ABSTRACT: We examine how management quarterly guidance strategy is affected by various outcomes from previously issued guidance. We find that managers are less likely to provide quarterly earnings guidance for a given year when past management forecasts have been overly optimistic, when past forecasts were unsuccessful at influencing analysts’ expectations, when past forecasts failed to reduce information asymmetry, and when past forecasts resulted in earnings disappointments. For firms that continue to give guidance, adverse prior outcomes also affect the precision of future guidance and the number of quarters within a year for which they give guidance.

ABSTRACT We examine whether auditors exercise professional skepticism about management earnings forecasts when making going‐concern decisions. Using publicly issued management earnings forecasts as a proxy for earnings forecasts provided by managers to auditors, we find that management earnings forecasts are negatively associated with both auditors’ going‐concern opinions and subsequent bankruptcy. The weight auditors put on management forecasts in the going‐concern decision is not significantly different from the weight implied in the bankruptcy prediction model. Moreover, compared with the bankruptcy model, auditors assign a lower weight to management forecasts they perceive as being less credible, including those (1) issued by managers who issued optimistic forecasts in the previous two years, and (2) predicting high earnings increases or high earnings. Taken together, our evidence is consistent with auditors being professionally skeptical about management earnings forecasts when making going‐concern decisions.

We investigate whether earnings guidance affects aggregate stock returns through its effects on expectations about overall earnings performance and/or aggregate expected returns. We find that aggregate guidance, especially relative levels of quarterly downward guidance, is associated with analyst- and time-series-based measures of aggregate earnings news. We find more modest evidence that guidance, again, largely downward guidance, is associated with market returns—market returns appear to respond to guidance toward the end of each calendar quarter, when most earnings preannouncements are released, and there is some evidence that firm-level guidance affects market returns in short windows around its release.

ABSTRACT: We document that, when revising their short-term earnings forecasts in response to management guidance, analysts wishing to curry favor with management weight the guidance more heavily than predicted, based on the credibility and usefulness of the guidance. This overweighting of guidance is present prior to equity offerings and other events that could lead to investment banking business. Although analysts sacrifice their forecast accuracy by overweighting management guidance, they appear to benefit, on average, by subsequently gaining the underwriting business for their banks. Thus, while analysts wishing to please managers are optimistic in their long-term earnings forecasts, they take their cue from management when determining their short-term earnings forecasts.

We examine the relation between internal control quality and the accuracy of management guidance. Consistent with managers in firms with ineffective internal controls relying on erroneous internal management reports when forming guidance, we document less accurate guidance among firms reporting ineffective internal controls. This relation extends to a change analysis, and the impact of ineffective internal controls on forecast accuracy is three times larger when the weakness relates to revenues or cost of goods sold—inputs particularly relevant to forecasting earnings. We conclude that internal control quality has an economically significant effect on internal management reports and thus decisions based on these figures.

This paper examines why CFOs become involved in material accounting manipulations. We find that while CFOs bear substantial legal costs when involved in accounting manipulations, these CFOs have similar equity incentives to the CFOs of matched non-manipulation firms. In contrast, CEOs of manipulation firms have higher equity incentives and more power than CEOs of matched firms. Taken together, our findings are consistent with the explanation that CFOs are involved in material accounting manipulations because they succumb to pressure from CEOs, rather than because they seek immediate personal financial benefit from their equity incentives. AAER content analysis reinforces this conclusion.

ABSTRACT After restating their financial statements, companies may voluntarily restate their previously issued internal control (IC) reports for the financial statement (FS) misstatement periods, changing them from “effective” to “ineffective.” This paper examines the determinants and consequences of IC restatements, which have been of concern to financial statement users. When announcing these IC restatements, companies often provide a detailed explanation of the IC problems and a discussion of their plans to remediate these problems. We find that companies with less severe IC problems that can be remediated more quickly are more likely to restate their IC reports. Moreover, these results are driven by companies with a higher need for external financing, suggesting that IC restaters voluntarily restate their IC reports in order to inform investors about their less severe IC material weaknesses and their plans to improve IC quality. Finally, we find that, relative to other FS restatement companies, IC restaters have a lower likelihood of CFO turnover and auditor resignation following the FS restatement. Taken together, our results suggest that voluntary IC restatements are used by IC restaters as a means to separate themselves from other FS restatement companies with more severe control problems and slower remediation plans. Our findings also indicate that studies investigating IC quality and related disclosures need to distinguish between IC restaters and other FS restatement companies because of the different characteristics and consequences between the two groups.