{"title":"State Sponsors of Terrorism Disclosure and SEC Financial Reporting Oversight","authors":"R. Hills, M. Kubic, William J. Mayew","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3592694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examine whether SEC effort to review state sponsors of terrorism (SST) disclosure negatively influences financial reporting oversight. Using comment letter inquiries about SST to measure effort, we find the likelihood that the SEC fails to identify a financial reporting error increases when comment letters reference SST. Consistent with SST disclosure review crowding out financial reporting oversight, comment letters referencing SST are less likely to mention accounting, non-GAAP, and MD&A issues. These effects are unique to SST as we find references to non-SST issues complement financial reporting oversight. Data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request reveals a temporal shift in the occupational mix of SEC reviewers towards (away from) lawyers (accountants) that coincides with an increased focus on SST. Path analysis reveals that accountants (lawyers) are more (less) likely to detect errors and comment on financial reporting topics, with an indirect path through SST exacerbating these effects.","PeriodicalId":245576,"journal":{"name":"CSR & Management Practice eJournal","volume":"88 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CSR & Management Practice eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3592694","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10
Abstract
We examine whether SEC effort to review state sponsors of terrorism (SST) disclosure negatively influences financial reporting oversight. Using comment letter inquiries about SST to measure effort, we find the likelihood that the SEC fails to identify a financial reporting error increases when comment letters reference SST. Consistent with SST disclosure review crowding out financial reporting oversight, comment letters referencing SST are less likely to mention accounting, non-GAAP, and MD&A issues. These effects are unique to SST as we find references to non-SST issues complement financial reporting oversight. Data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request reveals a temporal shift in the occupational mix of SEC reviewers towards (away from) lawyers (accountants) that coincides with an increased focus on SST. Path analysis reveals that accountants (lawyers) are more (less) likely to detect errors and comment on financial reporting topics, with an indirect path through SST exacerbating these effects.
我们研究SEC审查恐怖主义国家资助者(SST)披露的努力是否会对财务报告监督产生负面影响。使用关于SST的评论信查询来衡量努力,我们发现当评论信引用SST时,SEC未能识别财务报告错误的可能性增加。与SST披露审查排挤财务报告监督相一致,提到SST的评论信不太可能提到会计、非公认会计准则和MD&A问题。这些影响是SST特有的,因为我们发现非SST问题的参考补充了财务报告监督。根据《信息自由法》(Freedom of Information Act)的要求获得的数据显示,SEC审查员的职业组合在时间上从律师(会计师)转向(远离)律师(会计师),这与对SST的日益关注相吻合。路径分析显示,会计师(律师)更可能(更不可能)发现错误并对财务报告主题发表评论,而通过SST的间接路径加剧了这些影响。