This study examines how PCAOB international inspections of non-U.S. auditors affect international Merger and Acquisition (M&A) outcomes. We find that clients of inspected auditors are more likely to become acquisition targets after the public disclosure of auditor's inspection report. We also find that deal completion is more likely and deal announcement returns are higher if deals involve targets with auditors for which inspection reports are available. Engagement deficiencies and unremediated quality control deficiencies identified in inspection reports weaken the positive effect of PCAOB oversight on M&A outcomes. Collectively, our results suggest that PCAOB oversight reduces information uncertainty in M&A deals.

We examine whether the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) international inspection program improves audit quality for a sample of non-US-listed foreign public client companies from 55 countries audited by foreign (i.e., non-US) auditors. For a sample of non-US-listed clients of PCAOB-registered foreign auditors, we find that initial PCAOB inspections improve audit quality, over and above the threat of such inspections, for foreign auditors’ non-US-listed foreign clients. Our findings document the benefits of PCAOB international inspections for foreign investors in non-US-listed foreign companies which could increase the acceptability of the PCAOB international inspection program abroad.

We exploit the staggered state‐level adoption of the Riegle‐Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act (IBBEA) to examine how banking deregulation and the resulting increase in bank competition affect firms’ auditor choices. We find that an exogenous increase in the degree of interstate branch banking deregulation leads to a reduction in firms’ propensity to engage a Big N or industry expert auditor. This main result, when combined with our cross‐sectional analyses, offers evidence suggesting that deregulation leads to less demand for higher quality auditors because (1) firms have increased access to credit, which reduces the benefits of higher audit quality; (2) entering banks’ lending expertise substitutes for higher quality financial statements; (3) incumbent banks with less lending expertise seek to protect their rents by preferring that borrowers provide lower quality financial statement information; and (4) external stakeholders delegate their monitoring to banks to a greater degree, resulting in less demand for higher quality financial statements. As such, our study sheds light on how the U.S. credit market's infrastructure shapes firms’ auditor choice decisions.

By employing two alternative measures of fundamental value, we reexamine the value relevance of accounting information over time. Consistent with some recent studies, we do not find evidence on the temporal decline in R 2s of conventional value-relevance regressions when the stock price is replaced by these measures as the dependent variable. Further, our results show that the divergence between fundamental value and the prevailing stock price (a) increases over time and (b) is associated with measures of noise trading and other arbitrage risks and costs. Additional analyses also reveal that proxies measuring the extent of noise trading increase over time. Overall, we do not find evidence that there is a loss over time in the value relevance of accounting information with respect to fundamental value. More importantly, we show that measures of price divergence are associated with noise trading as well as other arbitrage costs and risks (such as transaction costs and information uncertainty) that prohibit market prices from converging to fundamental values.