IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jappol/v29y2010i3p226-241.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does auditor tenure affect accounting conservatism? Further evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Dan

Abstract

Accounting regulators are concerned about the potential threat of long-term auditor-client relationships on auditor independence, leading to lower audit quality. Jenkins and Velury (2008, hereafter JV) document a positive association between the conservatism in reported earnings and the length of the auditor-client relationship. A primary objective of this study is to extend JV by providing evidence that the relationship between conservatism and auditor tenure is not unique for all firms. In particular, this study finds that the positive association only exists for large firms or firms strongly monitored by their auditors, while for smaller firms or firms weakly monitored by their auditors, I observe a significantly negative association between auditor tenure and conservatism. Overall, the findings suggest that client importance plays an important role in long-term auditor-client relationship. Long-term auditor-client relationship imposes greater threat to auditor independence for smaller clients weakly monitored by auditors than larger clients. Hence, the study provides some support to the regulators who are concerned about the potential negative impact of auditor tenure on audit quality and the rule of mandatory audit firm rotation.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Dan, 2010. "Does auditor tenure affect accounting conservatism? Further evidence," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 226-241, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jappol:v:29:y:2010:i:3:p:226-241
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278-4254(10)00020-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nikolaos Anastasopoulos & Dimitrios Asteriou, 2021. "Optimal dynamic auditing based on game theory," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 1887-1912, September.
    2. Casterella, Jeffrey R. & Johnston, Derek, 2013. "Can the academic literature contribute to the debate over mandatory audit firm rotation?," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 108-116.
    3. TINA M. Jose Vega & Dennis M. López, 2012. "Evaluating The Effect Of Industry Specialist Duration On Audit Quality And Audit Fees," Working Papers 0023, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    4. Habib, Ahsan & Jiang, Haiyan, 2015. "Corporate governance and financial reporting quality in China: A survey of recent evidence," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 29-45.
    5. Sun, Yan & Xu, Weihong, 2012. "The role of accounting conservatism in management forecast bias," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 64-77.
    6. Mahmoud Moeinadin & Jamal Barzagari Khaneghah & Jamal Tabatabaei Mazraehno, 2013. "Investigating the Effect of Audit Quality on Over-investment Using Measures of Auditor Specialty and Audit Tenure for Listed Companies in Tehran Stock Exchange," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 3(4), pages 229-244, October.
    7. Booker, K., 2018. "Can clients of economically dependent auditors benefit from voluntary audit firm rotation? An experiment with lenders," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 63-67.
    8. Alhababsah, Salem & Alhaj-Ismail, Alaa, 2023. "Does shared tenure between audit committee chair and engagement partner affect audit outcomes? Evidence from the UK," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(2).

    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:eee:jappol:v:29:y:2010:i:3:p:226-241. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jaccpubpol .

    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.