20-34.
    4. Keith A. Houghton & Michael Kend & Christine Jubb, 2013. "The CLERP 9 Audit Reforms: Benefits and Costs Through the Eyes of Regulators, Standard Setters and Audit Service Suppliers," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 49(2), pages 139-160, June.
    5. Gaetano Lisi, 2012. "Testing the slippery slope framework," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(2), pages 1369-1377.
    6. Ping Zhang, 2007. "The Impact of the Public's Expectations of Auditors on Audit Quality and Auditing Standards Compliance," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 631-654, June.
    7. DeAngelo, Linda Elizabeth, 1981. "Auditor size and audit quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 183-199, December.
    8. Canning, Mary & O’Dwyer, Brendan, 2013. "The dynamics of a regulatory space realignment: Strategic responses in a local context," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 169-194.
    9. Christopher Humphrey & Asad Kausar & Anne Loft & Margaret Woods, 2011. "Regulating Audit beyond the Crisis: A Critical Discussion of the EU Green Paper," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 431-457, June.
    10. Power, Michael, 2009. "The risk management of nothing," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(6-7), pages 849-855, August.
    11. Kastlunger, Barbara & Lozza, Edoardo & Kirchler, Erich & Schabmann, Alfred, 2013. "Powerful authorities and trusting citizens: The Slippery Slope Framework and tax compliance in Italy," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 36-45.
    12. Timothy B. Bell & Monika Causholli & W. Robert Knechel, 2015. "Audit Firm Tenure, Non‐Audit Services, and Internal Assessments of Audit Quality," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 461-509, June.
    13. Stephen K. Asare & Arnold M. Wright, 2004. "The Effectiveness of Alternative Risk Assessment and Program Planning Tools in a Fraud Setting," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 325-352, June.
    14. Malsch, Bertrand & Gendron, Yves, 2011. "Reining in auditors: On the dynamics of power surrounding an “innovation” in the regulatory space," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 456-476.
    15. Gilles Hilary & Clive Lennox, 2005. "The Credibility of Self-Regulation: Evidence from the Accounting Profession's Peer Review," Post-Print hal-00482306, HAL.
    16. Mouna Hazgui & Yves Gendron, 2015. "Blurred roles and elusive boundaries," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(8), pages 1234-1262, October.
    17. DeFond, Mark L., 2010. "How should the auditors be audited? Comparing the PCAOB Inspections with the AICPA Peer Reviews," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 104-108, February.
    18. Hilary, Gilles & Lennox, Clive, 2005. "The credibility of self-regulation: Evidence from the accounting profession's peer review program," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-3), pages 211-229, December.
    19. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    20. Pincus, Karen V., 1989. "The efficacy of a red flags questionnaire for assessing the possibility of fraud," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 14(1-2), pages 153-163, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Inder K. Khurana & Nathan G. Lundstrom & K. K. Raman, 2021. "PCAOB Inspections and the Differential Audit Quality Effect for Big 4 and Non–Big 4 US Auditors," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 376-411, March.
    2. Ojala, Hannu & Malo, Pekka & Penttinen, Esko, 2023. "Private firms’ tax aggressiveness and lightweight pre-tax-audit interventions by the tax administration," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    3. Arnold, Vicky & Collier, Philip A. & Leech, Stewart A. & Rose, Jacob M. & Sutton, Steve G., 2023. "Can knowledge based systems be designed to counteract deskilling effects?," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    4. Ege, Matthew & Knechel, W. Robert & Lamoreaux, Phillip T. & Maksymov, Eldar, 2020. "A multi-method analysis of the PCAOB’s relationship with the audit profession," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    5. Vlad‐Andrei Porumb & Abe De Jong & Carel Huijgen & Teye Marra & Jan Van Dalen, 2021. "The Effect of Auditor Style on Reporting Quality: Evidence from Germany," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 57(1), pages 1-26, March.
    6. Sarah B. Stuber & Chris E. Hogan, 2021. "Do PCAOB Inspections Improve the Accuracy of Accounting Estimates?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 331-370, March.
