Audit committees have become a major means for companies to monitor th
e reliability of the financial reporting process. Despite the increase
in support and responsibilities of audit committees, there is little
empirical evidence documenting how well they accomplish their objectiv
es. The results of studies that examined differences between companies
with and without audit committees have been inconclusive, suggesting
the need for additional research. This study provides evidence concern
ing whether audit committees are associated with a reduced incidence o
f errors, irregularities and other indicators of unreliable financial
reporting. To determine if the presence of an audit committee is assoc
iated with financial reporting reliability, five potential consequence
s of audit committees are identified, involving the occurrence of erro
rs, irregularities and illegal acts. This study uses the following var
iables as measures of these consequences: shareholder litigation alleg
ing management fraud, quarterly earnings restatements, SEC actions, il
legal acts, and auditor turnover involving an accounting disagreement.
Five separate treatment samples are compared to randomly selected con
trol samples. Results of random approximation tests support the associ
ation between the presence of an audit committee and more reliable fin
ancial reporting. For all five financial reporting consequences, the a
udit committee variable is significant, even in the presence of other
company-specific variables that could affect the quality of financial
reporting. These results provide evidence that firms with reliable fin
ancial reporting (i.e., the absence of errors, irregularities and ille
gal acts) are more likely to have audit committees. These results have
implications for regulators, such as the Securities and Exchange Comm
ission (SEC) and the various stock exchanges, as they attempt to formu
late future corporate governance policy.