Regulator Continuity and Decision-Making Quality: Evidence from SEC Comment Letters

被引:8
作者
Kubic, Matthew [1 ]
Toynbee, Sara [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Austin, McCombs Sch Business, Dept Accounting, Austin, TX 78705 USA
关键词
SEC; comment letter; regulators; decision-making biases; continuity; rotation; AUDIT PARTNER TENURE; SECURITIES LAW; DISCLOSURE; ENFORCEMENT; ROTATION; INVOLVEMENT; FAMILIARITY; EXPERTISE; EARNINGS; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.2308/TAR-2021-0432
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Staff at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) conduct recurring reviews of firms' filings to deter misconduct and facilitate investor access to high-quality information. We identify the names of SEC staff who work on a comment letter and examine whether their prior involvement (i.e., continuity) is associated with comment letter quality. Our results are consistent with continuity leading to lower-quality comment letters. Continuity is associated with fewer substantive comments, agreed-upon disclosure changes, and greater similarity between consecutive comment letter reviews. These results are consistent with continuity increasing staffs' tendency to focus on familiar issues and overlook other areas of potential deficiencies. Time, changes in firms' operations, and increasing staffs' feelings of accountability can mitigate the negative effect of continuity on comment letter quality. Our study suggests benefits to a fresh perspective in regulatory monitoring.
引用
收藏
页码:365 / 398
页数:34
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Communicating statin evidence to support shared decision-making [J].
Barrett, Bruce ;
Ricco, Jason ;
Wallace, Margaret ;
Kiefer, David ;
Rakel, Dave .
BMC FAMILY PRACTICE, 2016, 17
[22]   Political Independence, Accountability, and the Quality of Regulatory Decision-Making [J].
Koop, Christel ;
Hanretty, Chris .
COMPARATIVE POLITICAL STUDIES, 2018, 51 (01) :38-75
[23]   Can comment letters impact excess perks? Evidence from China [J].
Hong, Yun ;
Yao, Youfu .
INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF FINANCIAL ANALYSIS, 2024, 91
[24]   Improving opioid stewardship programs through shared decision-making COMMENT [J].
Xu, Kathy ;
Nolan, Seonaid ;
Mihic, Tamara ;
Ti, Lianping .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN PHARMACISTS ASSOCIATION, 2022, 62 (03)
[25]   From science to decision-making for environmental health [J].
Andre, Jean-Claude ;
Gnansia, Elisabeth ;
Levi, Yves .
ENVIRONNEMENT RISQUES & SANTE, 2020, 19 (03) :179-189
[26]   Evidence of different underlying processes in pattern recall and decision-making [J].
Gorman, Adam D. ;
Abernethy, Bruce ;
Farrow, Damian .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2015, 68 (09) :1813-1831
[27]   When is evidence sufficient for decision-making? A framework for understanding the pace of evidence adoption [J].
Dubois, Robert W. ;
Lauer, Michael ;
Perfetto, Eleanor .
JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH, 2013, 2 (04) :383-391
[28]   AI-empowered KM processes for decision-making: empirical evidence from worldwide organisations [J].
Leoni, Luna ;
Gueli, Ginetta ;
Ardolino, Marco ;
Panizzon, Mateus ;
Gupta, Shivam .
JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, 2024, 28 (11) :320-347
[29]   Choice of dialysis modality: patients' experiences and quality of decision after shared decision-making [J].
Finderup, Jeanette ;
Lomborg, Kirsten ;
Jensen, Jens Dam ;
Stacey, Dawn .
BMC NEPHROLOGY, 2020, 21 (01)
[30]   Evidence-based medicine and clinical decision-making in spine surgery [J].
Mattei, Tobias A. .
NORTH AMERICAN SPINE SOCIETY JOURNAL, 2020, 3