IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reacre/v21y2009i1p48-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

CFOs’ and public accountants’ perceptions of material weaknesses in internal control areas as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley act

Author

Listed:
  • McEnroe, John E.

Abstract

One of the most controversial aspects of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOA) is related to Section 404, which requires management to assess the entity’s internal controls, and then its independent auditor to attest and report on management’s assessment. The auditing standard governing this requirement was promulgated by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). Its title is Auditing Standard (AS) No. 2, An Audit of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Performed in Conjunction with an Audit of Financial Statements [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, Washington, DC: PCAOB]. AS No. 2 requires, among other things, that management must disclose any “material weaknesses” in internal controls. However, absent any guidance other than definitions from the PCAOB, management and independent auditors are left to their own judgment to define and recognize “material weakness in internal control” or “significant deficiency” while implementing AS No. 2. The research question, then, becomes to what extent, if any, are weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting consistently assessed, recognized and agreed upon by both parties? Or does their professional judgment and point of view cause different perceptions? Most of the Section 404 research has focused on the characteristics of the material weaknesses disclosed (and the capital market or other impacts of reported material weaknesses). This study, in contrast, is behavioral in context, and examines the perceptions of CFOs and CPAs as to whether they believe an internal control material weakness exists under four independent scenarios. The results indicate that the CPAs were significantly more conservative in their assessments in two of the four cases.

Suggested Citation

  • McEnroe, John E., 2009. "CFOs’ and public accountants’ perceptions of material weaknesses in internal control areas as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley act," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 48-55.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reacre:v:21:y:2009:i:1:p:48-55
    DOI: 10.1016/j.racreg.2008.11.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1052045708000040
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.racreg.2008.11.006?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Trahan, Emery A. & Gitman, Lawrence J., 1995. "Bridging the theory-practice gap in corporate finance: A survey of chief financial officers," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 73-87.
    2. Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R., 2001. "The theory and practice of corporate finance: evidence from the field," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2-3), pages 187-243, May.
    3. Darnell F. Hawkins, 1975. "Estimation of Nonresponse Bias," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 3(4), pages 461-488, May.
    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. McEnroe, John E. & Sullivan, Mark, 2013. "An examination of the perceptions of auditors and chief financial officers regarding principles versus rules based accounting standards," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 196-207.
    2. Alexander, Cindy R. & Bauguess, Scott W. & Bernile, Gennaro & Lee, Yoon-Ho Alex & Marietta-Westberg, Jennifer, 2013. "Economic effects of SOX Section 404 compliance: A corporate insider perspective," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 267-290.
    3. Brav, Alon & Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Michaely, Roni, 2005. "Payout policy in the 21st century," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 483-527, September.
    4. Hoang, Daniel & Gatzer, Sebastian & Ruckes, Martin E., 2018. "The economics of capital allocation in firms: Evidence from internal capital markets," Working Paper Series in Economics 115, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    5. Hermes, Niels & Smid, Peter & Yao, Lu, 2007. "Capital budgeting practices: A comparative study of the Netherlands and China," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 630-654, October.
    6. Szyszka Adam, 2014. "Factors Influencing IPO Decisions. Do Corporate Managers Use Market and Corporate Timing? A Survey," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 42(1), pages 30-39, June.
    7. H. Kent Baker & David M. Smith, 2006. "In search of a residual dividend policy," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18.
    8. Siziba, Simiso & Hall, John Henry, 2021. "The evolution of the application of capital budgeting techniques in enterprises," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    9. John R. Graham & Michelle Hanlon & Terry Shevlin, 2011. "Real Effects of Accounting Rules: Evidence from Multinational Firms’ Investment Location and Profit Repatriation Decisions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 137-185, March.
    10. Pereiro, Luis E., 2006. "The practice of investment valuation in emerging markets: Evidence from Argentina," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 160-183, April.
    11. Heltzer, Wendy & Shelton, Sandra Waller, 2011. "The book–tax divide: Perceptions from the field," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 130-137.
    12. Wei-Chuan Kao, 2018. "Innovation quality of firms with the research and development tax credit," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 43-78, July.
    13. Ravi Jagannathan & Iwan Meier & Vefa Tarhan, 2011. "The Cross-Section of Hurdle Rates for Capital Budgeting: An Empirical Analysis of Survey Data," NBER Working Papers 16770, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Jurcau Anca Sabina & Andreicovici Ionela Irina, 2010. "A Survey On Business Evaluation Methods Used In Mergers," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 878-884, December.
    15. Dahlen, Niklas & Lahmann, Alexander & Schreiter, Maximilian, 2024. "Panacea for M&A dealmaking? Investor perceptions of earnouts," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    16. Paul Coram & James R. Frederickson & Matthew Pinnuck, 2024. "Earnings management: Who do managers consider and what is the relative importance of ethics?," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 49(2), pages 214-248, May.
    17. Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2005. "The economic implications of corporate financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-3), pages 3-73, December.
    18. Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Puri, Manju, 2015. "Capital allocation and delegation of decision-making authority within firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 449-470.
    19. Sureka, Riya & Kumar, Satish & Colombage, Sisira & Abedin, Mohammad Zoynul, 2022. "Five decades of research on capital budgeting – A systematic review and future research agenda," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    20. Mehari Mekonnen Akalu, 2002. "Evaluating the Capacity of Standard Investment Appraisal Methods," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 02-082/1, Tinbergen Institute.

    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:eee:reacre:v:21:y:2009:i:1:p:48-55. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/research-in-accounting-regulation .

    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.