• 沒有找到結果。

Contemporary Accounting Research 25 (2): 567–604

Millstein, I.M. 2002. Oversight hearing on accounting and investor protection issues raised by Enron and other public companies. US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Washington, DC, available at: http://banking.senate.gov/02_02hrg/022702/

millstn.htm.

Monks, R., and N. Minow. 2001. Corporate governance, 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Myers, J., L. Myers, and T. Omer. 2003. Exploring the term of the auditor client relationship and the quality of earnings: A case for mandatory auditor rotation. The Accounting Review 78 (3): 779–799.

Naiker, V., and D. Sharma. 2009. Former audit partners on the audit committee and internal control deficiencies. The Accounting Review 84 (2):559–87.

National Association of Corporate Directors (NASD). 2001. Director compensation: Purposes,

principles, and best practices. Washington DC: NACD.

National Association of Corporate Directors (NASD). 2003. Director compensation survey

2002-2003. Washington DC: NACD.

NYSE Listed Company Manual. Updated. New York, NY: New York Stock Exchange.

New York Times .2007. Holding the line (unsigned editorial), The New York Times, 2 January, p.

A18.

Palmrose, Z-V. and S. Scholz. 2004. The circumstances and legal consequences of non-GAAP reporting: Evidence from restatements. Contemporary Accounting Research 21 (1):

139–180.

Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2007. Changes in market responses to financial statement restatement announcements in the Sarbanes-Oxley era. Washington, DC, PCAOB.

Palmrose, Z. V., V. Richardson, and S. Scholz. 2004. Determinants of market reactions to

27 

restatement announcements. Journal of Accounting and Economics 37 (1): 1–31.

Palmrose, Z-V. and S. Scholz. 2004. The circumstances and legal consequences of non-GAAP reporting: Evidence from restatements. Contemporary Accounting Research 21 (1):

139–180.

Public Oversight Board (POB). 2000. Panel on audit effectiveness releases final report. Available at:

www.pobauditpanel.org.

Raghunandan. K., W. J. Read, and D.V. Rama. 2001. Audit committee composition, "gray directors," and interaction with internal auditing. Accounting Horizons 15 (2): 105-118.

Richardson, S., I. Tuna, and M. Wu. 2003. Capital market pressures and earnings management: The case of earnings restatements. Working paper, University of Pennsylvania.

Romanus, R., J. Maher, and D. Fleming. 2008. Auditor industry specialization, auditor changes, and accounting restatements. Accounting Horizons 22 (4): 389–413.

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 1974. Notice of amendments to require increased disclosure of relationships between registrants and their independent public accountants:

Accounting Series Release No. 165. Washington D.C.

Sennetti, J.T. and J.L. Turner. 1999. Post-audit restatement risk and brand-name audits. Working

Paper, Nova Southeastern University.

Scholz, S. 2008. The changing nature and consequences of public company financial restatements 1997-2006. Department of the Treasury.

Srinivasan, S. 2005. Consequences of financial reporting failure for outside directors: Evidence from accounting restatements and audit committee members. Journal of Accounting

Research 43 (2): 291–334.

Stanley, J. and F.T. DeZoort. 2007. Audit firm tenure and financial restatements: an analysis of industry specialization and fee effects. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 26:

131-159.

Teoh, S. H., I. Welch, and T. J. Wong. 1998a. Earnings management and the underperformance of seasoned equity offerings. Journal of Financial Economics 50 (October): 63–99.

Teoh, S.H., I. Welch, and T.J. Wong. 1998b. Earnings management and the subsequent market performance of initial public offerings. Journal of Finance 53: 1935-1974.

The Wall Street Journal. 2006. Study cites role outside directors had with options. The Wall Street Journal, 18 December, B3.

Vicknair, D., K. Hickman, and K.C. Carnes. 1993. A note on audit committee independence:

Evidence from the NYSE on “grey” area directors. Accounting Horizon 7 (1): 53-57.

Xie, B. W.N. Davidson III. and P.J. DaDalt. 2003. Earnings management and corporate governance:

The role of the board and the audit committee. Journal of Corporate Finance 9: 295-316.

