Auditing Section Research Summaries Space

A Database of Auditing Research - Building Bridges with Practice

This is a public Custom Hive  public

research summary

    U.S. Audit Partner Rotations
    research summary posted June 26, 2017 by Jennifer M Mueller-Phillips, tagged 04.0 Independence and Ethics, 05.03 Partner Rotation 
    265 Views
    Title:
    U.S. Audit Partner Rotations
    Practical Implications:

    This study helps to inform about the effects of audit partner rotations. The evidence suggests that partner rotation does add a fresh look at U.S. audit engagements. The results can also be applied to the U.S. debate over audit firm rotation. It demonstrates that firm rotation is not the only way to add a fresh look to audit engagements and that the current system of audit partner rotation already has a measurable effect.

    Citation:

    Laurion, Henry, A. Lawrence, and J. Ryans. 2017. “U.S. Audit Partner Rotations”. The Accounting Review. 92.3 (2017): 209. 

    Keywords:
    U.S. audit partner rotations; fresh look; restatements; valuation allowances and reserves; write-downs; special items
    Purpose of the Study:

    Currently, the SEC requires that lead partners rotate off an audit engagement after five years and then sit out another five years before returning to the audit engagement. The audit partner rotation requirement was put into place to add renewed professional skepticism and a fresh insight into the audit. Previous studies in the United States generally indicate that partner rotation decreases audit quality due to a loss of client-specific knowledge and expertise. This paper adds to the discussion by examining the incidence of restatements, write-downs, and special items, as well as changes in valuation allowances and reserves surrounding partner rotation.

     

    Design/Method/ Approach:

    The authors identified audit partner rotations by using SEC comment letter correspondences for issuers who have received comment letter reviews in two consecutive years that copy different audit partners for each of those years. The information was gathered using the Audit Analytics Comment Letter database and comprised of 205 U.S. partner rotations at 189 SEC public companies from 2006 to 2014. A difference-in-differences model was used to compare the before and after results against a non-rotating firm control group. 

    Findings:

    The authors find the following:

    • There is no change in the frequency of misstatements after a partner rotation.
    • However, restatement discoveries and restatement announcements display relative increases of 5.9% and 5.1% respectively after there is a new lead partner. This suggests that the audit partner rotation requirement does in fact increase audit quality.
    • Additionally, there is some evidence of decreases in positive special items.
    Category:
    Audit Quality & Quality Control, Audit Team Composition, Independence & Ethics
    Home:

    http://commons.aaahq.org/groups/e5075f0eec/summary