审计收费、审计师变更与意见购买

实证研究表明,虽然变更审计师增加了上市公司年报被出具非标准审计意见和审计意见恶化的可能性,但是审计师变更更为显著地提高了审计意见改善的可能性;审计收费异常增加与被出具非标准审计意见和审计意见恶化的可能性负相关.公司管理层在一定程度上可以成功实现审计意见购买的动机.此外,异常审计收费、审计收费异常增加和异常降低与审计师变更之间不存在显著的交互效应.     

本地审计师的合谋效应

本文结合公司的信息不对称程度,从审计收费与审计质量的角度来研究本地审计师的合谋效应问题。研究结果表明,异常审计收费降低了本地审计师对信息不对称程度高的盈余管理公司出具非标审计意见的概率,而并不会降低本地审计师对信息不对称程度低的盈余管理公司出具非标审计意见的概率,同时,异常审计收费也不影响外地审计师出具非标审计意见的概率,表明本地审计师与信息不对称程度高的盈余管理公司之间存在合谋行为;进一步研究表明,信息不对称程度高的盈余管理公司更可能选择本地审计师进行审计,从而为本地审计师的合谋效应提供了进一步的证据。     

审计师变更之管理层与审计师博弈：模型与抉策

审计师的变更具有经济后果。管理当局通过变更审计师，购买有利的审计意见或是通过提出变更审计师威胁审计师的独立性，都将有损审计质量。本文通过构建管理层与审计师的博弈模型，分析可能影响其行为决策的因素，以期对我国审计师变更监管政策的制定存所帮助。     

大股东“隧道挖掘”下的审计合谋历程审视

大股东与中小股东间的利益冲突是一个世界性公司治理难题。大股东在特定状态下会成为企业剩余控制者而选择与审计师进行合谋,购买审计意见。文章在对股权结构与外部审计监督相关的中外文献进行梳理的基础上,针对大股东"隧道挖掘"下的审计合谋的博弈过程、演化历程进行剖析,从需求方和供给方分别提出了审计合谋的规制策略。     

代理冲突、董事会质量与“污点”审计师变更

当审计师因受监管部门处罚而致声誉受损时,公司变更"污点"审计师表明其对高质量审计服务存在较大需求。本文利用2002-2010年间被中国证监会处罚的会计师事务所及其上市公司客户数据,从代理冲突和董事会质量的角度,考察相关因素对上市公司变更其声誉受损审计师决策的影响。结果发现,就代理冲突变量而言,当原审计师受到处罚后,股权集中度与审计师变更之间呈显著正向关系,而财务杠杆及管理层是否持股与审计师变更之间没有表现出显著的关系;就董事会质量而言,董事会的规模、独立性和勤勉性与"污点"审计师变更之间均未表现出显著关联,仅是否同时设立四个专门委员会与"污点"审计师变更之间呈显著正向关系。     

审计委员会治理与审计意见

本文从审计委员会的存在性、独立性和勤勉程度三个方面,将审计委员会与审计师规模、异常审计收费、审计师变更等结合起来考虑,探讨审计委员会治理对上市公司年报审计意见类型以及不利审计意见改善和审计意见恶化的影响。研究表明,相对于审计委员会的存在性,审计委员会的独立性和勤勉程度对外部独立审计师审计判断及其所出具的审计意见的影响更为显著;在结合考虑审计师规模、审计收费、审计师变更等相关因素的前后均可以发现,在董事会中设立审计委员会并切实提高审计委员会的独立性和勤勉程度,不仅有助于提升上市公司财务报告的质量,而且亦有助于在一定程度上对管理层的审计意见购买行为进行有效的制衡。     

