Prior auditor reporting literature posits a self-fulfilling prophecy (SFP) effect, whereby auditors’ going concern opinions (GCOs) increase the probability of subsequent failure for audit clients. This possibility of a causal SFP effect for GCOs has troubled companies, practitioners, and regulators for decades. Our study examines whether auditor and client decisions are sensitive to the expectation of an SFP effect. Data demonstrate significant engagement-specific variation in the expected SFP effect across distressed clients. We find evidence consistent with auditor reluctance to issue GCOs to distressed clients when such opinions are expected to increase the probability of subsequent failure. This association is lessened for larger auditors, consistent with their differential sensitivity to the expected costs of issuing clean opinions versus GCOs. We also find that the expected SFP effect is associated with management’s auditor switching and auditor selection decisions. These results inform practitioner and regulator concerns around the SFP effect and provide archival evidence that complements and extends prior analytical and experimental work.
Abdel-KhalikA. R.AjinkyaB. B. (1979). Empirical research in accounting: A methodological viewpoint. American Accounting Association.
2.
AlbrechtA.GlendeningM.KimK.PereiraR. (2020). Auditor going concern opinions and bank systemic risk: Evidence from the 2007–2009 financial crisis. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 39(3), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-17-126
3.
AlleeK. D.BhattacharyaN.BlackE. L.ChristensenT. E. (2007). Pro forma disclosure and investor sophistication: External validation of experimental evidence using archival data. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(3), 201–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.09.012
AnantharamanD.PittmanJ. A.WansN. (2016). State liability regimes within the United States and auditor reporting. The Accounting Review, 91(6), 1545–1575. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-51426
BasuS.HwangL.-S.JanC.-L. (2001). Differences in conservatism between big eight and non-big eight auditors. Available at SSRN 2428836.
10.
BerglundN. R. (2020). Do client bankruptcies preceded by clean audit opinions damage auditor reputation?Contemporary Accounting Research, 37(3), 1914–1951. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12575
11.
BerglundN. R.DraegerM.SterinM. (2022). Management’s undue influence over audit committee members: Evidence from auditor reporting and opinion shopping. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 41(1), 49–74. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2020-054
12.
BerglundN. R.EshlemanJ. D.GuoP. (2018). Auditor size and going concern reporting. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 37(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-51786
13.
BlayA. D.GeigerM. A.NorthD. S. (2011). The auditor's going-concern opinion as a communication of risk. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 30(2), 77–102. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50002
CadburyA. (1992). Report of the committee on the financial aspects of corporate governance (Vol. 1). Gee.
16.
CarcelloJ. V.NealT. L. (2003). Audit committee characteristics and auditor dismissals following “new” going-concern reports. The Accounting Review, 78(1), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2003.78.1.95
17.
CarcelloJ. V.PalmroseZ.-V. (1994). Auditor litigation and modified reporting on bankrupt clients. Journal of Accounting Research, 32(Supplement), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/2491436
18.
CareyP. J.GeigerM. A.O’connellB. T. (2008). Costs associated with going-concern-modified audit opinions: An analysis of the Australian audit market. Abacus, 44(1), 61–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6281.2007.00249.x
19.
CarsonE.FargherN. L.GeigerM. A.LennoxC. S.RaghunandanK.WillekensM. (2013). Audit reporting for going-concern uncertainty: A research synthesis. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(Supplement 1), 353–384. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50324
20.
ChenK. C.ChurchB. K. (1996). Going concern opinions and the market’s reaction to bankruptcy filings. The Accounting Review, 71(1), 117–128. https://www.jstor.org/stable/248358
21.
ChenP. F.HeS.MaZ.SticeD. (2016). The information role of audit opinions in debt contracting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 61(1), 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2015.04.002
22.
ChristensenB. E.GloverS. M.OmerT. C.ShelleyM. K. (2016). Understanding audit quality: Insights from audit professionals and investors. Contemporary Accounting Research, 33(4), 1648–1684. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12212
23.
ChristensenB. E.NeumanS. S.RiceS. C. (2019). The loss of information associated with binary audit reports: Evidence from auditors’ internal control and going concern opinions. Contemporary Accounting Research, 36(3), 1461–1500. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12470
24.
ChungH.SonuC. H.ZangY.ChoiJ.-H. (2019). Opinion shopping to avoid a going concern audit opinion and subsequent audit quality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 38(2), 101–123. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-52154
25.
CitronD. B.TafflerR. J. (1992). The audit report under going concern uncertainties: An empirical analysis. Accounting and Business Research, 22(88), 337–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.1992.9729449
26.