Yermack, D. 1996. Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors. Journal

of Financial Economics 40 (2): 185–211.

 

28 

TABLE 1

Sample Selection Procedure

Hand-collected audit committee compensation data during fiscal years 2003-2012 3,895

Less: Financial institutions (SIC codes 6000-6999) (28)

Less: Observations due to missing data after merging audit committee compensation data with BoardEx (52) Less: Observations due to missing data after merging with Compustat and Execucomp (1,497)

Final Sample 2,318

   

 

*The definitions of all the variables are as follows: ABS_DA is the absolute value of abnormal accrual (adjusted by ROA) measured by Cohen and Zarowin (2010); AQ is measured by the standard deviation of the residuals of firm-level time-series model (5) specified in Dechow and Dichev (2002) over a rolling four-year period; EQUITY % denotes the ratio of equity-based compensation to total compensation paid to the audit committee members; ACCEXP represents the ratio of the number of audit committee members who are CPA or have accounting-related experience to audit committee size; ACSIZE denotes the number of audit committee members; MEETINGTIMES is the number of yearly audit committee meetings;

ZSCORE is the deciles rank of Altman’s (1968) Z-score; ROA_ind represents the industry-median-adjusted return on assets; LnASSET is the natural log of a company’s total assets;

Big4 is an indicator variable that equals 1 if a company’s year t financial statements are audited by a Big 4, and 0 otherwise; BDSIZE is the natural log of the number of total board directors; BDINDEP represents the percentage of non-audit committee directors who are independent; MB is a company’s market-to-book ratio; AGE is the natural log of the number of years a firm has been publicly traded; TENURE is the natural log of auditor tenure.

 

30  TABLE 3

Regression of Abnormal Accruals on CEO Power and Clawbacks

CEO Power Effect Clawback Effect

Variablesa Predicted

Signs

Coefficientsb (t statistics)

Coefficientsb (t statistics)

Intercept ? 0.162*** 0.163***

(4.39) (4.41)

EQUITY% + 0.010*** 0.092***

(2.57) (2.66)

ACCEXP  -0.031* -0.030*

(-1.69) (-1.79)

CPOWER + 0.011*** 0.011***

(2.61) (2.63)

CPOWEREQUITY% + 0.052*** 0.014***

(2.78) (2.96)

CPOWER ACCEXP + 0.079** 0.063**

(-2.22) (-2.21)

CPOWERCB  -0.098***

(-2.42)

CPOWEREQUITY%CB  -0.011*

(-1.89)

CPOWER ACCEXPCB  -0.025**

(-2.17)

MEETINGTIMES  -0.003* -0.002*

(-1.88) (-1.89)

ACSIZE  -0.005** -0.005**

(-2.14) (-2.14)

ZSCORE + 0.002*** 0.002***

(3.58) (3.62)

ROA_ind  -0.061* -0.060*

(-1.81) (-1.83)

LnASSET  -0.004* -0.004*

(-1.91) (-1.95)

BIG4  -0.081*** -0.080***

(-3.54) (-3.51)

BDSIZE + 0.002* 0.006*

(1.71) (1.84)

BDINDEP  -0.028* -0.028*

(-1.85) (-1.71)

MB + 0.001 0.0008

(1.25) (1.26)

AGE  -0.013*** -0.013***

(-3.26) (-3.27)

TENURE  -0.014* -0.011*

(-2.09) (-1.71)

Fixed Effects Included Included

N 2,318 2,318

Adjusted R2 0.216 0.218

F Statistic 10.36*** 9.92***

aThe definitions of all the variables are as follows: ABS_DA is the absolute value of abnormal accrual (adjusted by ROA)

 

