Knowledge that Transforms

Abstract We examine whether earnings from parent‐only financial statements are incrementally informative to those from consolidated financial statements. We use a unique mandate in India that requires firms to provide both consolidated and parent‐level financial statements, since currently neither US GAAP nor IFRS mandates this level of disaggregation. While disaggregation provides additional information, it also imposes costs, raising the empirical question of whether its benefits outweigh the costs. Our analyses reveal that disaggregated quarterly earnings components inform investors, with investors placing more weight on parent‐level unexpected earnings than on subsidiaries' unexpected earnings. We do not find evidence of mispricing associated with disaggregation; rather, the higher weight on the parent's earnings reflects higher persistence, consistent with semi‐strong market efficiency. Moreover, parent earnings provide incremental informativeness, especially in the context of poor earnings quality and high mergers and acquisitions intensity. Our results endure when we examine annual parent‐ and subsidiary‐level earnings, where available, in 98 countries around the world. Our results contribute to the literature on disaggregation in accounting and earnings informativeness in equity markets, offering insights that may influence regulatory considerations on the usefulness of financial statement disaggregation.

ABSTRACT External audits enhance the credibility of financial statements and are a cornerstone of capital market integrity. However, the growing and complex auditing literature poses challenges for researchers. This survey synthesizes and critically evaluates archival audit research published in top accounting journals from 1995 to 2025, organizing over 600 studies into three core areas: the audit market, audit quality, and audit personnel and processes. We offer new conceptual insights into the audit market, emphasizing that audit assurance is unobservable and that audit fee studies generally estimate reduced‐form models rather than separate demand and supply functions. On audit quality, we expand upon DeAngelo's definition to include the auditor's responsibility to assess ex ante risk. We suggest an alternative three‐dimensional definition of audit quality that is more closely aligned with professional standards. We also clarify common misconceptions arising from conflating audit quality with financial reporting quality. Finally, we review the growing literature on audit personnel and call for more research into underexplored roles of personnel in the early stages of the audit process. Our survey contributes by reframing key constructs, identifying limitations in common proxies, and suggesting future research directions to advance our understanding of how audits function and shape financial reporting outcomes.

ABSTRACT Although cyber risk is widely recognized as a critical organizational threat, how firms configure internal roles and practices to address it remains poorly understood. This study offers insights into that question. In practice, two professional roles share the job of cyber risk assessment and assurance: cybersecurity specialists, who focus on the technical side of assurance, and internal auditors, who focus on governance, processes, and compliance. Drawing on 36 interviews across a range of organizations, we explain how these professional roles collaborate, when collaboration breaks down, and why working together is often difficult. We identify five common patterns of working across professional boundaries, ranging from rival parallel assessments to genuinely integrated work. As exposure to cyber threats rises because of regulation, critical operations, or greater digital dependence, accountability pressures increase, and managers and professionals spanning across the two professional roles act as connectors and engage in coordination across domains. We also show how standard risk‐management templates and reporting tools can shift from being symbolic checklists to becoming practical coordination mechanisms. Overall, the study offers a framework for building more integrated cyber risk assessment and assurance, with relevance for other emerging risks that demand cross‐functional expertise.

ABSTRACT We study how insider trading based on private cost information affects product market outcomes when firms differ in cost variance. In our model, managers exploit firm‐specific cost information to pursue short‐term trading gains, leading them to adjust output decisions and reshape product market competition. We show that trading opportunities have heterogeneous effects on firms' production and value: firms with high cost variance overproduce, whereas those with low cost variance underproduce; correspondingly, the value of firms with high cost variance rises, while that of firms with low cost variance declines. These results demonstrate how heterogeneous costs and private cost information create real economic consequences by linking insider trading incentives to distortions in product market competition and firm value.

ABSTRACT Companies are strongly encouraged to implement whistleblowing programs to help detect and deter misconduct in organizations, but whistleblowers often face ostracism, as their coworkers are less willing to work with them (the whistleblower effect). Rewarding the whistleblower and protecting the whistleblower's identity are two highly recommended features of whistleblowing programs that aim to encourage reporting. Across two experiments, I examine the spillover effects of these whistleblowing program features on how willing employees are to work with their coworkers after reporting occurs. I find that providing a reward to the whistleblower exacerbates the whistleblower effect, leading employees to work even less with the whistleblower (the reward effect). I also find that protecting the whistleblower's identity removes the reward effect but does not remove the whistleblower effect. Instead, the whistleblower effect is extended to neutral coworkers. As a result, when employees do not know the identity of the whistleblower, they view their coworkers less as separate individuals and are less willing to work with everyone in their group.