Cohen Commission. (1978). The commission on auditors’ responsibilities: Report, conclusions, and recommendations. AICPA. Manuel F. Cohen, Chairman.
27.
CornelliF.KominekZ.LjungqvistA. (2013). Monitoring managers: Does it matter?The Journal of Finance, 68(2), 431–481. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12004
28.
CowleE. N.RoweS. P. (2022). Don’t make me look bad: How the audit market penalizes auditors for doing their job. The Accounting Review, 97(3), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.2308/tar-2019-0554
DeFondM. L.LennoxC. S. (2011). The effect of SOX on small auditor exits and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 52(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2011.03.002
32.
DeFondM. L.RaghunandanK.SubramanyamK. R. (2002). Do non–audit service fees impair auditor independence? Evidence from going concern audit opinions. Journal of Accounting Research, 40(4), 1247–1274. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679x.00088
DeHaanE.MoonJ. R.ShipmanJ. E.SwanquistQ. T.WhitedR. L. (2023). Control variables in interactive models. Journal of Financial Reporting, 8(2), 77–85. https://doi.org/10.2308/jfr-2021-023
EgeM.GlennJ. L.RobinsonJ. R. (2020). Unexpected SEC resource constraints and comment letter quality. Contemporary Accounting Research, 37(1), 33–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12505
37.
EgeM. S.StuberS. B. (2022). Are auditors rewarded for low audit quality? The case of auditor lenience in the insurance industry. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 73(1), Article 101424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2021.101424
Financial Reporting Council. (2013). Implementing the recommendations of the Sharman panel: Revised guidance on going concern and revised international standards on auditing (UK and Ireland). The Financial Reporting Counsel. Consultation Paper.
FrankK. A. (2000). Impact of a confounding variable on a regression coefficient. Sociological Methods & Research, 29(2), 147–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124100029002001
43.
GaeremynckA.WillekensM. (2003). The endogenous relationship between audit-report type and business termination: Evidence on private firms in a non-litigious environment. Accounting and Business Research, 33(1), 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2003.9729632
44.
GarsombkeH. P.ChoiS. (1992). The association between auditor’s uncertainty opinions and business failures. Advances in Accounting, 10(Summer), 45–60.
45.
GeigerM.RaghunandanK.RamaD. (1998). Costs associated with going-concern modified audit opinions: An analysis of auditor changes, subsequent opinions, and client failures. Advances in Accounting, 16(1), 117–139.
GeigerM. A.RaghunandanK.RamaD. V. (2005). Recent changes in the association between bankruptcies and prior audit opinions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 24(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2005.24.1.21
49.
GerakosJ.HahnP. R.KovrijnykhA.ZhouF. (2016). Prediction versus inducement and the informational efficiency of going concern opinions. Available at SSRN 2802971.
50.
GhoshA.SiriviriyakulS. (2018). Quasi rents to audit firms from longer tenure. Accounting Horizons, 32(2), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-52035
51.
GohB. W.KrishnanJ.LiD. (2013). Auditor reporting under section 404: The association between the internal control and going concern audit opinions. Contemporary Accounting Research, 30(3), 970–995. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.2012.01180.x
52.
GuiralA. s.RuizE.RodgersW. (2011). To what extent are auditors’ attitudes toward the evidence influenced by the self-fulfilling prophecy?Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 30(1), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2011.30.1.173
53.
GutierrezE.KrupaJ.Minutti-MezaM.VulchevaM. (2020). Do going concern opinions provide incremental information to predict corporate defaults?Review of Accounting Studies, 25(4), 1344–1381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-020-09544-x
54.
HanlonM.HoopesJ. L. (2014). What do firms do when dividend tax rates change? An examination of alternative payout responses. Journal of Financial Economics, 114(1), 105–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.06.004
55.
Holder-WebbL. M.WilkinsM. S. (2000). The incremental information content of SAS No. 59 going-concern opinions. Journal of Accounting Research, 38(1), 209–219. https://doi.org/10.2307/2672929
56.
HopwoodW.McKeownJ. C.MutchlerJ. F. (1994). A reexamination of auditor versus model accuracy within the context of the going-concern opinion decision. Contemporary Accounting Research, 10(2), 409–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1994.tb00400.x
57.
KaoJ. L.LiY.ZhangW. (2014). Did SOX influence the association between fee dependence and auditors’ propensity to issue going-concern opinions?Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 33(2), 165–185. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50672
58.
KidaT. (1980). An investigation into auditors’ continuity and related qualification judgments. Journal of Accounting Research, 18(2), 506–523. https://doi.org/10.2307/2490590
59.
