Search

This study aimed to shed light on the contribution of analytical procedures (APs) to supporting corporate governance. This was achieved through a field study in which a questionnaire was created and disseminated to a random sample of external auditors in Algeria. The data collected underwent analysis using the SPSS. The study concluded that APs play a crucial role in bolstering corporate governance by analyzing the company’s continuity capability and identifying financial problems facing the companies. In addition, APs enhance the quality and efficiency of external auditing, especially considering auditing as one of the key mechanisms that support corporate governance.

This article aims to analyse the asset-backing risk of stablecoins, focusing on international accounting standards, classification criteria, and auditing standards and using Tether as a case study. It examines Tether’s issuance, backing, controls, ratios, and regulations to assess risk transmission and mitigation. The results suggest a need for unified and strengthened accounting and auditing standards to enhance user confidence. Liquidity, solvency, and debt ratios were applied to Tether’s balance sheets; while Tether has made efforts to increase its transparency, and although it possesses highly liquid assets, challenges remain regarding its liquidity, solvency, and debt. An independent auditors’ valuation is crucial for investor confidence, demonstrating that more specific regulations are required for stablecoins. Future research should explore other stablecoins to comprehensively understand the accounting and auditing challenges in the field.

AbstractThe present study attempts to test the impact of audit, non-­audit fees, auditor tenure, auditor size, and financial distress on earnings management during turbulent periods for the five largest Eurozone countries. The motivation of the current study is to provide fresh evidence on these relationships during global financial crisis and sovereign debt crisis. We use the generalized methods of moments and ordinary least squares method for a sample of listed firms across the five largest Eurozone countries. We found that auditor tenure and auditor size carry no significant effect on earnings management during the financial crisis and sovereign debt crisis period as compared to the pre-crisis period for both cases. However, audit, non-audit fees and financial distress affect earnings management during the Eurozone crises periods. The results imply that stricter accounting regulation is needed during turbulent periods and investors should be careful with their investments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Exploiting a unique measure of hostile takeover exposure principally based on the staggered adoption of state legislations, the authors investigate how external audit quality is influenced by the discipline of the takeover market. External auditors and the takeover market both function as important instruments of external corporate governance. Design/methodology/approach: The authors execute a standard regression analysis and run a variety of robustness checks to minimize endogeneity, namely, propensity score matching (PSM), entropy balancing, an instrumental-variable analysis, Generalized method of moment (GMM) dynamic panel data analysis and Lewbel's (2012) heteroscedastic identification. Findings: The authors' immense sample spans half a century, encompassing nearly 180,000 observations and 17 takeover-related state legislations, one of the largest samples in the literature in this area. The authors' results suggest that firms with more takeover exposure are significantly less likely to use Big N auditors. Therefore, a more active takeover market results in poorer external audit quality, corroborating the substitution hypothesis. The discipline of the takeover market substitutes for the necessity for a high-quality external auditor. Specifically, a rise in takeover susceptibility by one standard deviation lowers the probability of using a Big N auditor by 4.29%. Originality/value: The authors' study is the first to examine the effect of the takeover over market on audit quality using a novel measure of hostile takeover susceptibility mainly based on the staggered implementation of state legislation. Because the enactment of state legislation is beyond the control of any firm individually, it is plausibly exogenous. The authors' results therefore probably reflect a causal influence rather than merely a correlation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore the economic impact of financial restatements by major customers on the audit opinion of their suppliers, showing that non-financial information disclosure potentially helps auditors make better assessments. Design/methodology/approach: Using a sample of China's listed firms from 2007 to 2021, the authors aim to find the relationship between customers' financial restatements and their suppliers' audit opinions. Heckman selection model, placebo tests and other robustness checks are used as well. Findings: The findings reveal that customers' financial restatements have a significant effect on the likelihood of suppliers receiving modified audit opinions. This relationship is pronounced when suppliers face a higher level of financial constraints, exhibit poorer accounting conservatism or receive more negative media coverage. Additionally, this effect occurs through increased business risk and information risk, which heightens auditors' perceived audit risk. Moreover, the study highlights the influence of switching costs, auditor expertise and restatement severity on this relationship. Practical implications: Risks originating from