Auditor Selection and Earnings Management of KOSDAQ IPO Firms

There is a serious information asymmetry between internal managers and outside investors in the process during IPOs. One mechanism that mitigates this information asymmetry is a high quality auditor. Since prior research document auditors’ effect on newly listed firms at the IPO year, what has not yet been revealed in previous studies is the behavior of firms and auditors after listing. In this study, we investigate (i) the firms tendency of contracting with Big N auditors, and (ii) the effect of Big N auditors on accounting quality after the years of IPOs. Using a sample of 7,678 (1,892 firm-years of after IPOs, and 5,786 control firm-years) KOSDAQ observations between 2002 and 2012, we find that the likelihood of contracting with Big N auditor lasts only for two years after IPO compare to that of non-IPO control years. Secondly, we find that the effect of Big N auditors on clients’ earnings management lasts for a very short period after IPO. These findings suggest that although prior literature argue that Big N auditors reduce earnings management of their clients, at least the period right after IPO, it is not consistent. Our study contributes to the existing literature in several ways. First, we provide new evidences of firms’ auditor selection decisions by investigating years after the listing. In second, as an evidence of accruals reversal, we document decrease in discretionary accruals after IPOs. Third, we find that there is not always a positive relation between Big N auditor and accounting quality by showing the insignificant Big N auditor effect after IPOs. Our results also suggest several implications to IPO related stakeholders. First, to IPO firms, we provide evidences that decisions of hiring auditors affect firms earnings. Also, lead IPO underwriters may consider how these decisions influence future performance. Second, investors may want to use information not only in the preofferings but also after public offerings. Our study insists that auditor hiring decisions affects their own welfare. Finally, accounting standard setters may find these results useful for evaluating how much discretion they should allow corporate managers to hire auditors. In addition, our result casts doubt on auditor designation.