IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcjaxx/v11y2023i3p516-542.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Special representative actions, the insurance value of audits, and investor protection: an empirical study based on the ruling against Kangmei Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd

Author

Listed:
  • Daoguang Yang
  • Hongling Han
  • Yidan Mao
  • Siyi Liu

Abstract

The ruling against the Kangmei Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd’s financial fraud was the first special representative action under China’s new Securities Law, serving as a milestone in investor protection in China. Exploiting the natural experiment provided by the ruling, we empirically test the insurance value of audits and find a negative market reaction of the client firms audited by the accounting firms that were still being sued as of the date of Kangmei ruling (i.e., the sued accounting firms). Further, this reaction is weakened when the solvency of the sued accounting firms or the client firms is high, and is intensified when the client firms have high litigation risk. The ruling also eroded investors’ trust in the financial statements for the year 2020 that were audited by the sued accounting firms. Overall, we provide important evidence on the effect of special representative actions from the perspective of audit insurance hypothesis.

Suggested Citation

  • Daoguang Yang & Hongling Han & Yidan Mao & Siyi Liu, 2023. "Special representative actions, the insurance value of audits, and investor protection: an empirical study based on the ruling against Kangmei Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd," China Journal of Accounting Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 516-542, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcjaxx:v:11:y:2023:i:3:p:516-542
    DOI: 10.1080/21697213.2023.2239674
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21697213.2023.2239674
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21697213.2023.2239674?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:11:y:2023:i:3:p:516-542. 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.