The corporate earnings management behavior will reduce the efficiency of capital market pricing, resulting in the accumulation of " bubbles”, which is an important factor influencing risk hazards. In recent years, strengthening the front-line supervision of the exchange is an important action for China’s capital market to fill shortcomings. Therefore, it is of great significance to explore whether the front-line supervision of the exchange can identify the corporate earnings management behavior and to verify its active prevention and mitigation of risks. Based on the evidence of the annual report inquiry letter, this study uses Heckman’s two-stage approach to further explore whether the exchange has the " whistleblower” risk screening ability on listed companies’ earnings management behavior. The results of the study show that: First, the higher the corporate accrued earnings management level is, the higher the probability of acceptance of the inquiry letter is, and in the sample of companies receiving the annual report inquiry letter, the higher the higher the accuracy of the inquiry letter is, which shows that the inquiry letter has a precise recognition function. Second, the cross-section grouping finds that the inquiry letter identifies more obviously in non-state-owned companies, Shenzhen Stock Exchange listed companies, and the media’s earnings management with high degree of concern and good legal environment. Third, the scalability test finds that the inquiry letter also has a screening effect on the relatively hidden real earnings management, and the inquiry letter mainly plays the role of reducing market information asymmetry by reducing companies’ future accounting performance for positive earnings management. This paper has the following contributions: First, the existing domestic literature mainly explores the economic consequences of the inquiry letter from the aspects of market reaction, audit quality, stock price crash risk and earnings management, but has not yet begun to pay attention to the influencing factors of the inquiry letter. Different from Chen, et al. (2019), whether the inquiry letter can reduce the future earnings management behavior from the perspective of economic consequences, this paper mainly studies whether the current corporate earnings management can trigger the identification and supervision of the exchange annual inquiry letter from the perspective of influencing factors. The risk identification function of the inspection inquiry letter is precisely the important premise of the exchange’s governance role. It enriches and supplements the research on the effectiveness of the front-line supervision of the exchange by Chen, et al. (2019), and also expands the study perspective of the domestic inquiry letter to a certain extent. According to the literature that the author has mastered, the existing research on the influencing factors of the inquiry letter abroad is mainly based on profitability, audit quality, corporate governance, tax evasion, political connections, etc. However, it has not yet paid attention to whether the corporate earnings management behavior can be accurately identified by the inquiry letter, which enriches the research on the influencing factors of the inquiry letter to a certain extent. Second, the existing literature mainly focuses on the impact of earnings management from the perspective of banks, firms and auditors, but lacks the perspective of public law enforcement to explore the economic consequences of earnings management. As a front-line of supervision, whether the exchange is sensitive to earnings management is of great significance to prevent the occurrence of risks. Third, different from the SEC comment letter in US, the main body of the Chinese inquiry letter is mainly a lower-level exchange. Exploring the effectiveness of the inquiry letter with Chinese characteristics can complement the literature in this field. It is also a test of the effect of the " deepening the reform of the regulatory system” of the 19th National Congress and the reform of the information disclosure through the train policy in 2013.
/ Journals / Journal of Finance and Economics
Journal of Finance and Economics
LiuYuanchun, Editor-in-Chief
ZhengChunrong, Vice Executive Editor-in-Chief
YaoLan BaoXiaohua HuangJun, Vice Editor-in-Chief
Can Stock Exchange Front-Line Supervision Identify Capital Market Risks? Evidence from the Annual Report Inquiry Letter
Journal of Finance and Economics Vol. 45, Issue 07, pp. 45 - 58 (2019) DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.jfe.2019.07.004
Summary
References
Summary
[1]Chen Y S, Deng Y L, Li Z. Does the non-penalty regulation have information content? Evidence from inquiry letters[J]. Journal of Financial Research, 2018a, (4): 155-171. (In Chinese)
[2]Chen Y S, Deng Y L, Li Z. Can non-administrative penalty regulation improve audit quality? Evidence from inquiry letters[J]. Auditing Research, 2018b, (5): 82-88. (In Chinese)
[3]Chen Y S, Deng Y L, Li Z. Effectiveness of the front-line regulation of the Chinese stock exchanges: Evidence from comment letters[J]. Management World, 2019, (3): 169-185. (In Chinese)
[4]Huang M, Xia X P. An evaluation on specification and power of discretionary accruals models in the Chinese context[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2009, (5): 136-143. (In Chinese)
[5]Li W J. The economic consequence of government regulation on accounting information disclosure: Empirical findings from Chinese security market[J]. Accounting Research, 2007, (8): 13-21. (In Chinese)
[6]Li Y X, Bao S Z, GaoR, et al. The management compensations, supervision of the board of directors and earnings management of listed companies in China[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2007, (6): 55-61. (In Chinese)
[7]Lin D P, Su D W. CEO stock incentives and firm performance: New research based on the perspective of earnings management[J]. Journal of Financial Research, 2011, (9):162-177. (In Chinese)
[8]Lu Z F, Zhu J G, Sun B X. Earnings management, accounting information and bank debt contract[J]. Management World, 2008, (3): 152-158. (In Chinese)
[9]Song Y L, Li Z W, Ji X W. Viewing the regulatory effects of Chinese securities supervision from the earnings forecast violation[J]. Journal of Financial Research, 2011, (6): 136-149. (In Chinese)
[10]Sun G G, GuoR. Can CFO inside directors help board supervision?[J]. Accounting Research, 2015, (11): 27-33. (In Chinese)
[11]Wang B, Li J, Su W B, et al. Can non-administrative penalty regulation improve audit quality? Evidence from inquiry letters[J]. Accounting Research, 2011, (12): 86-92. (In Chinese)
[12]Wang F S, Ji S S, Cheng F. The effect of earnings management on future operating performance: A comparative study between accrual earnings management and real earnings management[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2014, (2): 95-106. (In Chinese)
[13]Wang k M, Lian P. Does the sponsor system improve the earnings quality of IPO companies?[J]. Management World, 2010, (8): 21-34. (In Chinese)
[14]Ye K T, Liu H. Tax administration, income tax cost and earnings management[J]. Management World, 2011, (5): 140-148. (In Chinese)
[15]Zhang J S, Tang X J, Li G Z. Does the preventive regulation mitigate stock price crash risk? Evidence from comment letters[J]. Journal of Management Sciences in China, 2018, (10): 112-126. (In Chinese)
[16]Zeng X Y, Lu Z F. The information risk of earnings management, performance volatility, and audit opinions: How to escape from listed companies with extremely suspect earnings management?[J]. Journal of Finance and Economics, 2016, (8): 133-144. (In Chinese)
[17]Anderson D M. Taking stock in China: Company disclosure and information in China’s stock markets[J]. Georgetown Law Journal, 2000, 88: 1919-1952.
