The Credibility of Self-Regulation: Evidence from the Accounting Profession's Peer Review

Gilles Hilary and Clive Lennox ()

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Following the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, self-regulated peer reviews at accounting firms were replaced by independent inspections conducted by the Public Company Accounting and Oversight Board. Critics of self-regulation had argued that the peer review program lacked credibility. This paper tests whether the opinions issued by the peer reviewers provided credible information to clients about audit firm quality. We find audit firms gained clients after receiving clean opinions from their reviewers and lost clients after receiving modified or adverse opinions. This suggests peer review opinions provided credible information about quality differences between audit firms.

Keywords: Self-regulation; Sarbanes-Oxley Act (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2005-12-01
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (40)

Published in Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2005, Vol.40, n°1-3, p.211-229. ⟨10.1016/j.jacceco.2005.03.002|⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00482306

DOI: 10.1016/j.jacceco.2005.03.002|

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().