Abstract This study examines turnover experiences in public accounting, including the exit phase (from public accountants' initial thoughts of leaving to their exit) and the post‐exit phase (from their exit to the present moment) of the turnover process. Drawing on social exchange theory and organizational support theory, we also investigate the relationship between these phases by exploring how turnover characteristics within the exit phase impact alumni's decisions to engage in post‐employment citizenship in the post‐exit phase (e.g., recommending the firm's services to others). Using the experiential questionnaire method, we rely upon two separate surveys to investigate the turnover process from the perspective of 284 firm alumni (“leavers”) and 83 experienced public accountants (“stayers”). Our process‐based research method allows us to gather a large and rich data set that provides multiple perspectives on the turnover experience in public accounting. Our results not only provide insights into the underlying factors influencing turnover but also indicate several places in the turnover decision process where firms can strategically intervene. Finally, our results show that several turnover characteristics within the exit phase impact post‐employment citizenship behaviors in the post‐exit phase. Consequently, our results demonstrate that the characteristics that drive employees' decisions to leave the firm also play a significant role in shaping their post‐employment citizenship behaviors following their departure.

ABSTRACT This study examines whether competition in the form of emerging threats from rivals' overlapping product strategies has explanatory power for future performance and volatility, beyond existing competition measures and firm life cycle proxies. We proxy for emerging threats using product market fluidity, which captures competitive pressures and instability arising from rivals' evolving product overlap. Specifically, higher fluidity (i.e., higher product market threats) is negatively associated with future profitability and operating cash flows and positively associated with the variability of future profitability and operating cash flows. We also find fluidity is negatively associated with future asset turnover, margins, and expenses, and only moderately positively associated with future sales, shedding light on the mechanisms through which product market threats manifest in future performance. However, capital market participants do not fully incorporate this information, leading to predictable future stock returns and analyst forecast errors. Overall, our findings suggest that the dynamism and fluidity in a firm's product market space convey valuable and distinct information to capital market participants.

ABSTRACT This paper examines whether lenders' risk preferences explain the use of cost‐synergy adjustments in loan contracts. These adjustments represent an aggressive accounting choice that permits borrowers to add expected cost savings and synergy gains from mergers, acquisitions, and restructurings to contractual earnings. Using novel data from loan contracts, I first document an increasing prevalence of these adjustments over the past two decades. Consistent with the notion that these adjustments provide borrowers with greater risk‐taking flexibility and increase the riskiness of lenders' payoffs, I find that lenders with stronger risk‐taking preferences are more likely to use these adjustments. This finding is more pronounced when lenders face lower monitoring costs and when borrowers are led by managers who are less risk‐incentivized. It is also stronger in loan contracts that grant borrowers more flexibility through these adjustments and when lenders face greater pressure to reach for yield. Overall, my findings highlight the importance of lenders' risk preferences in determining accounting choices in debt contracting.

ABSTRACT I use downloads of regulatory filings by SEC employees as a measure of SEC attention and find that SEC employees are disproportionately less likely to review the filings of firms with names later in the alphabet. Additional tests show that alphabetical order determines a firm's priority when the SEC follows up on common shocks among peer firms and that the strength of the SEC's alphabetical bias does not vary with the intensity of resource constraints. Further, the SEC appears to be more surprised by the restatements of end‐of‐the‐alphabet firms. These results are consistent with a cognitive bias that leads SEC employees to pay more attention to firms at the top of alphabetically sorted lists. Last, using shocks to alphabetical order caused by firm name changes, I find that alphabetically induced increases in SEC attention are linked with lower future noncompliance, suggesting that the regulatory effects of alphabetical order are material. Overall, this study highlights the “human” element of regulatory attention.

ABSTRACT In a broad sample of publicly traded firms, we observe that the share of firms annually reporting pre‐tax book losses increased from about 20% to 40% during 1988–2023. We also observe that 68% of those loss firms have positive cash tax payments (taxpaying loss firms). The amount of taxes paid by these loss firms is substantial and increasing over time. Surprisingly, we observe that taxes paid increase with the magnitude of pre‐tax losses. This study seeks to understand the prevalence of taxpaying loss firms. We examine whether both the extensive margin—the likelihood that a loss firm pays taxes—and the intensive margin—the magnitude of taxes paid—are explained by firm characteristics. We find that multinational status, state taxes, consolidation differences, goodwill impairments, asset write‐downs, extraordinary items, discontinued operations, depreciation differences, the frequency and magnitude of losses, and firm size are key determinants of both the likelihood and the amount of taxes paid by loss firms. We find that the decrease in the statutory tax rate included in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 did not decrease the tax burden on loss firms.