Litigation risk and audit fees: evidence from UK firms cross-listed on US markets

By A. Seetharamana, Ferdinand A. Gulb, Stephen G. Lynnb. 2002

479 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Economics and Econometrics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/da83484906f74b00f11bcfe12d33b52fcf1ff5d3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

The Effects of Securities Class Action Litigation on Corporate Liquidity and Investment Policy (2015, unknown): “…reporting and accounting disclosure (Skinner (1994, 1997), Field, Lowry, and Shu (2005)), leverage (Crane (2011)), institutional monitoring (Cheng et al. (2010)), MD&A disclosures(Brown and Tucker(2011)), audit fees(Seetharaman, Gul, and Lynn (2002)),and executive pay (Peng and Roell (2007)).”
Accounting Conservatism and Board of Director Characteristics: an Empirical Analysis (2007, unknown): “Furthermore, US firms are subject to considerably higher litigation risk than UK firms (Fulbright and Jaworski, 2005; Seetharaman et al., 2002).”
The impact of audit committee expertise on audit quality: Evidence from UK audit fees (2017, methodology): “30 Notes 1 Zaman et al. (2011) examine a range of audit committee characteristics and audit fees but their definition of expertise is simply a binary variable indicating the presence of a financial expert (broadly defined) or not.”
Post-listing performance and private sector regulation: The experience of London's Alternative Investment Market $ (2013, unknown): “However, it is important to note that the US legal environment tends to be more litigious than that in the UK, which likely provides another level of oversight beyond securities regulation (Seetharaman et al., 2002).”
Measuring Country Differences in Enforcement of Accounting Standards: An Audit and Enforcement Proxy (2013, unknown): “Finally, we include a ranking of the risk of litigation against auditors (item 9) because possible litigation affects auditors’ incentives and behaviour, and litigation risk differs between countries (Seetharaman et al., 2002; Khurana and Raman, 2004).”