Prior research suggests that Big 4 auditors provide higher quality audits in the U.S. in order to protect the firm's brand name reputation and to avoid costly litigation. In this study, we examine whether the perceived higher quality of a Big 4 audit is related to auditor litigation exposure or to reputation concerns. Specifically, we utilize an estimable proxy for financial reporting credibility—the ex ante cost of equity capital—to examine whether Big 4 auditors are perceived as providing higher quality audits (relative to non-Big 4 auditors) in the U.S., and in the less litigious (but economically similar) environments in other Anglo-American countries during the 1990–99 period. We find that a Big 4 audit is associated with a lower ex ante cost of equity capital for auditees in the U.S. but not in Australia, Canada, or the U.K. Our findings suggest that it is litigation exposure rather than brand name reputation protection that drives perceived audit quality.

No abstract

In this paper, we examine religiosity as one determinant of tax avoidance by corporate and individual taxpayers. Prior research suggests a relation between religiosity and risk aversion. Because aggressive tax avoidance strategies involve significant uncertainty and possible penalties and damage to reputation, we predict that higher levels of religiosity are associated with less aggressive (i.e., less risky) tax positions. Consistent with this prediction, we find that firms headquartered in more religious U.S. counties are less likely to avoid taxes. We also find that religiosity is consistently associated with lower tax avoidance by individual taxpayers, as measured by underreported income. These results hold after controlling for several firm-level, as well as county-level, demographic characteristics identified in prior research as affecting tax avoidance by corporate and/or individual taxpayers. We conclude that religiosity is a significant determinant of tax avoidance by corporate and individual taxpayers.

Although investor perceptions of audit quality play a critical role in maintaining systemic confidence in the integrity of financial accounting reports (Levitt [2000]), prior research on the effects of auditor tenure from an investor perspective is relatively sparse. In this study, we investigate whether investors price audit firm tenure for Big Five audits by examining the relation between tenure and the ex ante equity risk premium, that is, the excess of the company-specific ex ante cost of equity capital over the risk-free interest rate. Based on prior research, whereas the “auditor learning” argument predicts that audit quality will change in only one direction (i.e., improve) with tenure, the “auditor-client closeness” argument suggests that audit quality may decrease beyond some (albeit unspecified) length of tenure because of impaired auditor independence and objectivity. Consistent with prior theoretical arguments, we find some evidence of a nonlinear relation between audit firm tenure and the ex ante equity risk premium, that is, we find that the equity risk premium decreases in the early years of tenure but increases with additional years of tenure. These findings persist after we control for well-known risk factors and company characteristics that have been shown in prior research to be related to the cost of equity capital. The implications of our findings are discussed.