31 

measured by Cohen and Zarowin (2010); AQ is measured by the standard deviation of the residuals of firm-level time-series model (5) specified in Dechow and Dichev (2002) over a rolling four-year period; EQUITY % denotes the ratio of equity-based compensation to total compensation paid to the audit committee members; ACCEXP represents the ratio of the number of audit committee members who are CPA or have accounting-related experience to audit committee size; ACSIZE denotes the number of audit committee members; MEETINGTIMES is the number of yearly audit committee meetings; ZSCORE is the deciles rank of Altman’s (1968) Z-score; ROA_ind represents the industry-median-adjusted return on assets; LnASSET is the natural log of a company’s total assets; Big4 is an indicator variable that equals 1 if a company’s year t financial statements are audited by a Big 4, and 0 otherwise; BDSIZE is the natural log of the number of total board directors; BDINDEP represents the percentage of non-audit committee directors who are independent; MB is a company’s market-to-book ratio; AGE is the natural log of the number of years a firm has been publicly traded; TENURE is the natural log of auditor tenure.

bIn estimating the t statistics, I use two-way clustering to adjust standard errors. Asterisks *, **, and *** denote two-tailed significance levels at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively.

 

32  TABLE 4

Regression of Accrual Quality on CEO Power and Clawbacks

CEO Power Effect Clawback Effect

Variablesb Predicted

Signs

Coefficientsc (t statistics)

Coefficientsc (t statistics)

Intercept ? 0.744*** 0.731***

(3.69) (3.62)

EQUITY% + 0.071*** 0.062***

(2.81) (2.93)

ACCEXP  -0.065*** -0.066**

(-2.63) (-2.49)

CPOWER + 0.019*** 0.042***

(2.79) (2.78)

CPOWEREQUITY% + 0.082*** 0.137***

(3.18) (2.98)

CPOWER ACCEXP + 0.079** 0.128**

(2.45) (2.49)

CPOWERCB  -0.132***

(-2.66)

CPOWEREQUITY%CB  -0.244*

(-1.99)

CPOWER ACCEXPCB  -0.368***

(-3.02)

MEETINGTIMES  -0.002* -0.001*

(-1.85) (-1.71)

ACSIZE  -0.012** -0.012**

(-2.44) (-2.03)

ZSCORE + 0.002 0.002

(1.59) (1.44)

ROA_ind  -0.461** -0.456**

(-2.56) (-2.53)

LnASSET  -0.003*** -0.007**

(-2.79) (-2.26)

BIG4  -0.172** -0.154**

(-2.41) (-2.23)

BDSIZE + 0.023* 0.024*

(1.87) (1.70)

BDINDEP  -0.184* -0.182***

(-1.72) (-1.69)

MB + 0.002 0.003

(1.23) (1.19)

AGE  -0.035 -0.033

(-1.59) (-1.50)

TENURE  -0.058*** -0.058***

(-3.10) (-3.06)

Fixed Effects Included Included

N 2,318 2,318

Adjusted R2 0.153 0.155

F Statistic 7.16*** 6.91***

aThe definitions of all the variables are as follows: ABS_DA is the absolute value of abnormal accrual (adjusted by ROA)

 

33 

measured by Cohen and Zarowin (2010); AQ is measured by the standard deviation of the residuals of firm-level time-series model (5) specified in Dechow and Dichev (2002) over a rolling four-year period; EQUITY % denotes the ratio of equity-based compensation to total compensation paid to the audit committee members; ACCEXP represents the ratio of the number of audit committee members who are CPA or have accounting-related experience to audit committee size; ACSIZE denotes the number of audit committee members; MEETINGTIMES is the number of yearly audit committee meetings; ZSCORE is the deciles rank of Altman’s (1968) Z-score; ROA_ind represents the industry-median-adjusted return on assets; LnASSET is the natural log of a company’s total assets; Big4 is an indicator variable that equals 1 if a company’s year t financial statements are audited by a Big 4, and 0 otherwise; BDSIZE is the natural log of the number of total board directors; BDINDEP represents the percentage of non-audit committee directors who are independent; MB is a company’s market-to-book ratio; AGE is the natural log of the number of years a firm has been publicly traded; TENURE is the natural log of auditor tenure.

bIn estimating the t statistics, I use two-way clustering to adjust standard errors. Asterisks *, **, and *** denote two-tailed significance levels at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively.

Managerial Ability, Equity-based Compensation,