IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ysm/wpaper/amz2575.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Auditor Liability Reforms in the UK and the US: A Comparative Review

Author

Listed:
  • Tim Bush
  • Shyam Sunder
  • Stella Fearnley

Abstract

The past decade has seen many changes in audit liability regimes of the US and the UK, and more may be on the way. These include LLP status for audit firms, proportional liability, and the introduction of various forms of liability caps through contract in engagement letters. These changes may affect audit quality, price and profitability, the organization of the market for audit services, as well as domestic and cross-national mechanisms for regulation of this market. What have been, or will be the consequences of these changes? Will the auditors, who advocate many of these reforms, benefit from them? Will the investors, who advocate other reforms, benefit from them? Answers to these questions are relevant to policy decisions at hand. We analyze the recent changes and the proposals for future changes on the basis of available research on the market for audit services, including some studies commissioned by regulators. We find it difficult to establish a correspondence between the self-interest of the advocates of various changes and the observed and anticipated effects of such changes. More evidence is needed to inform the debate in the corridors of power. Such evidence could be obtained by requiring audit firms to publish information about their true litigation costs. Moreover, the regulatory process might benefit from somewhat greater reliance on market forces.

Suggested Citation

  • Tim Bush & Shyam Sunder & Stella Fearnley, 2007. "Auditor Liability Reforms in the UK and the US: A Comparative Review," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2575, Yale School of Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:ysm:wpaper:amz2575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.som.yale.edu/icfpub/publications/2575.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Derek K. Chan & Suil Pae, 1998. "An Analysis of the Economic Consequences of the Proportionate Liability Rule," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 457-480, December.
    2. John C. Coffee, 2005. "A Theory of Corporate Scandals: Why the USA and Europe Differ," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 21(2), pages 198-211, Summer.
    3. Peter Moizer, 1992. "State of the art in audit market research," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 333-348.
    4. Shyam Sunder & Karim Jamal, 2006. "Regulation, Competition and Independence in a Certification Society: Financial Reports Vs. Baseball Cards," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2578, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Jun 2007.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Tim Bush & Shyam Sunder & Stella Fearnley, 2007. "Auditor Liability Reforms in the UK and the US: A Comparative Review," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2575, Yale School of Management.
    2. Jackie Krafft & Jacques-Laurent Ravix, 2008. "Corporate Governance in Advanced Economies: Lessons in a Post Financial Crash Era.. Introduction to the Special Issue," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 74(4), pages 419-424.
    3. Karim Jamal, 2008. "Mandatory Audit of Financial Reporting: A Failed Strategy for Dealing with Fraud," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 97-110, May.
    4. Jani Saastamoinen & Hanna Savolainen, 2021. "Does a leopard change its spots? Auditors and lawyers as valuation experts for minority shareholders in the judicial appraisal of private firms," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3-4), pages 613-636, March.
    5. Ralf Ewert & Eberhard Feess & Martin Nell, 2000. "Auditor liability rules under imperfect information and costly litigation: the welfare-increasing effect of liability insurance," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 371-385.
    6. Greco, Giulio, 2012. "Governance codes and types of issuer. An empirical research on a global sample," MPRA Paper 37854, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Lennox, Clive & Li, Bing, 2012. "The consequences of protecting audit partners’ personal assets from the threat of liability," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 154-173.
    8. Ray Ball, 2009. "Market and Political/Regulatory Perspectives on the Recent Accounting Scandals," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 277-323, May.
    9. Antonio Zanotti, 2012. "La governance nelle imprese cooperative. Il caso delle cooperative aderenti a Legacoopservizi," Euricse Working Papers 1240, Euricse (European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises).
    10. Marleen Willekens & Dan Simunic, 2007. "Precision in auditing standards: effects on auditor and director liability and the supply and demand for audit services," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 217-232.
    11. Jannis Bischof & Holger Daske, 2013. "Mandatory Disclosure, Voluntary Disclosure, and Stock Market Liquidity: Evidence from the EU Bank Stress Tests," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(5), pages 997-1029, December.
    12. A. Greenfield & Carolyn Norman & Benson Wier, 2008. "The Effect of Ethical Orientation and Professional Commitment on Earnings Management Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 419-434, December.
    13. Peter J. Baldacchino & Annette Gauci & Simon Grima, 2019. "Family Influence in Maltese Listed Companies: The Implications on Corporate Governance," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(1), pages 85-112.
    14. Yang, Dan & Jiao, Hao & Buckland, Roger, 2017. "The determinants of financial fraud in Chinese firms: Does corporate governance as an institutional innovation matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 309-320.
    15. Xingqiang Du & Xu Li & Xuejiao Liu & Shaojuan Lai, 2018. "Underwriter–Auditor Relationship and Pre-IPO Earnings Management: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(2), pages 365-392, October.
    16. Tobias Svanstr�m, 2013. "Non-audit Services and Audit Quality: Evidence from Private Firms," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 337-366, June.
    17. Rustam, Sehrish & Rashid, Kashif & Zaman, Khalid, 2013. "The relationship between audit committees, compensation incentives and corporate audit fees in Pakistan," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 697-716.
    18. Ma, Liangbo & Ma, Shiguang & Tian, Gary, 2016. "Family control, accounting misstatements, and market reactions to restatements: Evidence from China," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 1-27.
    19. Michael Dietrich & Jolian McHardy & Abhijit Sharma, 2016. "Firm Corruption in the Presence of an Auditor," Review of Economic Analysis, Digital Initiatives at the University of Waterloo Library, vol. 8(2), pages 97-124, December.
    20. Roberto Barontini & Stefano Bozzi & Guido Ferrarini, 2017. "Executive remuneration standards and the “conformity gap” at controlled corporations," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 21(3), pages 573-597, September.

    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:ysm:wpaper:amz2575. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/smyalus.html .

    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.