IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mes/emfitr/v61y2025i13p3989-4013.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pricing Opinion Shopping: Evidence from an Emerging Debt Market

Author

Listed:
  • Heesun Chung
  • Jaehee Jo
  • Catherine Heyjung Sonu

Abstract

We examine whether opinion shopping (OS)—the opportunistic practice of switching auditors to obtain a favorable audit opinion—is priced in an emerging debt market. Using data from Korean listed firms from 2005 to 2020, we find that firms engaging in OS-driven auditor switches face higher debt costs compared to those switching for other reasons or retaining their auditors. The effect is more pronounced when corporate governance, measured by foreign ownership and audit committee presence, is weak and when firms switch to non-Big 4 auditors. Our findings suggest that debt market participants perceive OS-driven auditor switches as a signal of heightened credit risk and respond by demanding higher risk premiums. This study is among the first to document the adverse consequences of OS in the debt market, highlighting important implications for regulators to establish policies that protect auditor independence and enhance oversight of firms with weaker governance, for investors to exercise increased caution when assessing firms that switch auditors for OS, and for managers to consider the potential negative effect of OS on firm valuation.

Suggested Citation

  • Heesun Chung & Jaehee Jo & Catherine Heyjung Sonu, 2025. "Pricing Opinion Shopping: Evidence from an Emerging Debt Market," Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(13), pages 3989-4013, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:mes:emfitr:v:61:y:2025:i:13:p:3989-4013
    DOI: 10.1080/1540496X.2025.2500445
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1540496X.2025.2500445
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1540496X.2025.2500445?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

    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:mes:emfitr:v:61:y:2025:i:13:p:3989-4013. 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/MREE20 .

    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.