Avoidance of Goodwill Impairments via Auditor Choice

SUMMARY We examine whether companies preemptively shop for a more favorable auditor to avoid timely goodwill impairment charges. We further examine the success and ramifications and the conditions that give rise to these decisions. Adapting the “what if” methodology from Lennox (2000) to the goodwill impairment setting, we find evidence of auditor shopping to avoid goodwill impairment. Shoppers who proactively change auditors exhibit initial success in delaying impairment or reducing impairment magnitude relative to nonshoppers and shoppers who retain their auditors. However, they are more likely to elicit investor suspicion. Audit firms with a larger proportion of new clients who shopped are more likely to receive goodwill-related PCAOB inspection deficiencies. Shoppers who retain their auditor have a greater frequency of goodwill-related critical audit matters. Shopping behavior is concentrated among clients anticipating an equity issuance, when the CEO is more incentivized to avoid impairment, and when audit committees have less financial expertise. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M41; M43.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory
Published
2025-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2024-036
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.91
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Avoidance of Goodwill Impairments via Auditor Choice

Keval Amin, Timothy A. Seidel, Robert H. Felix
1 citations
Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory
Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
3.91
article

Avoidance of Goodwill Impairments via Auditor Choice

Keval Amin, Timothy A. Seidel, Robert H. Felix
article en
1 citations

Abstract

SUMMARY We examine whether companies preemptively shop for a more favorable auditor to avoid timely goodwill impairment charges. We further examine the success and ramifications and the conditions that give rise to these decisions. Adapting the “what if” methodology from Lennox (2000) to the goodwill impairment setting, we find evidence of auditor shopping to avoid goodwill impairment. Shoppers who proactively change auditors exhibit initial success in delaying impairment or reducing impairment magnitude relative to nonshoppers and shoppers who retain their auditors. However, they are more likely to elicit investor suspicion. Audit firms with a larger proportion of new clients who shopped are more likely to receive goodwill-related PCAOB inspection deficiencies. Shoppers who retain their auditor have a greater frequency of goodwill-related critical audit matters. Shopping behavior is concentrated among clients anticipating an equity issuance, when the CEO is more incentivized to avoid impairment, and when audit committees have less financial expertise. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M41; M43.

Auditing A Journal of Practice & TheoryVol. 45(1)
Brigham Young University (US), Stony Brook University (US), Catholic University of America (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
3.91
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.