Explanations for Not Having an Audit Committee in a ‘Comply or Explain’ Regime

Michael E. Bradbury, Diandian Ma and Tom Scott

Australian Accounting Review, 2019, vol. 29, issue 4, 649-662

Abstract: We utilise the Australian ‘comply or explain’ corporate governance regime to examine the explanations given for not having an audit committee and whether these explanations are consistent with underlying firm characteristics. We hand‐collect explanations provided by firms, and find the most common explanations are that the firm or board size is too small or that the firm is insufficiently complex to justify an audit committee. Thus, the reasons that firms provide for not having an audit committee are focused on internal factors limiting their ability to supply an audit committee. As we find that these explanations are associated with lower total assets, smaller board size and lower leverage, they are consistent with underlying firm characteristics. Thus firms are not providing inconsistent or unrelated explanations as pretexts to avoid forming an audit committee. Documenting that the explanations given for non‐compliance are associated with related firm characteristics should be of interest to regulators and policy makers.

Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12241

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:bla:ausact:v:29:y:2019:i:4:p:649-662

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=1035-6908

Access Statistics for this article

Australian Accounting Review is currently edited by Linda M. English

More articles in Australian Accounting Review from CPA Australia
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().