Regulators have raised concerns about the quality of component auditors' work. Of particular concern is that component auditors often do not adequately perform procedures and gather enough quality evidence. This failure is likely caused by component auditors' different interpretations of lead auditor instructions and by their lack of responsibility. Our interview findings suggest that component auditors tend to interpret lead auditor instructions concretely because they often receive detailed instructions from lead auditors. We propose that a responsibility prompt reminding component auditors to be aware of their obligations to the group audit engagement can improve their evidence collection. In two experiments, we find that our proposed responsibility prompt can effectively improve component auditors' evidence collection decisions and that this finding holds across different cultural settings. Our third experiment provides evidence that a responsibility prompt improves component auditors' evidence collection when provided to auditors who receive instructions that prime low‐level (but not high‐level) construals. Overall, our findings suggest that prompting component auditors to internalize the responsibility of a group audit engagement is a viable way to improve the quality of group audits.

The stated goal of the SEC Whistleblower Program introduced as part of the Dodd‐Frank Act was to deter securities violations and thereby to strengthen investor protection. We document significant reductions in the likelihood of financial reporting fraud by US firms following the introduction of this program. The reductions are robust to controlling for other regulatory changes in the Dodd‐Frank Act and economic trends. Given that employees of firms with weaker internal compliance and reporting programs are more likely to report irregularities directly to the SEC rather than internally, we predict and find that these firms are more likely to change their reporting behavior. We also show that the observed reductions are attributable to an improvement in internal whistleblower programs and the hiring of more capable audit committee members after the program's inception. Collectively, these findings provide important large‐sample evidence of significant benefits of the SEC Whistleblower Program for deterring financial reporting fraud and of the efficacy of bounty‐type whistleblower programs.

This study extends extant research on the determinants of financial analyst bias by examining the role that political incentives play. Using a series of scheduled provincial political events in China, we document that analysts are significantly more likely to issue favorable recommendations or revise their recommendations upward during political event periods, and the effect of political events on optimism is larger for analysts employed by brokerage firms affiliated with politicians. Cross‐sectional evidence suggests that the impact of political events on analyst optimism is concentrated in those provinces where capital market development is a more important performance indicator for politicians or where the incumbent politicians face a pending promotion. Stock return analyses reveal that favorable recommendations issued during political event periods are significantly less profitable in the long run and are less credible according to investor perceptions. Reinforcing our main evidence, we also find that financial analysts are more likely to issue optimistic earnings forecasts during political event periods. Collectively, our results imply that political incentives distort analyst opinions and political‐economic factors affect the corporate information environment in China.

Unlike prior research that focuses on determinants of firm-specific stock price crashes (SPCs), we study the consequences of SPCs on market information efficiency. The tension underlying our research question stems from two competing explanations. As an unanticipated shock, an SPC could stimulate (distort) information efficiency by triggering investor rational attention (opinion divergence). Our identification strategy involves a difference-in-differences analysis in which SPC firms in the treatment sample are propensity score matched with non-SPC firms in the industry-peer control sample, as well as placebo tests for falsification. Consistent with the stimulation effect, we find an increase of the earnings response coefficient and a decrease in post-earnings announcement drift, from the pre- to post-SPC period, for SPC firms, but not for non-SPC firms. Further analyses reveal that SPC firms attract increased investor attention, as reflected in greater analyst coverage and more investor access to firms' online financial filings following such an event. Using mutual fund flow redemption pressure based on hypothetical sales as an exogenous shock to SPCs, we provide evidence corroborating our causal interpretation of the main findings. Collectively, the evidence suggests that SPCs can attract increased investor attention, bringing about positive externalities by stimulating market information efficiency.

We investigate whether credit default swap (CDS) trading results in managers learning new information through stock prices that is relevant to their investment and forecasting decisions. We argue that the CDS market structure, the sophistication of CDS market participants, and the cleanness of CDS spreads as a signal of default risk together produce and convey information that is new to managers of firms referenced in CDS contracts. We consider two measures for managerial learning: (1) the sensitivity of managerial investments to share prices and (2) the sensitivity of changes in management forecast accuracy to stock returns. We find that both sensitivity measures increase significantly when firms are referenced in any traded CDS contracts, indicating that CDS trading improves managerial learning. We also find that the improvement in managerial learning is more pronounced for firms that are subject to higher uncertainty in industry‐specific and economy‐wide prospects, consistent with the view that CDS market participants have informational advantages with respect to the industry‐level and macroeconomic environments. We further find that the improvement in managerial learning is more evident for firms with higher credit risk. Our findings provide large‐sample evidence on a positive consequence of CDS trading in the context of managers' ability to learn from outside investors.

This study investigates how external corporate governance provisions, specifically statutory and corporate charter provisions that limit direct shareholder participation in the governance process, affect the likelihood of an accounting restatement. The analysis indicates that strong external governance (fewer restrictions on shareholder participation) is associated with a relatively low incidence of accounting restatements. The effect of external governance is incremental to that of internal governance, which is considered as provisions that foster effective board oversight of management. Such evidence supports the premise that shareholder participation improves financial reporting quality.

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.

The firm‐level bullwhip effect is the amplification of demand uncertainty along a supply chain—that is, fluctuations in production (for manufacturing firms) or purchases from suppliers (for retailers or wholesalers) in a firm tend to be greater than its demand fluctuations. We predict that the bullwhip ratio (a proxy for the bullwhip effect) amplifies the relation between demand uncertainty and cost structure. We expect this amplifying effect because the bullwhip ratio determines the extent to which demand uncertainty translates into uncertainty in production or purchases, which, in turn, affects cost structure. Using data from public US firms over the 1990–2020 period, we find results consistent with our prediction. Specifically, we find that both the negative relation between demand uncertainty and cost elasticity in the manufacturing sector and the positive relation between the two in the retail/wholesale sectors are stronger for firms with higher bullwhip ratios. We contribute to the literature on cost structure by highlighting the important role of the bullwhip effect in cost structure decisions.

In this study, we examine whether a country's implementation of major corporate governance reforms affects firms' cross-listing activities. Cross-listing is important in overcoming international investment barriers and thus it is worth investigating whether enhanced corporate governance at the country level contributes to the integration of international capital markets. Using a difference-in-differences (DiD) research design, we predict and find that following the implementation of corporate governance reforms in their home countries, firms are more likely to engage in cross-listing activities and tend to cross-list in host countries with stronger investor protection and more developed markets than those in countries with no reforms in the same period. The results from country-level cross-sectional tests indicate that this effect is greater for firms in home countries with weaker investor protection and less developed stock markets in the prereform period. The reforms also have a stronger effect on firms subject to less analyst following and greater external finance dependence. Finally, we find a stronger association between cross-listing activities and institutional ownership after the reforms. Taken together, this study increases understanding of the trade-off between cross-border capital supply and demand. Our finding suggests that country-level corporate governance plays an important role in facilitating the supply of cross-border capital, which in turn incentivizes firms to cross-list. Our study also offers policy implications for national stock exchanges and securities regulators by suggesting that countries without well-developed capital markets should strengthen their corporate governance to improve firms' ability to raise external financing and attract cross-border capital flows.