Abstract
The SEC recently issued a proposal to modernize and clarify the regulatory structure of securities offerings. The proposal would allow companies to access capital markets on an almost continuous basis but would require strengthening of the role of independent accountants and other gatekeepers in the registration process. The Commission is seeking comment on whether it “should add to the proposed practices the fact than an independent accountant performed a timely review under SAS 71 of an issuer's quarterly financial information” (SEC, 1998, p. 231). This is the most recent of several proposals, made by the SEC and others, that provides incentives for companies to purchase quarter-end (timely) reviews of their quarterly data. Some managers who currently have their quarterly earnings reviewed only at year-end (retrospective reviews) argue that having a timely review would delay interim earnings releases. Proponents of timely reviews deny that this would occur, and assert that shifting certain review procedures into interim periods would decrease the time needed to release annual earnings.
We estimate the quarterly and annual reporting lags that would occur if companies currently selecting retrospective reviews switched to timely reviews. Our results indicate that quarterly earnings release lags would increase, as opponents of mandatory timely review have argued. Switching to timely review would reduce annual earnings release lags only when interim earnings contain unusual components.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abdel-khalik, A.R., “The Jointness of Audit Fees and Demand for MAS: An Analysis of Self-selection.” Contemporary Accounting Research 6, 295–322, (1990).
AICPA. Accounting Principles Board. Opinion no. 20, Accounting Changes, New York, NY: AICPA, 1971.
AICPA. Accounting Principles Board. Opinion no. 30, Reporting the Results of Operations, New York, NY: AICPA, 1973.
AICPA. Auditing Standards Board. Statement on auditing standards no. 36, Review of or performing procedures on interim financial information, New York, NY: AICPA, 1981.
AICPA. Auditing Standards Board. Statement on auditing standards no. 66, Communication of matters about interim financial information field or to be filed with specified regulatory agencies, New York, NY: AICPA, 1991.
AICPA. Auditing Standards Board. Statement on auditing standards no. 71, Interim financial information, New York, NY: AICPA, 1992.
Ashton, R., J. Willingham, and R. Elliott, “An Empirical Analysis of Audit Delay.” Journal of Accounting Research 25, 275–292, (1987).
Ashton, R., P. Graul, and J. Newton, “Audit Delay and the Timeliness of Corporate Reporting.” Contemporary Accounting Research 657–673, (1989).
Bamber, E.M., L.S. Bamber, and M.P. Schoderbek, “Audit Structure and other Determinants of Audit Report Lag: An Empirical Analysis.” Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 12, 1–23, (1993).
Big Five Firms Call for Quarterly Reviews. FEI News, Financial Executives Institute, 1999.
Deloitte & Touche requires timely quarterly reviews. Public Accounting Report, 5, 1994.
Easton, P.D. and M.E. Zmijewski, “SEC Form 10K/10Q Reports and Annual Reports to Shareholders: Reporting Lags and Squared Market Model Prediction Errors.” Journal of Accounting Research 31, 113–129, (1993).
Ettredge, M., D. Simon, D. Smith, and M. Stone, “Why Do Companies Purchase Timely Reviews?” Journal of Accounting & Economics 18, 131–155, (1994).
Heckman, J., “The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection, and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for such Models.” Annals of Economic and Social Measurement 5, 475–92, (1976).
Heckman, J., “Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error.” Econometrica 47, 153–61, (1979).
Hogan, C.E., “Costs and Benefits of Audit Quality in the IPO Market: A Self-selection Analysis.” The Accounting Review 72, 67–86, (1997).
Lee, L.F., Estimation of limited dependent variable models by two-stage methods, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, 1976.
Lee, L.F., “Unionism andWage Rates: A Simultaneous Equation Model with Qualitative and Limited Dependent Variables.” International Economic Review 19, 415–33, (1978).
Maddala, G.S., Limited dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting. Report of the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting, New York: National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting, 1987.
Newton, J. and R. Ashton, “The Association Between Audit Technology and Audit Delay.” Auditing: A Journal of Theory and Practice, 22–37, 1989.
Report and Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees, New York Stock Exchange and The National Association of Securities Dealers, 1999.
Securities and Exchange Commission, Accounting Series Release 177, SEC Docket 7. No. 17. Washington, DC: Securities and Exchange Commission, 1975.
Securities and Exchange Commission, Request for comment on increasing the level of involvement of the independent accountant with interim financial information, Washington, DC: Securities and Exchange Commission, 1989.
Securities and Exchange Commission, Securities act concepts and their effects on capital formation, http://www.sec.gov, 1996a.
Securities and Exchange Commission, Final report of the advisory committee on the capital formation and regulatory processes, http://www.sec.gov. 1996b.
Securities and Exchange Commission, Release No.33-7606A; 34-40632A; IC-23519A. http://www.sec.gov/rules/ proposed/337606al.txt. 1998.
Shehata, M., “A Self-selection Bias and the Economic Consequences of Accounting Regulation: An Application Of Two-stage Switching Regression to SFAS No. 2.” The Accounting Review 66, 768–787, (1991).
Stice, E.K., “The Market Reaction to 10-K and 10-Q Filings and to Subsequent The Wall Street Journal Earnings Announcements.” The Accounting Review 66, 42–55, (1991).
Williams, D. and M. Dirsmirth, “The Effects of Audit Technology on Auditor Efficiency: Auditing and the Timeliness of Client Earnings Announcements.” Accounting, Organizations, & Society 13, 487–508, (1988).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ettredge, M., Simon, D., Smith, D.B. et al. Would Switching to Timely Reviews Delay Quarterly and Annual Earnings Releases?. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting 14, 111–130 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008384311710
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008384311710