IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcjaxx/v4y2016i2p183-204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An analysis of US accounting firms’ cross-country audit quality of China concepts stocks

Author

Listed:
  • Nan Jia
  • Dan Li

Abstract

PCAOB once issued an article challenging US accounting firms’ practice of outsourcing the audit of US-listed Chinese companies. By analysing China concepts stocks audited by US firms from 2001 to 2012, this paper seeks to find the optimal mode for cross-country auditing. The study shows that integration and alliance outsourcing have significantly higher quality than non-alliance outsourcing, although no significant difference has been found between the former two modes. However, as the length of cooperation extends, the audit quality of non-alliance outsourcing improves significantly, which remarkably narrowed its difference with alliance outsourcing. Moreover, for the integration mode, audit quality decreases significantly as client importance increases, and consequently reduces its superiority in audit quality over outsourcing. Hence, although both integration and alliance outsourcing are favourable for cross-country auditing in China, special attention should be paid to integration where firms may compromise audit independence for large clients.

Suggested Citation

  • Nan Jia & Dan Li, 2016. "An analysis of US accounting firms’ cross-country audit quality of China concepts stocks," China Journal of Accounting Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 183-204, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcjaxx:v:4:y:2016:i:2:p:183-204
    DOI: 10.1080/21697213.2016.1196058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21697213.2016.1196058
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21697213.2016.1196058?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:rcjaxx:v:4:y:2016:i:2:p:183-204. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rcja .

    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.