Reviewing the SEC's Review Process: 10-K Comment Letters and the Cost of Remediation

被引:201
作者
Cassell, Cory A. [1 ]
Dreher, Lauren M. [1 ]
Myers, Linda A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701 USA
关键词
comment letters; disclosure quality; filing reviews; reporting compliance; Securities and Exchange Commission; AUDITOR TENURE; DETERMINANTS; QUALITY; NONCOMPLIANCE; PERCEPTIONS; INFORMATION;
D O I
10.2308/accr-50538
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Securities and Exchange Commission( SEC) comment letters provide independent and timely feedback on the clarity of disclosures and on the extent to which filings comply with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and SEC reporting regulations. We investigate factors that affect the probability of receiving a 10-K comment letter, the extent of comments received, and the cost of remediation. We find that in addition to factors explicitly stated to increase SEC scrutiny in Section 408 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, low profitability, high complexity, engaging a small audit firm, and weaknesses in governance are positively associated with the receipt of a comment letter, the extent of comments, and the cost of remediation. The probability that the comment letter results in a restatement is higher for smaller companies and for companies engaging a small audit firm. We also provide evidence that comments relating to accounting issues result in higher remediation costs, largely due to the additional time required to resolve comments relating to classification issues and fair value issues. Our findings should be of interest to stakeholders who use SEC comment letters to assess disclosure quality and reporting compliance, and to managers and other stakeholders impacted by costs associated with the SEC's review process.
引用
收藏
页码:1875 / 1908
页数:34
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   FINANCIAL RATIOS, DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS AND PREDICTION OF CORPORATE BANKRUPTCY [J].
ALTMAN, EI .
JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 1968, 23 (04) :589-609
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2010, CFO
[3]   Accounting discretion in fair value estimates: An examination of SFAS 142 goodwill impairments [J].
Beatty, A ;
Weber, J .
JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, 2006, 44 (02) :257-288
[4]   An analysis of cross-sectional differences in big and non-big public accounting firms' audit programs [J].
Blokdijk, Hans ;
Drieenhuizen, Fred ;
Simunic, Dan A. ;
Stein, Michael T. .
AUDITING-A JOURNAL OF PRACTICE & THEORY, 2006, 25 (01) :27-48
[5]   Do the Big 4 and the Second-tier firms provide audits of similar quality? [J].
Boone, Jeff P. ;
Khurana, Inder K. ;
Raman, K. K. .
JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING AND PUBLIC POLICY, 2010, 29 (04) :330-352
[6]   AN ANALYSIS OF TRANSFORMATIONS [J].
BOX, GEP ;
COX, DR .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES B-STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY, 1964, 26 (02) :211-252
[7]  
Bushee BJ, 1998, ACCOUNT REV, V73, P305
[8]   The Emergence of Second-Tier Auditors in the US: Evidence from Investor Perceptions of Financial Reporting Credibility [J].
Cassell, Cory A. ;
Giroux, Gary ;
Myers, Linda A. ;
Omer, Thomas C. .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS FINANCE & ACCOUNTING, 2013, 40 (3-4) :350-372
[9]   The Interdependence between Institutional Ownership and Information Dissemination by Data Aggregators [J].
D'Souza, Julia M. ;
Ramesh, K. ;
Shen, Min .
ACCOUNTING REVIEW, 2010, 85 (01) :159-193
[10]  
DeAngelo L. E., 1981, Journal of Accounting and Economics, V3, P183, DOI [10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1, DOI 10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1, https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1]