The role of audit committees in managing relationships with external auditors after SOX: Evidence from the USA
AbstractPurpose – Recent US reforms aimed at strengthening audit committees and their structure grant independent audit committees the responsibility to appoint, dismiss, and compensate auditors. The purpose of this paper is to examine the association between audit committee characteristics and auditors' compensation and dismissals following the enactment of the Sarbanes Oxley Act (SOX). Design/methodology/approach – A series of linear and logistic regression models were employed in a unique sample comprising of 2,393 observations. Findings – It was observed that stronger audit committees demand a higher level of assurance and are less likely to dismiss their auditors. Further, an increase was found in auditor independence as measured by reduced board involvement and less dismissals following an unfavorable audit opinion. Overall results suggest that increased audit committee roles and independence after SOX contribute to auditor independence and audit quality. Practical implications – This research has implications for regulators, auditors, boards and academics. The paper highlights that although all audit committees had to improve as a result of SOX, the remaining variation in audit committee characteristics continue to be important to the demand for auditor and audit quality. Originality/value – This study is the first to consider the association between audit committee characteristics and its extended responsibilities after SOX.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Emerald Group Publishing in its journal Managerial Auditing Journal.
Volume (Year): 24 (2009)
Issue (Month): 4 (May)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com
Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Menon, Krishnagopal & Deahl Williams, Joanne, 1994. "The use of audit committees for monitoring," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 121-139.
- Noel O'Sullivan, 1999. "Board characteristics and audit pricing post-Cadbury: a research note," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 253-263.
- Yermack, David, 1996. "Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 185-211, February.
- W. Robert Knechel & Marleen Willekens, 2006. "The Role of Risk Management and Governance in Determining Audit Demand," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(9-10), pages 1344-1367.
- DeAngelo, Linda Elizabeth, 1981. "Auditor size and audit quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 183-199, December.
- Johnson, W. Bruce & Lys, Thomas, 1990. "The market for audit services : Evidence from voluntary auditor changes," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1-3), pages 281-308, January.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Louise Lister).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.