Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
J. K. Reynolds, J. Francis (2000)
Does size matter? The influence of large clients on office-level auditor reporting decisionsJournal of Accounting and Economics, 30
R. D. Cook (1977)
Detection of influential observations in linear regressionTechnometrics, 19
R. M. Frankel, M. F. Johnson, K. K. Nelson (2002)
Auditor independence and earnings qualityThe Accounting Review, 77
C. Becker, M. DeFond, J. Jiambalvo, K. R. Subramanyam (1998)
The effect of audit quality on earnings managementContemporary Accounting Research, 15
J. K. Reynolds, D. Deis, J. Francis (2004)
Professional service fees and auditor objectivityAuditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 23
J. H. Biggs (2000)
Auditors and consultants shouldn’t be too closeThe Wall Street Journal, 13
J. Elliot, J. D. Hanna (1996)
Repeated accounting write-offs and the information content of earningsJournal of Accounting Research, 36
C. Hayn (1995)
The information content of lossesJournal of Accounting and Economics, 20
J. Seligman (1982)
The transformation of Wall Street: A history of the securities and exchange commission and modern corporate finance
H. Chung, S. Kallapur (2003)
Client importance, nonaudit services, and abnormal accrualsThe Accounting Review, 78
J. Francis, E. Maydew, H. C. Sparks (1999)
The role of big 6 auditors in the credible reporting of accrualsAuditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 18
R. Mendenhall, W. Nichols (1988)
Bad news and differential market reactions to announcements of earlier-quarters versus fourth-quarter earningsJournal of Accounting Research, 26
S. H. Teoh, T. J. Wong (1993)
Perceived auditor quality and the earnings response coefficientThe Accounting Review, 68
A. Craswell, D. Stokes, J. Laughton (2002)
Auditor independence and fee dependenceJournal of Accounting and Economics, 33
P. Dechow, R. Sloan, A. Sweeney (1995)
Detecting earnings managementThe Accounting Review, 70
H. Kripke (1979)
The SEC and corporate disclosure: Regulation in search of a purpose
(1997)
Serving the public interest: A new conceptual framework for auditor independence
D. W. Collins, S. P. Kothari (1989)
An analysis of intertemporal and cross-sectional determinants of earnings response coefficientsJournal of Accounting and Economics, 11
M. Defond, K. Raghunandan, K. R. Subramanyam (2002)
Do nonaudit service fees impair auditor independence? evidence from going concern audit opinionsJournal of Accounting Research, 40
R. Freeman, S. Tse (1992)
A nonlinear model of security price responses to unexpected earningsJournal of Accounting Research, 30
W. H. Rogers (1993)
sg17: Regression standard errors in clustered samplesStata Technical Bulletin, 13
S. Whisenant, S. Sankaraguruswamy, K. Raghunandan (2003)
Evidence on the Joint Determination of Audit and Nonaudit FeesJournal of Accounting Research, 41
P. Easton, M. Zmijewski (1989)
Cross-sectional variation in the stock market response to the announcement of accounting earningsJournal of Accounting and Economics, 11
D Larcke, S Richardson (2004)
Fees paid to audit firms, accrual choices, and corporate governanceJournal of Accounting Research, 42
A. Levitt, P. Dwyer (2002)
Take on the street: What Wall Street and Corporate America don’t want you to know
B. Cornell, W. Landsman (1989)
Security price response to quarterly earnings announcements and analysts’ forecasts revisionsThe Accounting Review, 64
R. Holthausen, R. Verrecchia (1988)
The effect of sequential information releases on the variance of price changes in an intertemporal multi-asset marketJournal of Accounting Research, 26
H. Ashbaugh, R. LaFond, B. Mayhew (2003)
Do nonaudit services compromise auditor independence? further evidenceThe Accounting Review, 78
R. Kormendi, R. Lipe (1987)
Earnings innovations, earnings persistence, and stock returnsJournal of Business, 60
M. Zmijewski (1984)
Methodological issues related to the estimation of financial distress prediction modelsJournal of Accounting Research, 22
We investigate if the SEC’s recently mandated disclosure of fees for audit and nonaudit services paid by firms to their incumbent auditors affected the market’s perception of auditor independence and earnings quality. Following the initial fee disclosures in 2001, we find that the market valuation of quarterly earnings surprises (earnings response coefficient) was significantly lower for firms with high levels of nonaudit fees than for firms with low levels of such fees. In contrast, in the year prior to the new fee disclosures, there was no reduction in earnings response coefficients for firms that subsequently reported high nonaudit fees. Our evidence suggests that mandated fee disclosures provided new information that was viewed by the market as relevant to appraising auditor independence and earnings quality.
Review of Accounting Studies – Springer Journals
Published: Nov 3, 2006
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.