Advertisement

The SOX 404 control audit and the effectiveness of additional audit effort in lowering the risk of financial misstatements

  • Chan Li
  • K. K. Raman
  • Lili SunEmail author
  • Rong Yang
Original Research

Abstract

We examine the effectiveness of additional audit effort in lowering the risk of financial misstatements for companies with internal control material weaknesses during three separate post-SOX time periods. Our findings suggest that additional audit effort (as proxied by abnormal audit fees) is effective in lowering the risk of financial misstatements for clients with weak internal controls during the Auditing Standard No. 2 regime (2004–2006), but not during the extant Auditing Standard No. 5 (AS5) regime or the earlier 2002–2004 pre-404 audit (but still post-SOX) time period. We contribute to the on-going debate about the potential benefits associated with the SOX 404 audit and, in particular, the emerging literature on the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of the SOX 404 audit in improving the assessment of control risk under the extant AS5 regime (Schroeder and Shepardson in Account Rev 91(5):1513–1541, 2016). Collectively, our findings are consistent with the notion that extant PCAOB concerns about internal control quality under AS5 may be valid.

Keywords

SOX 404 audit AS2 AS5 Internal controls Additional audit effort Financial misstatements 

JEL Classification

M42 M48 

Notes

Funding

K. K. Raman acknowledges support from the Ramsdell Memorial Chair for Accounting at The University of Texas at San Antonio.

