IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/joares/v60y2022i5p1947-1989.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Audit Implications of Non‐GAAP Reporting

Author

Listed:
  • NICHOLAS J. HALLMAN
  • JAIME J. SCHMIDT
  • ANNE M. THOMPSON

Abstract

We investigate whether non‐GAAP reporting affects the audit process and thereby the quality of the related financial statements. First, we provide evidence that auditors in numerous countries, including the United States and the United Kingdom, rely to varying degrees on non‐GAAP profit before tax as a benchmark for determining quantitative materiality. Then, using Premium Listed companies on the London Stock Exchange, we document that U.K. auditor reliance on non‐GAAP materiality benchmarks often results in a higher quantitative materiality amount and can lower audit quality. Although U.K. auditors appear skeptical of managers’ more aggressive non‐GAAP adjustments, auditors adopt more of management's low‐quality adjustments when auditor independence is weaker. In sum, our results suggest that non‐GAAP reporting can indirectly affect investors by reducing the rigor of the financial statement audit.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicholas J. Hallman & Jaime J. Schmidt & Anne M. Thompson, 2022. "Audit Implications of Non‐GAAP Reporting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1947-1989, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:joares:v:60:y:2022:i:5:p:1947-1989
    DOI: 10.1111/1475-679X.12433
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12433
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1475-679X.12433?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Preeti Choudhary & Kenneth Merkley & Katherine Schipper, 2019. "Auditors’ Quantitative Materiality Judgments: Properties and Implications for Financial Reporting Reliability," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(5), pages 1303-1351, December.
    2. Mark T. Bradshaw & Richard G. Sloan, 2002. "GAAP versus The Street: An Empirical Assessment of Two Alternative Definitions of Earnings," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 41-66, March.
    3. Matthew M. Wieland & Mark C. Dawkins & Michael T. Dugan, 2013. "The Differential Value Relevance of S&P's Core Earnings Versus GAAP Earnings: The Role of Stock Option Expense," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1-2), pages 55-81, January.
    4. Wei Chen & Paul Hribar & Samuel Melessa, 2018. "Incorrect Inferences When Using Residuals as Dependent Variables," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 751-796, June.
    5. Bhattacharya, Nilabhra & Black, Ervin L. & Christensen, Theodore E. & Larson, Chad R., 2003. "Assessing the relative informativeness and permanence of pro forma earnings and GAAP operating earnings," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-3), pages 285-319, December.
    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. Sascha B. Herr & Peter Lorson & Jochen Pilhofer, 2022. "Alternative Performance Measures: A Structured Literature Review of Research in Academic and Professional Journals," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 389-451, September.
    2. Bradley Blaylock & Bradley P. Lawson & Michael A. Mayberry, 2020. "Taxable income, future profitability, and stock returns," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(7-8), pages 858-881, July.
    3. Florian Meier, 2020. "The Age of Cheap Money and Passive Investing: Are Pro Forma Earnings Value Relevant?," Journal of Finance and Investment Analysis, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 9(2), pages 1-1.
    4. Anantharaman, Divya & Chuk, Elizabeth & Kamath, Saipriya, 2024. "A demotion in disguise? The real effects of relocating pension smoothing from operating income to non-operating income," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 124405, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Mei Luo & Shuai Shao & Frank Zhang, 2018. "Does financial reporting above or below operating income matter to firms and investors? The case of investment income in China," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1754-1790, December.
    6. Dirk E. Black & Ervin L. Black & Theodore E. Christensen & Kurt H. Gee, 2022. "Comparing Non-GAAP EPS in Earnings Announcements and Proxy Statements," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1353-1377, February.
    7. Bradshaw, Mark T. & Christensen, Theodore E. & Gee, Kurt H. & Whipple, Benjamin C., 2018. "Analysts’ GAAP earnings forecasts and their implications for accounting research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 46-66.
    8. Campbell, Linda & Pitman, Marshall K., 2009. "Post-regulation G findings," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 100-106.
    9. Ahsan Habib & Mabel D' Costa & Hedy Jiaying Huang & Md. Borhan Uddin Bhuiyan & Li Sun, 2020. "Determinants and consequences of financial distress: review of the empirical literature," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(S1), pages 1023-1075, April.
    10. Claudia Arena & Simona Catuogno & Nicola Moscariello, 2021. "The unusual debate on non-GAAP reporting in the current standard practice. The lens of corporate governance," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 25(3), pages 655-684, September.
    11. Andersson, Patric & Hellman, Niclas, 2004. "The impact of pro forma profits on analyst forecasts: Some experimental evidence," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2004:5, Stockholm School of Economics.
    12. Zachary Kaplan & Xiumin Martin & Yifang Xie, 2021. "Truncating Optimism," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1827-1884, December.
    13. Theodore E. Christensen & Enrique Gomez & Matthew Ma & Jing Pan, 2021. "Analysts’ role in shaping non-GAAP reporting: evidence from a natural experiment," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 172-217, March.
    14. Mark A. Clatworthy & Tuan Ho & Jude Mengzhu Zhu, 2022. "Disagreement about the past: An empirical assessment of bank analysts' GAAP and non‐GAAP earnings measures," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3-4), pages 588-624, March.
    15. Jeremiah W. Bentley & Theodore E. Christensen & Kurt H. Gee & Benjamin C. Whipple, 2018. "Disentangling Managers’ and Analysts’ Non‐GAAP Reporting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 1039-1081, September.
    16. Asher Curtis & Valerie Li & Paige H. Patrick, 2021. "The use of adjusted earnings in performance evaluation," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 1290-1322, December.
    17. Greg Clinch & Ann Tarca & Marvin Wee, 2023. "Cross‐country diversity and non‐IFRS financial performance measures," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(2), pages 2473-2502, June.
    18. Edward J. Riedl & Suraj Srinivasan, 2007. "Signaling Firm Performance Through Financial Statement Presentation: An Analysis Using Special Items," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-031, Harvard Business School.
    19. Gary Entwistle & Glenn Feltham & Chima Mbagwu, 2006. "Misleading Disclosure of Pro Forma Earnings: An Empirical Examination," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 355-372, December.
    20. Jeffery S. Abarbanell & Reuven Lehavy, 2007. "Letting the “Tail Wag the Dog†: The Debate over GAAP versus Street Earnings Revisited," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 675-723, September.

    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:bla:joares:v:60:y:2022:i:5:p:1947-1989. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-8456 .

    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.