IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reaccs/v11y2006i1d10.1007_s11142-006-6394-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Political–economic Analysis of Auditor Reporting and Auditor Switches

Author

Listed:
  • K. Hung Chan

    (Lingnan University)

  • Kenny Z. Lin

    (Lingnan University)

  • Phyllis Lai-lan Mo

    (The Hong Kong Polytechnic University)

Abstract

This study examines whether auditor opinions are affected by political and economic influences from governments. We use auditor locality (local versus non-local) to capture such influences from local governments in China. Based on data from China’s stock markets for the period 1996–2002, we find that local auditors, who have greater economic dependence on local clients and are subject to more political influence from local governments than non-local auditors, are inclined to report favorably on local government-owned companies to mitigate probable economic losses. Moreover, companies with qualified opinions are more likely to switch from a non-local auditor to a local auditor than companies with unqualified opinions. Contrary to some prior studies, we find that in China’s political environment, local government-owned companies that switched from a non-local auditor to a local auditor after receiving a qualified opinion can succeed in opinion shopping.

Suggested Citation

  • K. Hung Chan & Kenny Z. Lin & Phyllis Lai-lan Mo, 2006. "A Political–economic Analysis of Auditor Reporting and Auditor Switches," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 21-48, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:reaccs:v:11:y:2006:i:1:d:10.1007_s11142-006-6394-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11142-006-6394-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11142-006-6394-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11142-006-6394-z?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krivogorsky, Victoria, 2000. "Corporate Ownership and Governance in Russia," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 331-353, September.
    2. MARK L. DeFOND & JAMES JIAMBALVO, 1993. "Factors Related to Auditor†Client Disagreements over Income†Increasing Accounting Methods," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 415-431, March.
    3. Lys, T & Watts, Rl, 1994. "Lawsuits Against Auditors," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32, pages 65-93.
    4. Charles J. P. Chen & Xijia Su & Ronald Zhao, 2000. "An Emerging Market's Reaction to Initial Modified Audit Opinions: Evidence from the Shanghai Stock Exchange," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), pages 429-455, September.
    5. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez‐De‐Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 1999. "Corporate Ownership Around the World," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(2), pages 471-517, April.
    6. Krishnan, Jagan & Stephens, Ray G., 1995. "Evidence on opinion shopping from audit opinion conservatism," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 179-201.
    7. Aharony, J & Lee, CWJ & Wong, TJ, 2000. "Financial packaging of IPO firms in China," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(1), pages 103-126.
    8. Teoh, Sh, 1992. "Auditor Independence, Dismissal Threats, And The Market Reaction To Auditor Switches," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 1-23.
    9. Kimberly A. Dunn & Brian W. Mayhew, 2004. "Audit Firm Industry Specialization and Client Disclosure Quality," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 35-58, March.
    10. Key, Kimberly Galligan, 1997. "Political cost incentives for earnings management in the cable television industry," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 309-337, November.
    11. E-Sah Woo & Hian Koh, 2001. "Factors associated with auditor changes: a Singapore study," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(2), pages 133-144.
    12. Karl E. Hackenbrack & Chris E. Hogan, 2002. "Market Response to Earnings Surprises Conditional on Reasons for an Auditor Change," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 195-223, June.
    13. DeAngelo, Linda Elizabeth, 1981. "Auditor size and audit quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 183-199, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jeremy Bertomeu & Robert P. Magee, 2015. "Political pressures and the evolution of disclosure regulation," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 775-802, June.

    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. Richard Chung & Michael Firth & Jeong-Bon Kim, 2003. "Auditor conservatism and reported earnings," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 19-32.
    2. Thomas G. Calderon, 2008. "Determinants of client-initiated and auditor-initiated auditor changes," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 23(1), pages 4-25, January.
    3. Beatriz García Osma & Belén Gill‐de‐Albornoz Noguer, 2007. "The Effect of the Board Composition and its Monitoring Committees on Earnings Management: evidence from Spain," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 1413-1428, November.
    4. Beatriz García Osma & Belén Gill de Albornoz Noguer & Elena De las Heras Cristobal, 2016. "Opinion shopping: Partner versus firm-level evidence," Working Papers. Serie EC 2016-02, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    5. Stuart, Iris & Shin, Yong-Chul & Cram, Donald P. & Karan, Vijay, 2013. "Review of choice-based, matched, and other stratified sample studies in auditing research," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 88-113.
    6. Clive Lennox, 1999. "Non-audit fees, disclosure and audit quality," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 239-252.
    7. Reynolds, J. Kenneth & Francis, Jere R., 2000. "Does size matter? The influence of large clients on office-level auditor reporting decisions," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 375-400, December.
    8. Ku He & Xiaofei Pan & Gary Tian, 2017. "Legal Liability, Government Intervention, and Auditor Behavior: Evidence from Structural Reform of Audit Firms in China," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 61-95, January.
    9. Sakai, Ayami, 2025. "Empirical Study On The Disclosure Of Reasons For Auditor Switching: Evidence From Japan," MPRA Paper 125060, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Qian Sai & Yanxi Li & Yanwen Liu & Heng Zhao & Shanshan Ouyang, 2024. "Audit report information improvement and earnings management," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(1), pages 425-442, January.
    11. Yeung, Wing Him & Lento, Camillo, 2018. "Ownership structure, audit quality, board structure, and stock price crash risk: Evidence from China," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-24.
    12. Emiliano Ruiz Barbadillo & Nieves Gómez Aguilar & Nieves Carrera Pena, 2006. "Evidencia empírica sobre el efecto de la duración del contrato en la calidad de la auditoría: análisis de las medidas de retención y rotación obligatoria de auditores," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 30(2), pages 283-316, May.
    13. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    14. Zvi Singer & Jing Zhang, 2022. "Do companies try to conceal financial misstatements through auditor shopping?," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1-2), pages 140-180, January.
    15. Gul, Ferdinand A. & Cheng, Louis T.W. & Leung, T.Y., 2011. "Perks and the informativeness of stock prices in the Chinese market," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 1410-1429.
    16. Wang, Xiaoming & Cao, Jerry & Liu, Qigui & Tang, Jinghua & Tian, Gary Gang, 2015. "Disproportionate ownership structure and IPO long-run performance of non-SOEs in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 27-42.
    17. Sabri Boubaker & Florence Labégorre, 2006. "L’environnement informationnel et la structure de propriété et de contrôle des sociétés cotées françaises," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 9(3), pages 5-38, September.
    18. Nader Mansouri, 2014. "The Determinants Of Management Provisions After The Introduction Of Ias / Ifrs Standards In France [Les Determinants De La Gestion Des Provisions (Prc) Apres L’Introduction Des Normes Ias/Ifrs En F," Post-Print hal-01899131, HAL.
    19. Pan, Yue & Shroff, Nemit & Zhang, Pengdong, 2023. "The dark side of audit market competition," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1).
    20. Tree, David & Wang, Dilin & Frischmann, Peter J., 2024. "Differential responses to tax regulation: The case of Schedule UTP," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing

    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:spr:reaccs:v:11:y:2006:i:1:d:10.1007_s11142-006-6394-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.