This paper studies accounting and silence. Building on studies of accounting talk and introducing theories of “silencing,” we highlight the role of accounting silences in the production of engaging organizational conversations. Through a qualitative case study, we identify three forms of silence—the unspeakable, the unsaid, and the inaudible—and their links to accounting. Silences create motivations to engage in further accounting talk, but they also deny certain groups a voice in those conversations. An impression of participation, openness, and transparency emerges despite unequal access and the silencing of certain groups. Accounting itself can be silenced to avoid uncomfortable topics, potential problems, and anxiety‐inducing uncertainties. This silencing may serve to preserve a useful ignorance, avoid being in the know, and build alluring narratives and engaging conversations. Accounting silences sustain such conversations by protecting them from alternative voices, unsettling knowledge, and narratives that are incompatible with the organization's preferred story.

In this study, we examine whether the use of artificial intelligence (AI) can reduce the effect of independence conflicts on audit firm liability. In two experiments, we manipulate (1) whether procedures are performed by a human auditor or with AI and (2) whether the audit firm was careful in maintaining the appearance of independence from the audit client. Results of both experiments indicate that the use of AI significantly reduces the impact of the appearance of independence conflicts on jurors' judgments of audit firm liability. When concerns relating to the appearance of independence conflicts are present, the use of AI helps maintain the perceived objectivity of the auditor, which results in jurors maintaining higher overall trust in the audit process. Our study contributes to literature on determinants of auditor litigation risk and how technological change that is likely to grow in prominence might affect audit firm liability.

Given that tax‐related critical audit matters (tax CAMs) were prevalent among accelerated filers (18.5% of observations) during the initial year of CAM disclosures, we examine whether an auditor's disclosure of tax CAMs is associated with variation in tax‐related financial reporting quality, tax avoidance, and tax‐related earnings management. Finding an association between tax CAMs and one of these tax outcomes would indicate that the new auditor reporting standard has indirectly affected investors. Examining the first year of CAM disclosures, we do not find that tax CAMs are associated with broad proxies of tax‐related audit or financial reporting quality (e.g., restatements, internal control weaknesses, comment letters) or tax avoidance (e.g., effective tax rates or book‐to‐tax differences). We do find that tax CAMs are associated with a modest increase in tax accrual quality, an increase in the reserve for unrecognized tax benefits, and a reduction in the likelihood of tax‐related earnings management. However, we do not find these tax CAM effects persist into the second year of CAM reporting. Our evidence is consistent with tax CAM disclosures having a modest but short‐lived effect on companies' reporting of tax accounts. Our findings should inform the PCAOB as they conduct their post‐implementation review of the new audit reporting standard.