    7. Sutton, Steve G. & Arnold, Vicky & Holt, Matthew, 2023. "An extension of the theory of technology dominance: Capturing the underlying causal complexity," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Löhlein, Lukas, 2016. "From peer review to PCAOB inspections: Regulating for audit quality in the U.S," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 28-47.
    2. Ege, Matthew & Knechel, W. Robert & Lamoreaux, Phillip T. & Maksymov, Eldar, 2020. "A multi-method analysis of the PCAOB’s relationship with the audit profession," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    3. Löhlein, Lukas, 2016. "From peer review to PCAOB inspections: regulating for audit quality in the U.S," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67147, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Justin Logie & Warren Maroun, 2021. "Evaluating Audit Quality Using the Results of Inspection Processes Performed by an Independent Regulator," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 31(2), pages 128-149, June.
    5. Batrancea, Larissa M. & Kudła, Janusz & Błaszczak, Barbara & Kopyt, Mateusz, 2022. "Differences in tax evasion attitudes between students and entrepreneurs under the slippery slope framework," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 464-482.
    6. Siglé, Maarten & Goslinga, Sjoerd & Speklé, Roland & van der Hel, Lisette & Veldhuizen, Robbert, 2018. "Corporate tax compliance: Is a change towards trust-based tax strategies justified?," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 3-16.
    7. Löhlein, Lukas & Müßig, Anke, 2020. "At the boundaries of institutional theorizing: Individual entrepreneurship in episodes of regulatory change," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    8. Fany Inasius & Giri Darijanto & Engelwati Gani & Gatot Soepriyanto, 2020. "Tax Compliance After the Implementation of Tax Amnesty in Indonesia," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, October.
    9. Beattie, Vivien & Fearnley, Stella & Hines, Tony, 2010. "Factors Affecting Audit Quality in the 2007 UK Regulatory Environment: Perceptions of Chief Financial Officers, Audit Committee Chairs and Audit Engagement Partners," SIRE Discussion Papers 2012-29, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    10. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    11. Marius-Răzvan Surugiu & Cristina-Raluca Mazilescu & Camelia Surugiu, 2021. "Analysis of the Tax Compliance in the EU: VECM and SEM," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(17), pages 1-19, September.
    12. Musharraf Rasool Cyan & Antonios M. Koumpias & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2016. "The Effects of Media Campaigns on Individual Attitudes towards Tax Compliance; Quasi-experimental Evidence from Survey Data in Pakistan," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1609, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    13. Frecknall-Hughes, Jane & Gangl, Katharina & Hofmann, Eva & Hartl, Barbara & Kirchler, Erich, 2023. "The influence of tax authorities on the employment of tax practitioners: Empirical evidence from a survey and interview study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    14. Canning, Mary & O'Dwyer, Brendan, 2016. "Institutional work and regulatory change in the accounting profession," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-21.
    15. Stefan Sundgren & Tobias Svanström, 2013. "Audit office size, audit quality and audit pricing: evidence from small- and medium-sized enterprises," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 31-55, February.
    16. Giuseppe Iuliano & Gaetano Matonti, 2015. "Do big 4 audit companies detect earnings management and report it in the audit opinion? Empirical evidence from italian non-listed firms," ESPERIENZE D'IMPRESA, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(2), pages 5-43.
    17. Alan Kilgore & Renee Radich & Graeme Harrison, 2011. "The Relative Importance of Audit Quality Attributes," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 21(3), pages 253-265, September.
    18. Abernathy, John L. & Barnes, Michael & Stefaniak, Chad, 2013. "A summary of 10 years of PCAOB research: What have we learned?," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 30-60.
    19. James Alm & Peter Gerbrands & Erich Kirchler, 2022. "Using “responsive regulation” to reduce tax base erosion," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 738-759, July.
    20. Devan Mescall & Fred Phillips & Regan N. Schmidt, 2017. "Does the Accounting Profession Discipline Its Members Differently After Public Scrutiny?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(2), pages 285-309, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:abacus:v:54:y:2018:i:3:p:353-380. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0001-3072 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.