IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v34y2017i2p1128-1155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory Oversight of Financial Reporting: Securities and Exchange Commission Comment Letters

Author

Listed:
  • Rick Johnston
  • Reining Petacchi

Abstract

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reviews company filings (10†Q, 10†K, S†1, etc.) submitted to them. If a review identifies potential deficiencies, the SEC staff sends the company a comment letter seeking clarification, additional information, and ultimately, perhaps, revision of the filing or future filings. We examine the content, resolution, and ensuing informational consequences of SEC comment letters. The content analysis shows that nearly half of all comments involve accounting application, financial reporting, and disclosure issues. More than 17 percent of our sample cases result in immediate amended filings to resolve the issue(s) arising from the comment letters, and financial statements and/or footnotes are frequently revised. Following comment letter resolution, the adverse selection component of the bid†ask spread declines and Earnings Response Coefficients (ERCs) increase. Our results provide little support for the conjecture that the market interprets the receipt of a comment letter as a signal that the firm has poor reporting quality. Finally, we find no evidence that comment letter firms increase the quantity or change the type of voluntary disclosure, thereby eliminating a possible competing explanation for the improved information environment. We conclude the SEC's oversight has beneficial informational effects.La Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) examine les documents que doivent lui soumettre les sociétés (10†Q, 10†K, S†1, etc.). Si cet examen révèle des déficiences potentielles, le personnel de la SEC adresse à la société une lettre d'observations dans laquelle il demande des éclaircissements, des renseignements supplémentaires et enfin, dans certains cas, la révision des documents produits ou à produire ultérieurement. Les auteurs se penchent sur le contenu des lettres d'observations de la SEC, la résolution des questions qu'elles soulèvent et leurs conséquences au chapitre de l'information. L'analyse de contenu révèle que près de la moitié des observations soulèvent des questions d'application comptable, d'information financière et d'information à fournir. Plus de 17 pour cent des cas de l'échantillon se soldent par la modification immédiate des documents produits pour résoudre la ou les questions soulevées dans les lettres d'observations, et les états financiers et (ou) les notes font fréquemment l'objet d'une révision. À la suite de la résolution des questions soulevées dans les lettres d'observations, la composante d'antisélection de l'écart acheteur†vendeur décline et les coefficients de réaction aux résultats augmentent. L'étude livre peu d'indications confirmant l'hypothèse selon laquelle le marché interpréterait la réception d'une lettre d'observations comme un signal de la piètre qualité de l'information fournie par la société. Enfin, les auteurs ne relèvent aucun élément qui confirmerait que les sociétés recevant des lettres d'observations augmentent le volume d'information facultative qu'elles publient ou en modifient la nature, ce qui élimine la possibilité d'invoquer une autre explication : celle d'un meilleur environnement d'information. Les auteurs concluent que la surveillance de la SEC a des répercussions bénéfiques sur l'information.

Suggested Citation

  • Rick Johnston & Reining Petacchi, 2017. "Regulatory Oversight of Financial Reporting: Securities and Exchange Commission Comment Letters," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 1128-1155, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:34:y:2017:i:2:p:1128-1155
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3846.12297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12297
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3846.12297?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
    ---><---

    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:wly:coacre:v:34:y:2017:i:2:p:1128-1155. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.