We conduct a comprehensive study on the associations between debt covenant violations ("violations") and auditor actions for financially distressed and nondistressed firms. Our study is motivated by a lack of research on the consequences of violations resulting from auditors' actions. We find that firms with violations have significantly higher audit fees, a greater likelihood of receiving a going-concern opinion, and a greater likelihood of experiencing an auditor resignation. Importantly, the positive associations hold for all types of firms, including financially nondistressed firms. In fact, we find that, after controlling for other financial information, the relation between violations and an increased likelihood of a going-concern opinion is stronger for nondistressed versus distressed firms. Our evidence is consistent with belief-revision research in auditing that finds auditors react more strongly to information that is inconsistent with their prior beliefs. This study provides further evidence on the indirect yet significant consequences of covenant violations on firms resulting from auditor actions. recueillies vont dans le sens des etudes qui remettent en cause les id ees rec ßues selon lesquelles les auditeurs r eagissent plus fortement aux informations qui ne sont pas conformes a leurs convictions pr ealables. Cette etude fournit des preuves suppl ementaires des cons equences indirectes mais n eanmoins importantes pour les soci et es des d erogations aux clauses restrictives r esultant de la ligne de conduite adopt ee par les auditeurs.

No abstract

The quality of financial statement (FS) audits integrated with audits of internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) depends upon the quality of ICFR information used in, and its integration into, FS audits. Recent research and PCAOB inspections find auditors underreport existing ICFR weaknesses and perform insufficient testing to address identified risks, suggesting integrated audits—in which substantial ICFR testing is required—may result in lower FS audit quality than FS-only audits. We compare a 2007–2013 sample of small U.S. public company firm-years receiving integrated audits (accelerated filers) to firm-years receiving FS-only audits (non-accelerated filers) and find integrated audits are associated with higher likelihood of material misstatements and discretionary accruals, consistent with lower FS audit quality. We also find evidence of (1) auditor judgment-based integration issues, and (2) low-quality ICFR audits harming FS audit quality. Overall, results suggest an important potential consequence of integrated audits is lower FS audit quality. Data Availability: Data are publicly available from the sources identified in the text.

No abstract

I provide theory-based causal evidence on the effects of risk-based regulatory inspections, modeled after the PCAOB's, on auditor behavior in a multi-client setting where clients with relatively higher misstatement risk ("higher-risk" clients) have a higher risk of being inspected than clients with relatively lower misstatement risk ("lower-risk" clients). I predict and find inspections increase auditor effort, but only for higher-risk clients. Inspections impair auditors' decision performance for lower-risk clients relative to a regime without inspections and relative to higher-risk clients within an inspections regime, ceteris paribus. Theory-based process model results show inspections increase auditors' perceived inspection risks, which increase auditor effort for higher-risk clients, but also increase auditors' task-related anxiety resulting in decreased decision performance for lower-risk clients. Notwithstanding the previously-identified benefits, this study identifies potential unintended consequences of risk-based regulatory inspections.