Coping strategy of independent directors for job-fulfillment risk under different ownership types and enforced legal environments

Ownership type,legal system evolution and their interaction significantly affect the incentives and behaviors of independent directors.We use the 2019 Securities Law revision as an exogenous shock to examine how state-owned enterprises(SOEs)versus non-SOEs and their independent directors respond to variations in regulatory compliance risk.Following the revision,SOEs are more likely to purchase directors’and officers’liability insurance to provide job security for independent directors.Non-SOEs are more likely to compensate for independent directors’fulfillment risk by increasing salaries and their independent directors are more likely to resign to avoid litigation risk.The coping strategies for SOEs,non-SOEs and independent directors are dynamic under different compliance risk stages and are affected by firm-level and director-level characteristics.

Voluntary resignation of independent directors and auditor responses:Empirical evidence from Chinese A-share listed firms

We examine auditor responses to the voluntary resignation of independent directors.We show that auditors respond by increasing audit fees or rescinding engagement with their clients,but not by increasing their audit effort.Mechanism tests reveal that independent directors’voluntary resignation leads to increased regulatory sanctions and negative media coverage,these relationships are more pronounced after the New Securities Law.Auditor response strategies follow an order of priority:at an acceptable level of perceived risk,auditors increase audit fees;when perceived risk exceeds this level,auditors will discontinue the client relationship.Auditors associate greater risk with firms that have(vs.have not)experienced consecutive voluntary resignations by independent directors.Mandatory resignation has no such effect.