This study examines how using the internal audit function (IAF) as a management training ground (MTG) affects external audit fees and the external auditors' perceptions of the IAF. Over half of all companies that have an IAF specifically hire internal auditors with the purpose of rotating them into management positions (or cycle current employees into the IAF for a short stint before promoting them into management positions). Using archival data, we find that external auditors charge higher fees to companies that use the IAF as a MTG. Using an experiment, we provide evidence as to why fees are higher. Specifically, we find that external auditors perceive internal auditors employed in an IAF used as a MTG to be less objective but not less competent than internal auditors employed in an IAF not used as a MTG. These results have important implications for the many companies that use their IAF as a MTG. Data Availability: Contact the authors. Data provided by the Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation are subject to restrictions.

SUMMARY The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) and its associated regulations significantly expanded the oversight role of audit committees and improved independence, but regulators bypassed restrictions on audit committee equity incentives. We examine the association of audit committee members' equity incentives and financial reporting quality in the post-SOX time period. We find that audit committee members' stock-option awards and holdings are positively associated with the likelihood of meeting/beating analyst earnings forecasts. On average, a company whose audit committee holds the mean value of exercisable option holdings is associated with a 10.0 percent increase in the likelihood of meeting or just beating its consensus analyst forecast. This effect increases to 17.8 percent for companies with high-growth opportunities. These results suggest that—even in the post-SOX era—the stock-option incentives provided to independent audit committee members are associated with reduced financial reporting quality. JEL Classifications: M41, M42