Office size of big 4 auditors and client restatements

Jere R. Francis, Paul N Michas, Michael D. Yu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

70 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Francis and Yu (2009) and Choi, Kim, Kim, and Zang (2010) report evidence that Big 4 audits are of higher quality when the engagement office is of larger size. Specifically, client earnings quality is higher and auditors in larger offices are more likely to issue going-concern audit reports. We extend this line of research to test if larger Big 4 offices have fewer client restatements. A client restatement provides more direct evidence of a low-quality audit than earnings quality metrics or going-concern reports, because a restatement indicates the client's auditor did not effectively enforce the correct application of GAAP at the time the original financial statements were issued. We analyze 2,557 firm-year restatements in a sample of 23,190 financial statements originally issued by U.S. firms from 2003 to 2008. We find that Big 4 office size is associated with fewer client restatements after controlling for innate client characteristics that may affect restatements (client size, financial performance, industry membership, nonfinancial measures, off-balance sheet activities, and market-related measures), and a set of controls for other auditor factors such as fees and industry expertise. The study raises important questions about the ability of smaller offices to deliver high-quality audits for SEC registrants.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1626-1661
Number of pages36
JournalContemporary Accounting Research
Volume30
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2013

Fingerprint

Restatements
Auditors
Big 4
Going concern
Earnings quality
Quality audit
Industry
Financial statements
Audit
Fees
Factors
Non-financial measures
Financial performance
Audit reports
Balance sheet
Expertise
Quality metrics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Finance
  • Accounting
  • Economics and Econometrics

Cite this

Office size of big 4 auditors and client restatements. / Francis, Jere R.; Michas, Paul N; Yu, Michael D.

In: Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 30, No. 4, 12.2013, p. 1626-1661.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Francis, Jere R. ; Michas, Paul N ; Yu, Michael D. / Office size of big 4 auditors and client restatements. In: Contemporary Accounting Research. 2013 ; Vol. 30, No. 4. pp. 1626-1661.
@article{f9ed0985811f44768965af9b21af091f,
title = "Office size of big 4 auditors and client restatements",
abstract = "Francis and Yu (2009) and Choi, Kim, Kim, and Zang (2010) report evidence that Big 4 audits are of higher quality when the engagement office is of larger size. Specifically, client earnings quality is higher and auditors in larger offices are more likely to issue going-concern audit reports. We extend this line of research to test if larger Big 4 offices have fewer client restatements. A client restatement provides more direct evidence of a low-quality audit than earnings quality metrics or going-concern reports, because a restatement indicates the client's auditor did not effectively enforce the correct application of GAAP at the time the original financial statements were issued. We analyze 2,557 firm-year restatements in a sample of 23,190 financial statements originally issued by U.S. firms from 2003 to 2008. We find that Big 4 office size is associated with fewer client restatements after controlling for innate client characteristics that may affect restatements (client size, financial performance, industry membership, nonfinancial measures, off-balance sheet activities, and market-related measures), and a set of controls for other auditor factors such as fees and industry expertise. The study raises important questions about the ability of smaller offices to deliver high-quality audits for SEC registrants.",
author = "Francis, {Jere R.} and Michas, {Paul N} and Yu, {Michael D.}",
year = "2013",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1111/1911-3846.12011",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "1626--1661",
journal = "Contemporary Accounting Research",
issn = "0823-9150",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Office size of big 4 auditors and client restatements

AU - Francis, Jere R.

AU - Michas, Paul N

AU - Yu, Michael D.

PY - 2013/12

Y1 - 2013/12

N2 - Francis and Yu (2009) and Choi, Kim, Kim, and Zang (2010) report evidence that Big 4 audits are of higher quality when the engagement office is of larger size. Specifically, client earnings quality is higher and auditors in larger offices are more likely to issue going-concern audit reports. We extend this line of research to test if larger Big 4 offices have fewer client restatements. A client restatement provides more direct evidence of a low-quality audit than earnings quality metrics or going-concern reports, because a restatement indicates the client's auditor did not effectively enforce the correct application of GAAP at the time the original financial statements were issued. We analyze 2,557 firm-year restatements in a sample of 23,190 financial statements originally issued by U.S. firms from 2003 to 2008. We find that Big 4 office size is associated with fewer client restatements after controlling for innate client characteristics that may affect restatements (client size, financial performance, industry membership, nonfinancial measures, off-balance sheet activities, and market-related measures), and a set of controls for other auditor factors such as fees and industry expertise. The study raises important questions about the ability of smaller offices to deliver high-quality audits for SEC registrants.

AB - Francis and Yu (2009) and Choi, Kim, Kim, and Zang (2010) report evidence that Big 4 audits are of higher quality when the engagement office is of larger size. Specifically, client earnings quality is higher and auditors in larger offices are more likely to issue going-concern audit reports. We extend this line of research to test if larger Big 4 offices have fewer client restatements. A client restatement provides more direct evidence of a low-quality audit than earnings quality metrics or going-concern reports, because a restatement indicates the client's auditor did not effectively enforce the correct application of GAAP at the time the original financial statements were issued. We analyze 2,557 firm-year restatements in a sample of 23,190 financial statements originally issued by U.S. firms from 2003 to 2008. We find that Big 4 office size is associated with fewer client restatements after controlling for innate client characteristics that may affect restatements (client size, financial performance, industry membership, nonfinancial measures, off-balance sheet activities, and market-related measures), and a set of controls for other auditor factors such as fees and industry expertise. The study raises important questions about the ability of smaller offices to deliver high-quality audits for SEC registrants.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84890872759&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84890872759&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/1911-3846.12011

DO - 10.1111/1911-3846.12011

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84890872759

VL - 30

SP - 1626

EP - 1661

JO - Contemporary Accounting Research

JF - Contemporary Accounting Research

SN - 0823-9150

IS - 4

ER -