customers can spread along the supply chain, emphasizing the necessity for auditors to give heightened attention to both the audited firms and their customer information. Moreover, regulators should carefully consider the important impact of customer information disclosures to maximize the protection of the interests of external information users. Originality/value: This study not only confirms the crucial role of customer information disclosures in annual reports for stakeholders and auditors but also contributes to the existing literature on customer–supplier relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The current study uses an advanced machine learning method and aims to investigate whether auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based as less risky. More specifically, this study aims to explore the association between principles-based accounting standards and audit pricing and between principles-based accounting standards and the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion. Design/methodology/approach: The study uses an advanced machine-learning method to understand the role of principles-based accounting standards in predicting audit fees and going concern opinion. The study also uses multiple regression models defining audit fees and the probability of receiving going concern opinion. The analyses are complemented by additional tests such as economic significance, firm fixed effects, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, change analysis, yearly regression results and controlling for managerial risk-taking incentives and governance variables. Findings: The paper provides empirical evidence that auditors charge less audit fees to clients whose financial statements are more principles-based. The finding suggests that auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based less risky. The study also provides evidence that the probability of receiving a going-concern opinion reduces as firms rely more on principles-based standards. The finding further suggests that auditors discount the financial numbers supplied by the managers using rules-based standards. The study also reveals that the degree of reliance by a US firm on principles-based accounting standards has a negative impact on accounting conservatism, the risk of financial statement misstatement, accruals and the difficulty in predicting future earnings. This suggests potential mechanisms through which principles-based accounting standards influence auditors' risk assessments. Research limitations/implications: The authors recognize the limitation of this study regarding the sample period. Prior studies compare rules vs principles-based standards by focusing on the differences between US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and international financial reporting standards (IFRS) or pre- and post-IFRS adoption, which raises questions about differences in cross-country settings and institutional environment and other confounding factors such as transition costs. This study addresses these issues by comparing rules vs principles-based standards within the US GAAP setting. However, this limits the sample period to the year 2006 because the measure of the relative extent to which a US firm is reliant upon principles-based standards is available until 2006. Practical implications: The study has major public policy suggestions as it responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Andreas Barckow's recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks such as climate change. Originality/value: The study has major public policy suggestions because it demonstrates the value of principles-based standards. The study responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US SEC, to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information as business transactions and investor needs continue to evolve globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the IASB Andreas Barckow's recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks like climate change. The study fills the gap in the literature that auditors perceive principles-based financial statements as less risky and further expands the literature by providing empirical evidence that the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion is increasing in the degree of rules-based standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractThe purpose of this study was to trace the evolution of audit opinion research and identify research gaps that require the future investigation. Data was collected from Scopus and Dimension sources and then filtered by criteria so that the total final data analyzed bibliometrically was 709 over the last ten-year observation period. The research method is carried out in two stages, namely bibliometric analysis and content analysis on relevant articles. This study finds that the majority of audit opinion research have examined the topics of audit quality, types of audit opinions, business continuity, financial ratios, shopping opinions, earning management, audit tenure, and audit fees. Many audit opinion studies have employed quantitative methods, while a small number have used qualitative research methods. Furthermore, previous audit opinion studies have focused on corporate research, especially companies listed in the stock exchange market. Audit opinion research have also been explored in the local government sector, while they, in the relation to education, health, and sharia institutions still need to be improved. This research documents valuable research insights to future research agendas. In addition, the results revealed flaws in the audit opinion study of untouched objects.

