ABSTRACT: We use the IPO setting to examine the relation between auditor exposure to legal liability and audit quality and audit fees. With regard to audit quality, we report robust evidence that pre-IPO audited accruals are negative and less than post-IPO audited accruals. In contrast to extant literature, our findings provide scant support for the inference that auditors acquiesce to opportunistic earnings management by issuers in an attempt to increase the offering price. With regard to audit fees, we find auditors earn higher fees for IPO engagements than post-IPO engagements. While inherent differences in auditor responsibilities between IPO audits and post-IPO audits should lead to higher fees for IPOs, a substantial portion of IPO audit fees (in levels and changes) is associated with our proxy for the auditor’s 1933 Act exposure. Overall, our results suggest that both audit quality and audit fees are higher in a higher-litigation regime, consistent with the effects an increase in litigation exposure should have on auditor incentives.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
1 September 2008
Research Article|
September 01 2008
Litigation Risk, Audit Quality, and Audit Fees: Evidence from Initial Public Offerings Available to Purchase
Ramgopal Venkataraman;
Ramgopal Venkataraman
Southern Methodist University
Search for other works by this author on:
Joseph P. Weber;
Joseph P. Weber
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Search for other works by this author on:
Michael Willenborg
Michael Willenborg
University of Connecticut
Search for other works by this author on:
Online ISSN: 1558-7967
Print ISSN: 0001-4826
American Accounting Association
2008
The Accounting Review (2008) 83 (5): 1315–1345.
Citation
Ramgopal Venkataraman, Joseph P. Weber, Michael Willenborg; Litigation Risk, Audit Quality, and Audit Fees: Evidence from Initial Public Offerings. The Accounting Review 1 September 2008; 83 (5): 1315–1345. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2008.83.5.1315
Download citation file:
Pay-Per-View Access
$25.00