References

  1. Ai C, Norton EC (2003) Interaction terms in logit and probit models. Econ Lett 80(1):123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) (1983) Statement on auditing standards no. 47: audit risk and materiality in conducting an audit. AICPA, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) (2006) Statement on auditing standards no. 107: Audit risk and materiality in conducting an audit. AICPA, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Antle R, Gordon E, Narayanamoorthy G, Zhou L (2006) The joint determination of audit fees, non-audit fees, and abnormal accruals. Rev Quant Finance Account 27(3):235–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Asthana S, Khurana I, Raman KK (2019) Fee competition among Big 4 auditors and audit quality. Rev Quant Finance Account 52(2):403–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bedard JC, Graham L (2011) Detection and severity classifications of sarbanes–oxley section 404 internal control deficiencies. Account Rev 86(3):825–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blankley AI, Hurtt DN, MacGregor JE (2012) Abnormal audit fees and restatements. Audit J Pract Theory 31(1):79–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dechow PM, Ge W, Larson CR, Sloan RG (2011) Predicting material accounting misstatements. Contemp Account Res 28:17–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DeFond ML, Raghunandan K, Subramanyam KR (2002) Do non-audit service fees impair auditor independence? Evidence from going concern audit opinions. J Account Res 40(4):1247–1274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Doyle JT, Ge W, McVay S (2007) Accruals quality and internal control over financial reporting. Account Rev 82(5):1141–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ettredge ML, Li C, Sun L (2006) The impact of SOX section 404 internal control quality assessment on audit delay in the SOX era. Audit J Pract Theory 25(2):1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ettredge ML, Li C, Scholz S (2007) Audit fees and auditor dismissals in the sarbanes–oxley era. Account Horiz 21(4):371–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feldmann DA, Read WJ, Abdolmohammadi MJ (2009) Financial restatements, audit fees, and the moderating effect of cfo turnover. Audit J Pract Theory 28(1):205–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Feng M, Li C (2012) SOX Section 404 and intentional misstatements? Working paper, The University of PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  15. Francis JR, Michas PN, Yu MD (2013) Office size of Big 4 auditors and client restatements. Contemp Account Res 30(4):1626–1661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Francis J, Philbrick D, Schipper K (1994) Shareholder litigation and corporate disclosures. J Account Res 32(2):137–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Franzel J (2014) Effective audits of internal control in the current ‘perfect storm’. Speech by Jeanette Franzel (PCAOB Board member) at the Institute of Internal Auditors General Audit Management Conference. https://pcaobus.org/News/Speech/Pages/03262014_IIA.aspx. Accessed 31 Aug 2016
  18. Franzel J (2015) Current issues, trends, and open questions in audits of internal control over financial reporting. Speech by Jeanette Franzel (PCAOB Board member) at the American Accounting Association annual meeting. https://pcaobus.org/News/Speech/Pages/08102015_Franzel.aspx
  19. Government Accountability Office (2006) Financial Restatements. GAO, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  20. Hogan CE, Wilkins MS (2008) Evidence on the audit risk model: do auditors increase audit fees in the presence of internal control deficiencies? Contemp Account Res 25(1):219–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Iliev P (2010) The effect of SOX section 404: costs, earnings quality, and stock prices. J Financ 65:1163–1196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jaggi B, Mitra S, Hossain M (2015) Earnings quality, internal control weaknesses and industry-specialist audits. Rev Quant Financ Account 45(1):1–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keune MB, Johnstone KM (2012) Materiality judgments and the resolution of detected misstatements: the role of managers, auditors, and audit committees. Account Rev 87(5):1641–1677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kinney WR, Shepardson ML (2011) Do Control Effectiveness Disclosures Require SOX 404(b) Internal Control Audits? A Natural Experiment with Small U.S. Public Companies. J Account Res 49(2):413–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kinney WR, Martin RD, Shepardson ML (2013) Reflections on a decade of SOX 404(b) audit production and alternatives. Account Horiz 27(4):799–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Klein A (2002) Audit committee, board of director characteristics, and earnings management. J Account Econ 33(3):375–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knechel WR, Payne JL (2001) Additional evidence on audit report lag. Audit J Pract Theory 20(1):137–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Krishnan GV, Yu W (2012) Do small firms benefit from auditor attestation of internal control effectiveness? Audit J Pract Theory 34(1):115–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Krishnan J, Krishnan J, Song H (2011) The effect of auditing standard no. 5 on audit fees. Audit J Pract Theory 30(4):1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Li C (2009) Does client importance affect auditor independence at the office level? Empirical evidence from going-concern opinions. Contemp Account Res 26(1):201–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lobo GJ, Zhao Y (2013) Relation between audit effort and financial report misstatements: evidence from quarterly and annual restatements. Account Rev 88(4):1385–1412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nagy AL (2010) Section 404 compliance and financial reporting quality. Account Horiz 24(3):441–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nguyen D, Puri TN (2014) Information asymmetry and accounting restatement: nYSE-AMEX and NASDAQ evidence. Rev Quant Finance Account 43(2):211–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Norton EC, Wang H, Ai C (2004) Interaction effects and standard errors in logit and probit models. Stata J 4(2):154–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Palmrose ZV, Richardson VJ, Scholz S (2004) Determinants of market reactions to restatement announcements. J Account Econ 37(1):59–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Petersen MA (2009) Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: comparing approaches. Rev Financ Stud 22:435–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) (2004) An audit of internal control over financial reporting performed in conjunction with an audit of financial statements. Auditing Standard No. 2. PCAOB, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  38. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) (2007) An audit of internal control over financial reporting. Auditing standard no. 5. PCAOB, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  39. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) (2010) The Auditor’s responses to the risks of material misstatement. Auditing standard no. 13. PCAOB, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  40. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) (2013) Staff practice alert no. 11. Considerations for audits of internal control over financial reporting. October 24. PCAOB, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  41. Raghunandan K, Rama DV (2006) SOX section 404 material weakness disclosures and audit fees. Audit J Pract Theory 25(1):99–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rice SC, Weber DP (2012) How effective is internal control reporting under SOX 404? Determinants of the (non-)disclosure of existing material weaknesses. J Account Res 50:811–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schipper K, Vincent L (2003) Earnings quality. Account Horiz 17(Supplement):97–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schroeder JH, Shepardson ML (2016) Do SOX 404 control audits and management assessments improve overall internal control system quality? Account Rev 91(5):1513–1541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Srinivasan S, Wahid AS, Yu G (2015) Admitting mistakes: home country effect on the reliability of restatement reporting. Account Rev 90(3):1201–1240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhao Y, Bedard JC, Hoitash R (2017) SOX 404, auditor effort, and the prevention of financial report misstatements. Audit J Pract Theory 36(4):151–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Katz School of BusinessUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.College of BusinessUniversity of Texas at San AntonioSan AntonioUSA
  3. 3.G. Brint Ryan College of BusinessUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA
  4. 4.Saunders College of BusinessRochester Institute of TechnologyRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations