Search

SUMMARY: This study examines whether the presence of high-quality auditors (Big 4 or industry specialist auditors [ISAs]) in an industry facilitates accounting information transfer among industry peers and enhances investment decisions of firms not audited by high-quality auditors (non-Big 4-ISA client firms). Consistent with the prediction of informational influence theories, we find that non-Big 4-ISA client firms that belong to an industry with a greater presence of high-quality auditors are associated with lower investment inefficiency. The effect is more pronounced for firms with less precise private information. Path analysis shows that the association between high-quality auditor presence and learning firms' investment inefficiency is explained via a direct path of source credibility and an indirect path mediated by peer firms' accounting information quality. Finally, we find that firms in industries with larger reductions in Big 4 presence following the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 incur more investment inefficiency. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M40; M41; M42. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the effect of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act) on information uncertainty in IPO firms. The JOBS Act creates a new category of issuer, the Emerging Growth Company (EGC), and exempts EGCs from several disclosures required for non-EGCs. Our findings are consistent with proprietary cost concerns motivating EGCs to eliminate some of the previously mandatory disclosures, which increases information uncertainty in the IPO market, attracts investors who rely more on private information, and leads EGCs to provide additional post-IPO disclosures to mitigate the increased information uncertainty. Our results also are consistent with agency explanations, whereby EGCs exploit the JOBS Act provisions to avoid compensation-related disclosures, which results in larger IPO underpricing for such firms. Overall, we provide evidence on how reduced mandatory disclosure affects the IPO market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates whether and when differences in the credit rating agencies' methodologies result in differences in rating properties. In particular, this study focuses on differences in information processing constraints between a rating agency that utilizes qualitative analysis and direct access to borrowers' management in its rating process (Standard & Poor's) compared to one that does not (Egan Jones Ratings Company) and how these differences affect rating quality. We find that as information uncertainty about borrowers increases, Egan Jones's rating accuracy, informativeness, and timeliness decrease relative to Standard & Poor's. Our findings suggest that Egan Jones's more restricted rating methodology can lead to limitations in information processing and, thus, reductions in Egan Jones's rating quality advantage for borrowers with greater information uncertainty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigate the role played by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in monitoring fair value disclosures in regulatory filings. Specifically, we assess whether SEC action via the issuance of fair value comment letters to registrants is followed by reductions in uncertainty about the firms' fair value estimates. We hypothesize that registrants that receive a comment letter focusing on their fair value disclosure policies experience reductions in investor uncertainty regarding their fair value estimates in the post-letter period, compared to the pre-letter period. Supporting this prediction, we find that for the periods after the fair value comment letters, the associations between Level 2 and 3 fair value assets and our measures of uncertainty are significantly reduced. These findings are robust to a series of tests designed to ensure that we do not simply capture general changes in market uncertainty levels for firms investing in these types of assets. Our study contributes to the further understanding of market participants' perception of fair value disclosures by investigating the role of SEC enforcement. This finding is important given recent criticisms of fair value reporting emanating from the highest levels of government and industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the effect of mandatory XBRL disclosure across various aspects of the financial information environment. Our findings show an increase in information efficiency, a decrease in event return volatility, and a reduction of change in stock returns volatility for 428 firms (1,536 10-K and 10-Q filings) post-XBRL disclosure. In addition, this study shows that XBRL mitigates information risk in the market, especially when there is increased uncertainty in the information environment. Our results are robust to various alternative specifications and research modifications, such as a matched-pair control (326 XBRL versus 326 non-XBRL firms), current stock market condition, potential earnings releases, and corporate governance. This study contributes to the literature by systematically documenting evidence of how mandatory XBRL disclosure decreases information risk and information asymmetry in both general and uncertain information environments. Our evidence could potentially assist the SEC in their effort to expeditiously assess the benefits of XBRL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines whether disclosures of insider equity purchases on Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Form 4 resolve uncertainty regarding the valuation implications of reported earnings. Defining information uncertainty as ambiguity about firm value arising from low earnings precision, I predict and find that insider purchase filings trigger more positive market reactions in firms with greater information uncertainty (lower quality accruals). After controlling for future earnings changes, I further find that market reactions to purchase filings are predictably associated with prior earnings changes. The strength of this effect is increasing in the magnitude of insider purchases, as well as the level of information uncertainty. Overall, these findings suggest that, in addition to signaling future earnings information, Form 4 purchase filings help investors learn about the valuation implications of past earnings signals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, we examine some of the consequences of asset securitization. Specifically, using a sample of bank holding companies, we investigate whether the difficulty in assessing the true extent of risk transfer, between securitizing banks and investors in asset-backed securities, affects bank information uncertainty. We find that when market participants have a greater difficulty in estimating risk transfer, banks face greater information uncertainty (i.e., larger bid-ask spreads and analyst forecast dispersion). In addition, we find that this effect is mitigated for banks that operate in a higher quality information environment. We also find that banks that securitize financial assets have higher spreads and analyst forecast dispersion as compared to non-securitizing banks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We analyze a sample of 330 firms making unaudited disclosures required by Section 302 and 383 firms making audited disclosures required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We find that Section 302 disclosures are associated with negative announcement abnormal returns of -1.8 percent, and that firms experience an abnormal increase in equity cost of capital of 68 basis points. We conclude that Section 302 disclosures are informative and point to lower credibility of disclosing firms' financial reporting. In contrast, we find that Section 404 disclosures have no noticeable impact on stock prices or firms' cost of capital. Further, we find that auditor quality attenuates the negative response to Section 302 disclosures and that accelerated filers—larger firms required to file under Section 404—have significantly less negative returns (-1.10 percent) than non-accelerated filers (-4.22 percent). The findings have implications for the debate about whether to implement a scaled securities regulation system for smaller public companies: material weakness disclosures are more informative for smaller firms that likely have higher pre-disclosure information uncertainty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]