首页> 外文期刊>Review of quantitative finance and accounting >Does the monitoring effect of Big 4 audit firms really prevail? Evidence from managerial expropriation of cash assets
【24h】

Does the monitoring effect of Big 4 audit firms really prevail? Evidence from managerial expropriation of cash assets

机译:大4审计公司的监测效果是否真正占上风?管理征收现金资产的证据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This study pins down the monitoring effect of Big 4 versus non-Big 4 audit firms on shareholder wealth by exploring the dollar equivalent of the reduction in shareholder value arising from managerial expropriation of cash assets. We detect a value discount of $0.12 for a dollar of cash assets held by non-Big 4 clients, while we uncover a value premium of $0.09 for an extra dollar of cash reserves in Big 4 clients. We further observe that second-tier auditors underperform their Big 4 rivals in containing managerial expropriation of corporate liquidity. Moreover, the economic consequences of cash and cash equivalents increase with a switch from a non-Big 4 firm to a Big 4 firm. Our results survive examinations of excessive cash assets, propensity score-matching analysis, a vast array of controls, and alternative valuation models. Collectively, our results suggest that Big 4 auditors tend to play a significantly stronger role vis-a-vis their non-Big 4 rivals in deterring managers from expropriating outside shareholders through cash resources.
机译:这项研究通过探索了从管理征收现金资产产生的股东价值减少的美元相当于减少股东财富的大4与非大大4次审计公司的监测效果。我们检测非大型4客户持有的现金资产价值0.12美元的价值折扣,而我们在大4客户中删除了0.09美元的价值溢价。我们进一步遵守,二线审计师在纳入公司流动资金的管理征收方面表现不足。此外,现金和现金等价物的经济后果随着从非大型4件公司到一个大4公司的交换机而增加。我们的结果在过多的现金资产检查检查,倾向分数匹配分析,广泛的控制和替代估值模型。统称,我们的结果表明,大型4名审计师倾向于发挥明显更强大的作用,在通过现金资源促使管理人员免受征收外部股东的非大型4竞争对手。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号