The two sides of corporate social responsibility and the quality of internal control audit opinions

Although corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities provide a strong signal of management integrity, the involvement of the client in irresponsible CSR should alert the auditor to the risk of material misstatement. Framing management integrity assessments by relying on responsible CSR activities can lead to auditors' unintended alignment with their clients' preferred outcomes. Motivated by the increasing frequency of clean internal control opinions (ICOPs) regarding clients that subsequently misstate, we explore whether auditors' overreliance on responsible CSR influences the quality of ICOPs. We find that clients' CSR involvement is associated with fewer adverse ICOPs, but this CSR effect is asymmetric because it is only explained by responsible CSR activities and not by irresponsible CSR activities. Importantly, the 'good side of CSR' is associated with fewer adverse opinions being issued to misstated clients. Additional analyses show that only irresponsible CSR activities increase the risk of financial misstatements. Our findings provide support for the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board's warning that certain conditions inherent in the audit environment, such as the assessment of management integrity, can lead to auditors unconsciously favouring confirming evidence (represented by responsible CSR activities) instead of relying on disconfirming evidence (represented by irresponsible CSR activities) that could raise issues about management's integrity and ethical commitment.