盈余管理、事务所客户资源控制权的归属与审计质量——来自中国证券市场的经验证据

与西方市场仅能观察到事务所变更不同的是,中国资本市场还同时提供了审计师变更的佐证。基于此,本文应用新制度经济学中的资产专有理论,从审计师和事务所两个角度,分析了中国证券市场特有的审计师/事务所变更行为,并结合盈余管理和审计意见进一步分析这种行为的原因和后果。文章通过对比签字审计师离开事务所并带走客户的公司与签字审计师离开事务所没有带走客户的公司后,发现在审计师跳槽之前,公司的盈余管理越强,越会跟随审计师到新的事务所,表明客户资源的控制权归审计师而非事务所所有。并且,我们还发现,这类公司在审计师变更前的审计质量更差。本文的研究丰富了审计理论的研究手段和现有成果,并对于规范审计师行为和提高审计独立性具有积极的理论价值和现实意义。     

审计师变更与审计质量：一个经验研究综述

本文对国内外有关审计师变更与审计质量的经验文献做了较为全面、系统的回顾。总的看来,已有的文献主要从审计师变更与审计意见购买、审计任期与盈余质量以及审计师变更与盈余质量三个方面来考察审计师变更对审计质量的影响,但并未取得一致性的研究结论。本文在对相关文献综述的基础上从多维度计量盈余质量和结合中国特殊的制度背景两个方面提出未来的研究方向。     

审计师聘用中的敲竹杠行为研究

不完备审计契约环境中,审计师首次审计专用性投资的存在会诱使上市公司经理层实施胁迫,本文运用契约理论和博弈论进行研究认为,经理层对审计师敲竹杠会导致审计师与经理层合谋或者审计师偷懒减少专用性投资两种损害审计质量的行为,并从四个方面提出了治理审计师聘用中敲竹杠行为的对策。     

审计师变更的“新视角”效应——基于关键审计事项披露的文本证据

审计师变更能否给当期财务报表审计带来“新视角”进而改善审计质量一直是审计理论实证研究的难点。基于关键审计事项（CAM）披露的文本信息,本文实证考察了审计师变更的“新视角”效应。研究发现,审计师变更显著降低了公司本期CAM与上期的纵向文本相似度。相比重新上任,完全履新的审计师变更降低程度更大;“换师换所”和“换师不换所”均具有降低作用,但前者影响更大;相比只变更项目合伙人或经理,两者同时变更的降低作用最大;而且,降低作用主要集中于行业专长审计师。最后发现,变更公司CAM纵向相似度越低,审计投入越多、审计质量越高、信息有用性越强。研究拓展了审计师变更和CAM披露文献,为审计师轮换制度与新版审计报告准则实施提供了经验参考。     

股权质押、盈余管理与审计师风险应对

基于2007—2018年我国A股1109家上市公司的数据,研究大股东股权质押、真实盈余管理与审计师风险应对之间的关系,探究真实盈余管理程度是否增强了大股东股权质押与审计师风险应对的正向关系。研究发现:大股东股权质押正向影响了审计费用和审计意见;真实盈余管理程度加剧了大股东股权质押后的负面效果,进而加强了大股东股权质押与审计费用间的正向关系,但对审计意见的影响不显著;进一步的研究发现:上期的审计费用反向助长了当期的股权质押率;存在大股东股权质押的上市公司,审计师出具非标准审计意见的概率会随审计费用的提高而加大。该结论扩展了审计师风险应对的研究范围及影响大股东股权质押的其他因素,对提高审计师风险应对及完善大股东股权质押政策具有一定的参考价值。     

Does Ethical Culture in Audit Firms Support Auditor Objectivity?

The suggested cause of constrained auditor objectivity has been centred on auditors' financial incentives and long audit tenure. Recent research has challenged those assumptions and questioned the effectiveness of auditor rotation to counteract short-tenure threats to auditor objectivity. Audit firms and regulators need to adopt methods for enhancing auditor objectivity that are effective in various auditor–client relationships. This study examines whether audit firm ethical culture is positively related to auditor objectivity. Based on the responses of 281 practising auditors, the findings indicate that auditors are more likely to make objective judgments in ethical cultures characterized by the rewarding of ethical behaviour and punishment of unethical behaviour, prevalence of ethical norms, visible ethical leadership, and low emphasis on obedience to authority. In conclusion, evidence indicates that auditors in audit firms with a strong ethical culture are more likely to maintain auditor objectivity than are auditors in less supportive cultures. This suggests that audit firms should promote a strong ethical culture to reduce the risk of constrained auditor judgment.     