KothariS. P.LeoneA. J.WasleyC. E. (2005). Performance matched discretionary accrual measures. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39(1), 163–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2004.11.002
LamoreauxP. T. (2016). Does PCAOB inspection access improve audit quality? An examination of foreign firms listed in the United States. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 61(2-3), 313–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2016.02.001
62.
LarckerD. F.RusticusT. O. (2010). On the use of instrumental variables in accounting research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 49(3), 186–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2009.11.004
63.
LennoxC. (2000). Do companies successfully engage in opinion-shopping? Evidence from the UK. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 29(3), 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-4101(00)00025-2
64.
LennoxC. S. (1999). Audit quality and auditor size: An evaluation of reputation and deep pockets hypotheses. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 26(7-8), 779–805. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5957.00275
65.
LennoxC. S.WuX. (2018). A review of the archival literature on audit partners. Accounting Horizons, 32(2), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51942
66.
LiC. (2009). Does client importance affect auditor independence at the office level? Empirical evidence from going-concern opinions. Contemporary Accounting Research, 26(1), 201–230. https://doi.org/10.1506/car.26.1.7
67.
LouwersT. J.MessinaF. M.RichardM. D. (1999). The auditor’s going-concern disclosure as a self-fulfilling prophecy: A discrete-time survival analysis. Decision Sciences, 30(3), 805–824. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1999.tb00907.x
68.
MandeV.SonM. (2013). Do financial restatements lead to auditor changes?Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(2), 119–145. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50362
69.
MatsumuraE. M.SubramanyamK.TuckerR. R. (1997). Strategic auditor behavior and going-concern decisions. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 24(6), 727–758. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5957.00131
MutchlerJ. F. (1984). Auditor’s perceptions of the going-concern opinion decision. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 3(2), Article 17.
72.
MyersL. A.ShipmanJ. E.SwanquistQ. T.WhitedR. L. (2018). Measuring the market response to going concern modifications: The importance of disclosure timing. Review of Accounting Studies, 23(4), 1512–1542. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-018-9459-x
73.
NewtonN. J.PersellinJ. S.WangD.WilkinsM. S. (2016). Internal control opinion shopping and audit market competition. The Accounting Review, 91(2), 603–623. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-51149
74.
PapakostasD.HahnP. R.MurrayJ.ZhouF.GerakosJ. (2023). Do forecasts of bankruptcy cause bankruptcy? A machine learning sensitivity analysis. Annals of Applied Statistics, 17(1), 711–739. https://doi.org/10.1214/22-aoas1648
75.
PCAOB. (2014). PCAOB public meeting on the auditor's reporting model.
76.
PCAOB. (2015). Auditing Standard No. 2415: Consideration of an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. Washington, DC.
77.
PCAOB. (2022). Standard-setting, research, and rulemaking projects: Going concern. (Updated April 20, 2022). In.
78.
PowerM. K.GendronY. (2015). Qualitative research in auditing: A methodological roadmap. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 34(2), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-10423
PryorC.TerzaJ. (2002). Are going-concern audit opinions a self-fulfilling prophecy. Advances in Quantitative Analysis of Finance and Accounting, 10, 89–116.
81.
ReicheltK. J.WangD. (2010). National and office-specific measures of auditor industry expertise and effects on audit quality. Journal of Accounting Research, 48(3), 647–686. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-679x.2009.00363.x
82.
TuckerR. R.MatsumuraE. M. (1998). Going concern judgments: An economic perspective. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 10, 179–217.
83.
TuckerR. R.MatsumuraE. M.SubramanyamK. (2003). Going-concern judgments: An experimental test of the self-fulfilling prophecy and forecast accuracy. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 22(5), 401–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2003.08.002
VanstraelenA. (2003). Going-concern opinions, auditor switching, and the self-fulfilling prophecy effect examined in the regulatory context of Belgium. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 18(2), 231–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558x0301800204
86.
WallerW. S.ZimbelmanM. F. (2003). A cognitive footprint in archival data: Generalizing the dilution effect from laboratory to field settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91(2), 254–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0749-5978(03)00024-4
87.
WangJ. (2022). Management going concern disclosure, mitigation plan, and failure prediction—implications from ASU 2014-15. The Accounting Review, 97(4), 417–446. https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2019-0432
88.
WilliamsH. J. (1984). Practitioners’ perspectives on going concern issues. The CPA Journal, 54(12), 12–19.
89.
ZmijewskiM. E. (1984). Methodological issues related to the estimation of financial distress prediction models. Journal of Accounting Research, 22(Supplement), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.2307/2490859
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
