Purpose Public companies with required reporting deadlines subject auditors to a compressed timeframe in which to obtain sufficient evidence to form their opinion on the financial statements. Psychology theory posits that individuals adjust their actions to avoid the penalties associated with missing deadlines. The purpose of this study is to examine the association between deadline-imposed time pressure and audit quality. Design/methodology/approach The authors measure deadline-imposed time pressure as the proximity of the auditor’s report date to the required filing deadline. The authors use different measures of audit quality – restatements and receipt of a Generally Accepted Accounting Principles or disclosure-related Securities and Exchange Commission comment letter related to a company’s Form 10-K. Findings The authors find consistent evidence of lower audit quality when the audit report date is near, at or slightly beyond the original (or extended) required filing deadline relative to companies with an audit report date preceding the required filing deadline by more than a week. In addition, although Big N auditors are able to moderate the negative effects of deadline-imposed time pressure when the audit report date is near the filing deadline (or beyond the extended deadline), these negative effects persist when completing procedures on the required filing deadline or during the extension period. Research limitations/implications The findings suggest that auditors completing procedures at or near the required filing deadline (or extended deadline) may compromise audit quality in an effort to help the client meet the reporting requirement. Originality/value The findings also highlight an opportunity for standard setters to require audit report dating information that could aid financial statement users in identifying auditors under heightened deadline-imposed time pressure.
Hansen et al. (Thu,) studied this question.