The influence of litigation risk and internal audit source on reliance decisions

External auditor reliance on the work of internal auditors in an integrated audit of the financial statements and internal control is an important audit planning procedure that can impact audit efficiency and effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to examine how perceived auditor litigation risk and internal audit source affect external auditors' reliance decisions in an integrated audit environment under varying levels of risk of material misstatement. In an experimental study using 89 practicing Big 4 auditors, this study finds that auditors who perceive low litigation risk from placing reliance on the work of internal auditors will rely more on outsourced internal auditors than in-house internal auditors. The results also show that auditors' reliance decisions are sensitive to the level of account risk consistent with the risk-based approach to the integrated audit encouraged by the PCAOB.     

The effect of mandatory auditor assignment and non-audit service on audit fees: Evidence from Korea

In Korea, regulators could assign auditors to firms. We investigate the relationship among audit fees, mandatory auditor assignment, and the joint provision of non-audit and auditor services in Korea. We find that assigned auditors charge significantly higher audit fees than freely selected auditors. We also find that the joint provision of non-audit and audit services does intensify the relation between auditor assignment and audit fees. Combined with the results of other studies that have shown that firms audited by assigned auditors report smaller amounts of discretionary accruals than firms audited by freely selected auditors, our results suggest the possibility that mandatory auditor assignment may improve auditor independence.     

Do seasoned industry specialists provide higher audit quality? A re-examination

The purpose of this paper is to re-examine the recent findings in Gaver and Utke (2019) (GU) who find that seasoned industry specialist auditors provide higher audit quality. We first illustrate how the magnitude of residuals from the accruals model can vary significantly by industry, thus highlighting the importance of including industry fixed effects when the dependent variable is discretionary accruals. We next replicate GU’s findings. We first attempt to replicate prior literature after including industry fixed effects in the audit quality (discretionary accruals) models. This is an important control, as the relevant benchmark for a firm with an industry specialist auditor is a peer firm in the same industry with a non-specialist auditor. We find that after including industry fixed effects, there is no association between seasoned industry specialist auditors and discretionary accruals. We also find that the association between industry specialization and discretionary accruals is very sensitive to the way in which the researcher calculates specialization. Our findings are informative for shareholders of public companies who vote on auditor ratification.     

Auditor rotation and the appearance of independence: Evidence from non-professional investors

We examine the impact of audit firm versus partner rotation on non-professional investors’ independence-related perceptions, extending prior research on auditor rotation and independence in fact. Arguments for mandatory audit firm rotation continue to be made by regulators and investor groups based, in part, on the idea that firm rotation will incrementally strengthen independence in appearance relative to audit partner rotation. We report the results of two experiments. The first examines 5-year audit firm versus partner rotation under relatively weak or strong audit committees. We find no statistically significant difference in beliefs about how much of an income reducing audit difference management will record, or in beliefs about auditor independence, between the two auditor rotation conditions. On the other hand, we find that non-professional investors do believe more of the audit difference will be recorded, and the auditors will be more independent, under a strong audit committee than a relatively weak audit committee. The second experiment provides further evidence on audit firm versus partner rotation by examining a setting involving a 26-year audit firm–client relationship. Again, no statistically significant differences between the two auditor rotation conditions were found. These findings suggest that compared to audit partner rotation, audit firm rotation does not strengthen independence in appearance among non-professional investors and that non-professional investors recognize the value of strong audit committees.     