AbstractIn this bibliometric analysis, the study explores the evolution of internal auditing and its transformation from a basic financial oversight function to a critical entity that manages various aspects of organizational culture, IT challenges, risk management and more. The study emphasizes the multifaceted role of modern auditors who must combine traditional practices with the demands of a rapidly changing business environment. Today’s auditors are instrumental in shaping resilient, ethical and socially aware companies. Looking back in time, the study illustrates how the discipline has grown in response to global financial crises, focusing on transparency, risk management and expanded auditing techniques. This evolution positions auditors as strategic partners within the organization rather than simply financial scrutineers. Furthermore, the study emphasizes the interplay between effective auditing and overall governance structures, highlighting that internal auditing is a nuanced craft continuously refined by context-specific variables. A thematic cluster analysis reveals the discipline’s complexity, emphasizing its fundamental principles and emerging focus areas. Finally, the study underscores the adaptability and future-focused nature of internal auditing, which remains committed to transparency, accountability and excellence in a dynamic global landscape.

Purpose: This paper aims to examine the perspectives of auditors, regulators and financial report preparers on the effects of key audit matters (KAMs) reporting on audit effort, fees, quality and report transparency. Design/methodology/approach: The authors conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders (13 Audit Partners, 5 Chief Financial Officers and 3 regulators) and thematically analysed the interviews. They use the frame of "Paradox of Transparency" to explain the findings. Findings: Auditors perceive that the overall quality control of their audits has improved both in the planning and execution stages, and such improvement can mostly be attributed to the coercive pressures from professional bodies and regulators. Nevertheless, audit fee remains unchanged. Auditors disclose industry generic items and descriptions of KAMs, sometimes masking the real problem areas of the clients. Even after improving the performative audit quality, transparency of audit reporting has not improved. Issues that warrant going concern qualifications or audit report modifications are now reported as KAMs. Hence, KAMs reporting might make the audit report less transparent. Practical implications: Localised audit environments and institutions affect the transparency of KAMs reporting. Without attention to corporate governance and auditors' independence issues, paradoxically, performative improvement in audit quality (due to the KAMs reporting requirement) does not enhance the transparency of audit reports. Originality/value: To the best of the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to provide field-level evidence in Bangladesh and other developing countries about the perceptions of auditors, financial report preparers and regulators on the effects of KAMs reporting on audit efforts, fees, quality and report transparency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Auditors fulfill a crucial societal role by increasing the credibility of financial reports, which requires that appropriate audit quality be provided and auditors are factually independent and perceived as such. So far, regulators and researchers have focused on a few measures for improving independence, namely the prohibition of non-audit services (NAS), audit firm and audit partner rotation, and joint audits. Despite these regulatory initiatives, accounting scandals still happen, and the independence of the auditors involved is questioned. Therefore, this explorative study aims to identify alternative measures that may strengthen auditor independence. Non-professional investors and auditors participated in a survey to identify promising independence-enhancing measures.Surprisingly, not only non-professional investors but also auditors support the implementation of many instruments. Non-professional investors rate measures related to oversight, controls, and sanctions as particularly useful. Likewise, auditors perceive measures for oversight and control as helpful but rank most sanctions lower than non-professional investors. They also support a stricter civil liability and rank some direct independence-improving measures as highly useful. Overall, the participants perceive a greater need for improving the independence of public interest entity (PIE) auditors.This explorative study widens the research horizon by adding alternative measures for improving independence in appearance. Thus, researchers may identify promising avenues for future research. Also, the paper is of interest to regulators and potentially helps in setting independence standards. Auditors and audit committees can identify opportunities for taking voluntary actions to ensure factual and perceived auditor independence.

This study aims to investigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on accrual-based earnings management (EM) based upon a sampling of 938 listed firms from four selected European countries (United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, and Türkiye) during 2016–2020. We find that firms engage more in accrual-based EM through income-increasing and income-decreasing accruals in the year of the COVID-19 pandemic relative to the period before the pandemic. These findings imply that financial reporting reliability and usefulness decreased in the period of the pandemic. Our results are robust to some sensitivity checks.