IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v15y2022i4p180-d792961.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate Fraud and Accounting Firm Involvement: Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Jun Wang

    (School of Business Administration, Northeastern University, No. 195 Chuangxin Road, Hunnan District, Shenyang 110169, China)

  • Duo Wang

    (School of Business Administration, Northeastern University, No. 195 Chuangxin Road, Hunnan District, Shenyang 110169, China)

Abstract

In some cases, accounting firms and individual auditors will be punished by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) for involvement in the violations of their client companies. Taking the enforcement actions against listed companies and accounting firms of the CSRC from 2006 to 2019 as a research sample, this paper manually sorted out the specific characteristics of corporate fraud and empirically examined the regulatory authorities’ supervision tendency to auditors. The results show that accounting firms are more likely to be involved when their client companies’ fraudulent practices affect financial statements, occur during the IPO process, and continue for a longer period of time. Income statement manipulation and higher fraud amounts also increase the probability of accounting firms being sanctioned. Further analyses show that regulators’ supervision intensity is increasing over time, and they impose penalties on auditors based on the severity of corporate fraud; however, the intensity and differentiation of the sanctions are still insufficient. This study expands relevant research on accounting firm sanctions and provides empirical evidence for further improvement of audit industry supervision in an emerging market.

Suggested Citation

  • Jun Wang & Duo Wang, 2022. "Corporate Fraud and Accounting Firm Involvement: Evidence from China," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:15:y:2022:i:4:p:180-:d:792961
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/15/4/180/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/15/4/180/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lisic, Ling Lei & Silveri, Sabatino (Dino) & Song, Yanheng & Wang, Kun, 2015. "Accounting fraud, auditing, and the role of government sanctions in China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1186-1195.
    2. Patricia M. Dechow & Richard G. Sloan & Amy P. Sweeney, 1996. "Causes and Consequences of Earnings Manipulation: An Analysis of Firms Subject to Enforcement Actions by the SEC," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 1-36, March.
    3. Allen D. Blay, 2005. "Independence Threats, Litigation Risk, and the Auditor's Decision Process," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 759-789, December.
    4. Aharony, J & Lee, CWJ & Wong, TJ, 2000. "Financial packaging of IPO firms in China," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 103-126.
    5. Dye, Ronald A, 1993. "Auditing Standards, Legal Liability, and Auditor Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(5), pages 887-914, October.
    6. Aobdia, Daniel & Shroff, Nemit, 2017. "Regulatory oversight and auditor market share," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 262-287.
    7. Paul K. Chaney & Kirk L. Philipich, 2002. "Shredded Reputation: The Cost of Audit Failure," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 1221-1245, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John Obiora Anyaduba & Ivie Ologhosa Ogbeide, 2022. "Firm Attributes and Corporate Tax Aggressiveness: A Comparative Study of Nigeria and South Africa Banks," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Hidaya Al Lawati, 2022. "Politically Connected Firms and Forward-Looking Disclosure in the Era of Oman Vision 2040," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-22, May.
    3. Rahman, Md Jahidur & Zhu, Hongtao, 2024. "Detecting accounting fraud in family firms: Evidence from machine learning approaches," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).

    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. Marco Pagano & Giovanni Immordino, 2007. "Optimal Regulation of Auditing," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 53(3), pages 363-388, September.
    2. Numata, Shingo & Takeda, Fumiko, 2010. "Stock market reactions to audit failure in Japan: The case of Kanebo and ChuoAoyama," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 175-199, June.
    3. Christine Gimbar & Molly Mercer, 2021. "Do Auditors Accurately Predict Litigation and Reputation Consequences of Inaccurate Accounting Estimates?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 276-301, March.
    4. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    5. Li, Chunyu & Lou, Chenxin & Luo, Dan & Xing, Kai, 2021. "Chinese corporate distress prediction using LASSO: The role of earnings management," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    6. Pan, Yue & Shroff, Nemit & Zhang, Pengdong, 2023. "The dark side of audit market competition," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1).
    7. Marco Pagano & Giovanni Immordino, 2012. "Corporate Fraud, Governance, and Auditing," The Review of Corporate Finance Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 109-133.
    8. Lennox, Clive & Li, Bing, 2012. "The consequences of protecting audit partners’ personal assets from the threat of liability," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 154-173.
    9. Ray Ball, 2009. "Market and Political/Regulatory Perspectives on the Recent Accounting Scandals," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 277-323, May.
    10. Donnelly, Ray, 2008. "Accounting, board independence and contagion effects from adverse press comment: The case of Elan," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 245-259.
    11. Kuo, Jing-Ming & Ning, Lutao & Song, Xiaoqi, 2014. "The Real and Accrual-based Earnings Management Behaviors: Evidence from the Split Share Structure Reform in China," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 101-136.
    12. Georges Dionne & Florence Giuliano & Pierre Picard, 2009. "Optimal Auditing with Scoring: Theory and Application to Insurance Fraud," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 58-70, January.
    13. Jacco L. Wielhouwer, 2015. "The public cost of broken trust: Spillover effects of financial reporting irregularities," Journal of Trust Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 132-152, October.
    14. Koch, Christopher & Weber, Martin & Wüstemann, Jens, 2007. "Can auditors be independent? : Experimental evidence," Papers 07-59, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    15. Khushbu Agrawal & Chanchal Chatterjee, 2015. "Earnings Management and Financial Distress: Evidence from India," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 16(5_suppl), pages 140-154, October.
    16. Medhat Endrawes & Zhuoan Feng & Meiting Lu & Yaowen Shan, 2020. "Audit committee characteristics and financial statement comparability," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(3), pages 2361-2395, September.
    17. Xianjie He & Jeffrey Pittman & Oliver Rui, 2016. "Reputational Implications for Partners After a Major Audit Failure: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 138(4), pages 703-722, November.
    18. Yenpao Chen & Chien-Hsun Chen & Yu-Ting Wu, 2019. "An assessment of the relationship between channel stuffing and related party transactions: evidence from China’s listed companies," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 16(2), pages 116-127, July.
    19. Anna Bergman Brown & Nicole M. Heron & Hagit Levy & Emanuel Zur, 2023. "StoneRidge Investment Partners v. Scientific Atlanta: A Test of Auditor Litigation Risk," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 517-538, October.
    20. Jamel Azibi & Hamza Azibi & Hubert Tondeur, 2017. "Institutional Activism, Auditor’s Choice and Earning Management after the Enron Collapse: Evidence from France," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(2), pages 154-168, February.

    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:gam:jjrfmx:v:15:y:2022:i:4:p:180-:d:792961. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.