Perceived auditor independence and audit firm fees

Regulations requiring the disclosure of fees paid to an auditor for audit and non-audit services (NAS) respond to concerns that such payments are potentially detrimental to auditors' actual or perceived independence. Although empirical studies have failed to produce unequivocal evidence of detrimental effects on auditor independence, the actions of regulators, audit firms and companies are consistent with the belief that economic bonding generated by fees can impair perceived levels of auditor independence.

Using a sample of UK companies over a six year period to March 2006, we study perceived impairment of auditor independence by examining the relationship between levels of total relative fees (combined audit and NAS fees payable by a company to its auditor as a proportion of the audit firm's UK income) and market value. This paper's methodological innovation is its use of a valuation framework in this setting. A further contribution lies in dropping the assumption of linearity found in most prior empirical studies. We provide evidence that shareholders perceive a threat to auditor independence only at high total relative fee levels. At lower levels, total relative fees are positively related to company value. These results suggest that disclosure of NAS and audit fees are of relevance to investors, as is information about auditor income. Our results support the view that regulation by reference to the threshold at which total relative fees are perceived negatively is more consistent with investor preferences than prohibition of the supply of NAS by auditors to their audit clients.     

Audit Partner Tenure and Independence in a Low Litigation Risk Setting

We investigate whether long audit partner tenures impair auditor independence, as proxied by the opinion of the audit report, with a sample of Spanish companies for the period: 2002–2010. The Spanish audit market constitutes an ideal setting in which to address this issue, as it is characterized by unusually lengthy engagements with the audit firm. The motivation relies, on the one hand, on the current discussion about the necessity to reinforce the independence of auditors and, on the other hand, on the very limited available research at the partner level. The main result is the lack of significant effects of partner tenure on independence. This finding is robust to various checks. Unlike prior research, we also address the joint effects of firm and partner tenure on independence. Results indicate that partner tenure does not compromise independence, even under long or extremely long audit firm tenures. These findings might have some interesting policy implications, in particular for the intense current debate on auditor rotation regimes which is taking place within the European Union.     

The audit expectation gap: existence,causes, and the impact of changes

Recent regulatory initiatives targeting the statutory audit regime support the notion that the audit expectation gap is still a driver of change. This study seeks to analyse causes of the gap as well as the impact of proposed changes to the current statutory audit regime using an approach that differs from those used in prior literature. This approach allows us to attribute the audit expectation gap under the current regime to a failure of the public, the standard-setter, or the auditor. Based on a questionnaire survey conducted in 2011 in Germany, we find the public to have exaggerated expectations of auditors' responsibilities under current standards. Other causes of the gap relate to the public's difficulty in assessing the performance of auditors, but also to deficiencies in auditors' performance. In addition, we find that auditors are not fully aware of their responsibilities. Increasing the information content of the audit opinion is expected to narrow the gap. By contrast, recent proposed changes, such as mandatory rotation and a ban on non-audit services, may reduce the gap only to a lesser extent. Overall, it can be shown that the audit expectation gap is by its nature a persistent phenomenon comprising complex social aspects and interactions with changing accounting requirements, such as increased uncertainties in accounting estimates.     

Non‐Audit Service Fees and Financial Reporting Quality: A Meta‐Analysis

Auditing as a corporate governance mechanism has attracted considerable research attention. Because of the information asymmetry between corporate managers and outside shareholders, auditors are hired to provide independent assurance that financial statements are prepared following generally accepted accounting principles. The credibility of such assurance depends on the independence, both in fact and in appearance, of the auditor. Over the years, however, the independence of auditors has come under increased scrutiny because of their joint provision of both audit and non‐audit services. A sizable literature on the impact of non‐audit fees on financial reporting quality has developed. The evidence from this literature, however, remains inconclusive. This paper provides a meta‐analysis of the available literature by assessing (a) the net effect of non‐audit fees on financial reporting quality, and (b) whether there is homogeneity in the financial reporting quality proxies used in the extant literature. Findings suggest that the level of client‐specific non‐audit fees is associated with reduced financial reporting quality. However, the underlying studies used to conduct this meta‐analysis are not homogenous.