[18]Cassell C A, Dreher L M, Myers L A. Reviewing the SEC’s review process: 10-K comment letters and the cost of remediation[J]. The Accounting Review, 2013, 88(6): 1875-1908. DOI:10.2308/accr-50538
[19]Chen G M, Firth M, Gao D N, et al. Is China’s securities regulatory agency a toothless tiger? Evidence from enforcement actions[J]. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 2005, 24(6): 451-488. DOI:10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2005.10.002
[20]Chen K C W, Yuan H Q. Earnings management and capital resource allocation: Evidence from China’s accounting-based regulation of rights issues[J]. The Accounting Review, 2004, 79(3): 645-665. DOI:10.2308/accr.2004.79.3.645
[21]Cohen D A, Zarowin P. Accrual-based and real earnings management activities around seasoned equity offerings[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2010, 50(1): 2-19. DOI:10.1016/j.jacceco.2010.01.002
[22]Cunningham L M, Johnson B A, Johnson E S, et al. The switch up: An examination of changes in earnings management after receiving SEC comment letters[R]. SSEP Working Paper, 2019. https://www.onacademic.com/detail/journal_1000040869965910_978f.html
[23]Dechow P M, Sloan R G, Sweeney A P. Detecting earnings management[J]. The Accounting Review, 1995, 70(2): 193-225.
[24]Graham J R, Harvey C R, Rajgopal S. The economic implications of corporate financial reporting[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2005, 40(1-3): 3-73. DOI:10.1016/j.jacceco.2005.01.002
[25]Griffin P A. Got information? Investor response to form 10-K and form 10-Q EDGAR filings[J]. Review of Accounting Studies, 2003, 8(4): 433-460. DOI:10.1023/A:1027351630866
[26]Haw I M, Qi D Q, Wu Do H, et al. Market consequences of earnings management in response to security regulations in China[J]. Contemporary Accounting Research, 2005, 22(1): 95-140. DOI:10.1506/9XVL-P6RR-MTPX-VU8K
[27]Healy P M, Wahlen J M. A review of the earnings management literature and its implications for standard setting[J]. Accounting Horizons, 1999, 13(4): 365-383. DOI:10.2308/acch.1999.13.4.365
[28]Heckman J J. Sample selection bias as a specification error[J]. Econometrica, 1979, 47(1): 153-161. DOI:10.2307/1912352
[29]Heese J, Khan M, Ramanna K. Is the SEC captured? Evidence from comment-letter reviews[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2017, 64(1): 98-122. DOI:10.1016/j.jacceco.2017.06.002
[30]Johnston R, Petacchi R. Regulatory oversight of financial reporting: Securities and exchange commission comment letters[J]. Contemporary Accounting Research, 2017, 34(2): 1128-1155. DOI:10.1111/care.2017.34.issue-2
[31]Jones J J. Earnings management during import relief investigations[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 1991, 29(2): 193-228. DOI:10.2307/2491047
[32]King G, Zeng L C. Logistic regression in rare events data[J]. Political Analysis, 2001, 9(2): 137-163. DOI:10.1093/oxfordjournals.pan.a004868
[33]Kothari S P. Capital markets research in accounting[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2001, 31(1−3): 105-231. DOI:10.1016/S0165-4101(01)00030-1
[34]Kothari S P, Leone A J, Wasley C E. Performance matched discretionary accrual measures[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2005, 39(1): 163-197. DOI:10.1016/j.jacceco.2004.11.002
[35]Kubick T R, Lynch D P, Mayberry M A, et al. The effects of regulatory scrutiny on tax avoidance: An examination of SEC comment letters[J]. The Accounting Review, 2016, 91(6): 1751-1780. DOI:10.2308/accr-51433
[36]Roychowdhury S. Earnings management through real activities manipulation[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2006, 42(3): 335-370. DOI:10.1016/j.jacceco.2006.01.002
Cite this article
Liu Bai, Lu Jiarui. Can Stock Exchange Front-Line Supervision Identify Capital Market Risks? Evidence from the Annual Report Inquiry Letter[J]. Journal of Finance and Economics, 2019, 45(7): 45-58.
Export Citations as:
For
ISSUE COVER
RELATED ARTICLES