IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ebl/ecbull/eb-09-00371.html

Evaluating the SEC Review of Commercial Banks: Evidence from Comment Letters

Author

Listed:
  • Victor Valdivia

    (City University of New York)

Abstract

This paper examines whether the oversight provided by the SEC over commercial banks was appropriate in the period immediately preceding the end of the recent real-estate boom. The approach followed here is to first identify the variables that are of interest to those who invest in banks, and then to present evidence from comment letters to identify the areas in which the SEC actually focuses on . These two results are then compared to determine if the SEC's review efforts are aligned with the interests of bank investors. The results are mixed: in some instances the SEC focuses on the same areas as investors, but in other cases it does not – either because the SEC does not focus on areas of interest to investors, or because the SEC focuses in areas that are of questionable or no interest to investors. Even in cases in which the SEC and investors' interests are aligned, however, investors would benefit from enhanced disclosures. Overall, the paper suggests specific improvements to the SEC review process by identifying areas in which the SEC should focus on, and by suggesting areas of improved disclosure. Finally, this paper also examines the attributes of banks that generated issues upon SEC review.

Suggested Citation

  • Victor Valdivia, 2010. "Evaluating the SEC Review of Commercial Banks: Evidence from Comment Letters," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(1), pages 234-246.
    • Handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-09-00371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.accessecon.com/Pubs/EB/2010/Volume30/EB-10-V30-I1-P20.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Feroz, Eh & Park, K & Pastena, Vs, 1991. "The Financial And Market Effects Of The Secs Accounting And Auditing Enforcement Releases," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29, pages 107-142.
    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. Abdul‐Rahman Khokhar & Hesam Shahriari, 2022. "Is the SEC captured? Evidence from political connectedness and SEC enforcement actions," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2725-2756, June.
    2. Curtis Nicholls, 2016. "The impact of SEC investigations and accounting and auditing enforcement releases on firms’ cost of equity capital," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 57-82, July.
    3. Samuel Jebaraj Benjamin, 2019. "The Effect of Financial Constraints on Audit Fees," Capital Markets Review, Malaysian Finance Association, vol. 27(2), pages 59-87.
    4. Moon Kyung Cho & Minjung Kang, 2024. "Executives Implicated in Financial Reporting Fraud and Firms’ Investment Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-26, June.
    5. Lele Chen & Jennifer Yin, 2024. "Corporate Misconduct and Subsequent Consequences in Family Firms," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 60(4), pages 935-966, December.
    6. Marc Berninger, 2024. "Changes in the Perception of Error Announcements from the German Two-Tier Enforcement," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 613-639, December.
    7. Ehsan Habib Feroz & Taek Mu Kwon & Victor S. Pastena & Kyungjoo Park, 2000. "The efficacy of red flags in predicting the SEC's targets: an artificial neural networks approach," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(3), pages 145-157, September.
    8. Stephen J. Choi & A. C. Pritchard, 2016. "SEC Investigations and Securities Class Actions: An Empirical Comparison," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 27-49, March.
    9. 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.
    10. Anastasia A. Zakolyukina, 2018. "How Common Are Intentional GAAP Violations? Estimates from a Dynamic Model," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 56(1), pages 5-44, March.
    11. Liz Washington Arnold & Peter Harris, 2012. "An Empirical Analysis Of Market Reaction To Corporate Accounting Malfeasance," Accounting & Taxation, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 4(1), pages 25-42.
    12. Weber, David P. & Xu, Nina & Zhang, Kangkang, 2026. "SEC scrutiny and corporate risk-taking," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(3).
    13. Cormier, Denis & Houle, Sylvain & Ledoux, Marie-Josée, 2013. "The incidence of earnings management on information asymmetry in an uncertain environment: Some Canadian evidence," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 26-38.
    14. NIAMH M. BRENNAN & MARY McGRATH, 2007. "Financial Statement Fraud: Some Lessons from US and European Case Studies," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 17(42), pages 49-61, July.
    15. Hoberg, Gerard & Lewis, Craig, 2017. "Do fraudulent firms produce abnormal disclosure?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 58-85.
    16. Dan Amiram & Zahn Bozanic & James D. Cox & Quentin Dupont & Jonathan M. Karpoff & Richard Sloan, 2018. "Financial reporting fraud and other forms of misconduct: a multidisciplinary review of the literature," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 732-783, June.
    17. Brandon C. L. Morris & Jared F. Egginton & Kathleen P. Fuller, 2019. "Return and liquidity response to fraud and sec investigations," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 43(2), pages 313-329, April.
    18. 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.
    19. Fields, Thomas D. & Lys, Thomas Z. & Vincent, Linda, 2001. "Empirical research on accounting choice," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 255-307, September.
    20. Nurunnabi, Mohammad, 2014. "‘Does accounting regulation matter?’: An experience of international financial reporting standards implementation in an emerging country," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 230-238.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
    • M4 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting

    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:ebl:ecbull:eb-09-00371. 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: John P. Conley (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.