Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Search Tips
Conference
Virtual Exhibit Hall
About AAA
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Extant research on audit services suggests that social factors play a significant role in the performance of external audit services. A relatively large stream of empirical literature on the peer review process provides evidence that peer review deficiencies in the financial accounting context are associated with competition and experience incentives. Given that most prior studies use data from publicly-traded companies no longer subject to peer review, this study evaluates whether these findings remain relevant in a subsector that retained peer review regulation: employee benefit plan audits. Using signaling theory and institutional theory, this study tests whether the reputation and status of public accounting firms are associated with peer review deficiencies and auditor switches. Analyzing a sample of New York public accounting firms, this study provides evidence that both the reputation and the relative status of the peer reviewer is the most critical determinant of peer review deficiencies. However, neither of these determinants is associated with changes in client mix. This study fills a call for additional research into the determinants of audit quality in the regulated employee benefit plan audit industry. While recent changes in the regulation of the employee benefit plan audit sector may enhance audit quality, the public interest will only be fully protected through more significant limitations placed on public accounting firm participation in this market or independent regulation of this audit sector.