The Cost of Independence: Evidence from Companies’ Decisions to Dismiss Audit Firms as Tax-Service Providers

Kirsten A. Cook, Kevin H. Kim, Thomas C. Omer
{"title":"The Cost of Independence: Evidence from Companies’ Decisions to Dismiss Audit Firms as Tax-Service Providers","authors":"Kirsten A. Cook, Kevin H. Kim, Thomas C. Omer","doi":"10.2308/horizons-18-009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This study examines whether companies' decisions to dismiss or substantially reduce reliance on their audit firms as tax-service providers in the wake of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act affect tax avoidance. We hypothesize that decoupling audit and tax-service provision and subsequently obtaining tax services from a new provider can result in decreased tax avoidance because the new provider lacks familiarity with a client's existing tax planning or does not have the expertise to generate new tax-avoidance opportunities. Consistent with our hypothesis, our results reveal that sample companies' book (cash) effective tax rates increased by economically significant 1.36 (1.63) percentage points in the year after terminating or substantially decreasing purchases of tax services from their audit firms, and discretionary permanent book-tax differences declined significantly. We find that decreases in tax avoidance were larger for companies whose outgoing tax-service providers were tax-specific industry experts.","PeriodicalId":22313,"journal":{"name":"Tax eJournal","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tax eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2308/horizons-18-009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

This study examines whether companies' decisions to dismiss or substantially reduce reliance on their audit firms as tax-service providers in the wake of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act affect tax avoidance. We hypothesize that decoupling audit and tax-service provision and subsequently obtaining tax services from a new provider can result in decreased tax avoidance because the new provider lacks familiarity with a client's existing tax planning or does not have the expertise to generate new tax-avoidance opportunities. Consistent with our hypothesis, our results reveal that sample companies' book (cash) effective tax rates increased by economically significant 1.36 (1.63) percentage points in the year after terminating or substantially decreasing purchases of tax services from their audit firms, and discretionary permanent book-tax differences declined significantly. We find that decreases in tax avoidance were larger for companies whose outgoing tax-service providers were tax-specific industry experts.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
《独立的代价:来自公司拒绝审计事务所作为税务服务提供者的决定的证据》
本研究考察了在《萨班斯-奥克斯利法案》出台后,公司决定解雇或大幅减少对审计公司作为税务服务提供商的依赖,是否会影响避税。我们假设,将审计和税务服务脱钩,并随后从新的提供商那里获得税务服务,可能会导致避税减少,因为新的提供商对客户现有的税务规划不熟悉,或者不具备创造新的避税机会的专业知识。与我们的假设一致,我们的结果显示,样本公司在终止或大幅减少从审计公司购买税务服务后的一年内,账面(现金)有效税率在经济上显著提高了1.36(1.63)个百分点,可自由支配的永久账面税收差异显著下降。我们发现,对于那些离职的税务服务提供者是税务特定行业专家的公司来说,避税的减少幅度更大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
New Puzzles in International Tax Agreements Analysts’ GAAP earnings forecast quality Workplace Transformation and Its Tax Compliance Implications Consumption Taxes and Multinational Tax Planning in the Digital Age - Evidence from the European Service Sector Tax Avoidance and Equity Pricing: The Importance of Countries’ Legal Institutions and Disclosure Regulations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1