IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aic/saebjn/v69y2022i2p217-251n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Influence of Critical Audit Matters in the US on the Informativeness of Investors

Author

Listed:
  • Emil Spaargaren

    (University of Amsterdam)

  • Alexandros Sikalidis

    (International Hellenic University, Greece; University of Amsterdam)

  • Georgios Georgakopoulos

    (Agricultural University of Athens)

  • Chris Grose

    (International Hellenic University)

Abstract

In 2017, the PCAOB announced its new audit standard, AS 3101. One requirement is reporting critical audit matters (CAMs), starting June 30, 2019, for large accelerated filers. Using US data of CAM, we investigate whether the reporting of CAMs is informative for investors using a difference-in-differences approach and we use as proxies for investors’ informativeness, absolute abnormal returns and abnormal trading volume. Our motivation is to assess the relevance and the effectiveness of a new regulation aiming to improve audit quality. Overall, our findings provide some indications that the first-time implementation of CAMs might lead to investors avoiding those companies presumably because of uncertainty about the information being released. We also investigate the content of the CAM paragraph and do not find that the number, categories, or firm-specific/industry-common CAMs are value-relevant for investors. The results of this study provide insight into the new US auditor standard and the value-relevance of CAMs for investors. We suggest that standard setters should aim to improve the auditor report to make it more informational. Overall, our paper provides some evidence on the implementation and communicative value of the new CAM reporting, suggesting that CAMs are not informative for investors. We argue that this is the case potentially due to the additional information from CAMs which leads to complex information or information overload making investors less reluctant to invest on the companies with a significant number of CAMs reported.

Suggested Citation

  • Emil Spaargaren & Alexandros Sikalidis & Georgios Georgakopoulos & Chris Grose, 2022. "The Influence of Critical Audit Matters in the US on the Informativeness of Investors," Scientific Annals of Economics and Business (continues Analele Stiintifice), Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 69(2), pages 217-251, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:aic:saebjn:v:69:y:2022:i:2:p:217-251:n:7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://saeb.feaa.uaic.ro/index.php/saeb/article/view/1384
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glenn Stevens, 2011. "The Role of Finance," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 87(276), pages 1-10, March.
    2. Paul M. Healy & Amy P. Hutton & Krishna G. Palepu, 1999. "Stock Performance and Intermediation Changes Surrounding Sustained Increases in Disclosure," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 485-520, September.
    3. Linda Smith Bamber & Orie E. Barron & Douglas E. Stevens, 2011. "Trading Volume Around Earnings Announcements and Other Financial Reports: Theory, Research Design, Empirical Evidence, and Directions for Future Research," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 431-471, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Shahid Khan & Mark Anderson & Hussein Warsame & Michael Wright, 2015. "Do IFRS‐Based Earnings Announcements Have More Information Content than Canadian GAAP‐Based Earnings Announcements?," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 276-302, September.
    2. Umit G. Gurun & Rick Johnston & Stanimir Markov, 2016. "Sell-Side Debt Analysts and Debt Market Efficiency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 682-703, March.
    3. Stephen A. Hillegeist & James P. Kavourakis & Matthew Pinnuck, 2023. "The association between quarter length, forecast errors, and firms’ voluntary disclosures," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(2), pages 1885-1918, June.
    4. Stolowy, Hervé & Jeanjean, Thomas & Erkens, Michael, 2011. "The economic consequences of increasing the international visibility of financial reports," HEC Research Papers Series 957, HEC Paris.
    5. Kim, Bumjoon & Koo, Minjae, 2024. "Managerial ability and firm’s tweeting activity," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    6. Loukil, Nadia & Yousfi, Ouidad, 2010. "Firm's information environment and stock liquidity: evidence from Tunisian context," MPRA Paper 28699, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Feb 2011.
    7. Lisa Baudot & Zhongwei Huang & Dana Wallace, 2021. "Stakeholder Perceptions of Risk in Mandatory Corporate Responsibility Disclosure," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 151-174, August.
    8. Tuo, Ling & Rezaee, Zabihollah & Gao, Lei, 2024. "Is there a tradeoff between management earnings forecasts and sustainability reporting?," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    9. Vera Lucia M. Cunha & M. Dinis Mendes, 2017. "Financial Determinants of Corporate Governance Disclosure: Portuguese Evidence," Athens Journal of Business & Economics, Athens Institute for Education and Research (ATINER), vol. 3(1), pages 21-36, January.
    10. Van Geyt, Debby & Van Cauwenberge, Philippe & Vander Bauwhede, Heidi, 2014. "Does high-quality corporate communication reduce insider trading profitability?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-14.
    11. Wang, Weimin & (Frank) Wang, Xu, 2014. "Predicting earnings in a poor information environment," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 46-58.
    12. Ole-Kristian Hope & Danqi Hu & Hai Lu, 2016. "The benefits of specific risk-factor disclosures," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1005-1045, December.
    13. Paugam, Luc, 2011. "Valorisation et reporting du goodwill : enjeux théoriques et empiriques," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/8007 edited by Casta, Jean-François.
    14. Liao, Chih-Hsien & San, Ziyao & Tsang, Albert, 2024. "Corporate governance reforms and voluntary disclosure: International evidence on management earnings forecasts," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    15. Lof, Matthijs & van Bommel, Jos, 2023. "Asymmetric information and the distribution of trading volume," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    16. Bing Wang & Si Xu & Kung-Cheng Ho & I-Ming Jiang & Hung-Yi Huang, 2019. "Information Disclosure Ranking, Industry Production Market Competition, and Mispricing: An Empirical Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, January.
    17. He, Yan & Wang, Junbo & Wei, K.C. John, 2011. "Do bond rating changes affect the information asymmetry of stock trading?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 103-116, January.
    18. Wong, Jin Boon & Zhang, Qin, 2022. "Stock market reactions to adverse ESG disclosure via media channels," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    19. Hakan Jankensgard, 2014. "A Tale of Beauties and Beasts: Testing the Optimal Disclosure Hypothesis," Multinational Finance Journal, Multinational Finance Journal, vol. 18(1-2), pages 139-167, March - J.
    20. Lucy Lim, 2016. "Dual-class versus single-class firms: information asymmetry," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 763-791, May.

    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:aic:saebjn:v:69:y:2022:i:2:p:217-251:n:7. 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: Sireteanu Napoleon-Alexandru (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feaicro.html .

    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.