Dharmasiri Prabashi, Phang Soon-Yeow, Prasad Ashna, Webster John
Monash Business School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Swinburne Business School, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn Campus, VIC 3122 Australia.
J Bus Ethics. 2022;179(1):179-203. doi: 10.1007/s10551-021-04786-4. Epub 2021 Mar 19.
We investigate the justifications provided by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) when sanctioning audit firms and individual auditors, as disclosed in the publicly released Settled Disciplinary Orders (SDOs). Employing responsive regulation theory, we seek to gain an understanding of violating behaviors by audit firms and individual auditors that attract regulatory responses ranging in nature from persuasive to punitive sanctions. Using 298 SDOs issued by the PCAOB from 2005 to 2020, we find that the frequency and severity of PCAOB sanctions at the firm level are positively associated with auditing standards violations, independence issues, and reckless behavior. At the individual auditor level, integrity violations and reckless behavior are positively associated with the frequency and severity of PCAOB sanctions. Our findings indicate that significantly higher financial penalties for individual auditors (audit firms) arise from manipulation of audit evidence (quality control criticisms). Further, the PCAOB financially penalizes Big 4-affiliated auditors and firms significantly more than their non-Big 4 counterparts. Other factors such as multiple individuals being implicated in an SDO and whether a firm and individual(s) are both implicated in the SDO are important considerations in sanction(s) imposed by the PCAOB. Overall, our findings suggest that the PCAOB adopts a responsive enforcement strategy when monitoring the auditors in their ethical and audit compliance efforts.
我们调查了上市公司会计监督委员会（PCAOB）在制裁审计公司和个别审计师时所提供的理由，这些理由在公开发布的《纪律处分决定书》（SDO）中有所披露。运用回应性监管理论，我们试图了解审计公司和个别审计师的违规行为，这些行为引发了从劝导性到惩罚性制裁等不同性质的监管回应。利用PCAOB在2005年至2020年期间发布的298份《纪律处分决定书》，我们发现，在公司层面，PCAOB制裁的频率和严厉程度与违反审计准则、独立性问题以及鲁莽行为呈正相关。在个别审计师层面，违反诚信和鲁莽行为与PCAOB制裁的频率和严厉程度呈正相关。我们的研究结果表明，个别审计师（审计公司）因操纵审计证据（质量控制批评）而受到的财务处罚显著更高。此外，PCAOB对四大会计师事务所附属的审计师和公司的财务处罚明显高于非四大会计师事务所。其他因素，如多名个人牵涉到一份《纪律处分决定书》中，以及一家公司和个人是否都牵涉到该《纪律处分决定书》中，是PCAOB实施制裁时的重要考虑因素。总体而言，我们的研究结果表明，PCAOB在监督审计师的道德和审计合规工作时采取了回应性执法策略。
