IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/raaexx/v25y2018i1-2p1-20.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Big 4 firms benefit or suffer losses when another Big 4 firm fails to detect fraud?

Author

Listed:
  • Karim Jamal
  • Qiliang Liu
  • Le Luo

Abstract

This paper examines how investors and companies in China benefit or penalize other audit firms (and their clients) when one Big 4 audit firm fails to detect a fraud. Using a detailed archival study of a fraud by a manufacturing firm (Kelon), we propose that an audit failure by one Big 4 firm hurts not only itself and shareholders of its clients, but also competing Big 4 firms and their clients. Unlike results in developed countries, clients of both the failing auditor (Deloitte) and other foreign (Big 4) auditors experience more negative stock market reactions than local non-Big 4 auditors’ clients at the disclosure event pertaining to Kelon. Negative effects are more pronounced for companies in Kelon’s industry. Shareholder losses are moderated by government ownership. Furthermore, companies are less likely to switch to other Big 4 auditors after disclosure of the fraud case. Our results are robust to additional analyses, including controls for self-selection of Big 4 auditors.

Suggested Citation

  • Karim Jamal & Qiliang Liu & Le Luo, 2018. "Do Big 4 firms benefit or suffer losses when another Big 4 firm fails to detect fraud?," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1-2), pages 1-20, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:raaexx:v:25:y:2018:i:1-2:p:1-20
    DOI: 10.1080/16081625.2016.1230506
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/16081625.2016.1230506
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/16081625.2016.1230506?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:raaexx:v:25:y:2018:i:1-2:p:1-20. 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/raae20 .

    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.