首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
The business of auditing is heavily regulated. Auditor regulation exists through licensing, professional standards and liability. The auditor's liability for losses to financial statement users from audit failure is subject to a test of negligence. What constitutes due audit care is, however, not generally well-specified. Furthermore, reviews of litigation against auditors conclude that compliance with professional audit standards does not always act as a complete defence to allegations of negligence. The current situation can be described as one where (ex ante)—from the point of view of the auditor—uncertainty exists about the ‘legal’ standard of due audit quality (as seen by the courts in the event of litigation). This uncertainty about legal standards fundamentally affects audit behaviour in ways that are not immediately intuitive. This paper draws on insights from the economics and law literature (e.g., Kolstad et al., 1990; Shavell, 1984a, 1984b and 1987; Calfee and Craswell, 1984 and 1986) and provides an analysis of the effects of uncertainty about auditor negligence on the produced level of audit quality and on audit fees. The auditor subject to a negligence rule will produce too low or too high an audit quality level, as compared to the socially optimal level. It is shown that uncertainty about the legal standard of ‘due audit quality’ is fundamental to understanding audit quality supplied. This uncertainty is the explicator of an insurance component in audit fees. A surprising insight is that a large uncertainty about the legal standard of care can reduce rather than increase the quality of audit work supplied and increase the insurance component. Relying on insurance premiums can be more effective than direct expenditure in reducing risk. The effect of the imposition of ex ante precise audit quality standards, in combination with an uncertain negligence rule, is discussed. Since the influence of ex ante standards is indirect through its effect on ex post liability, auditing standards cannot be analysed independently of ‘legal’ standards. If the legal standard of care were clear, there would be no role for audit standards. Audit standards only affect audit behaviour if legal standards of care are unclear, and they help to clarify the legal standard. An effective combination is for ex ante standards to be set below the ex post standards of care so that they provide a lower bound on acceptable work. Under a lowest common denominator approach set too far below legal standards, audit standards would be irrelevant as far as operational decisions were concerned. As the level of standards are raised, so costs are first imposed on the lowest quality providers.  相似文献   

2.
The recent revival of interest in the issue of limiting auditors' liability raises questions about the potential effect of such a limitation on auditors' performance. This paper considers the consequences of limited liability from the perspectives of contracting theory and economic arguments. We examine the potential effect of a reduction in auditors' liability on the standard of care or quality of service they provide, emphasising the "calculus of negligence" concept used by Australian courts. We consider the potential impact of reduced liability on the auditor's decision to shirk responsibilities (the moral hazard problem) and on the value placed on audit services. The analysis shows that placing a statutory cap on auditors' liability has the potential to reduce the effectiveness of bonding mechanisms; provide an avenue for divergent behaviour; lower the level of care provided by auditors; and decrease the value of audit services.  相似文献   

3.
In quality-differentiated audit markets with client-firms of unknown types, insider-managers of client firms strategically select auditors who respond to legal liabilities to decide their care level. In this signaling game, uninformed-investors use the audit report and the auditors' identity for firm valuation. The analysis shows that increased legal liability increases the auditor's effort and audit accuracy but reduces the demand for high quality auditing because, apart from the increased audit costs, the adverse selection benefit of the worse type reduces with increased accuracy. Furthermore, alternative legal regimes and damage allocation rules alter informational efficiency of the financial market.  相似文献   

4.
There is strong evidence that individuals are optimistic in the sense that they underrate the probability of a negative event occurring. This paper provides a positive theoretical analysis of how auditor optimism affects their incentives to take care under two liability rules: strict liability and a negligence rule. Under strict liability, auditors are held liable when they cause damages to investors. Under a negligence rule, auditors are held liable when they cause damages and in addition, act negligently, that is, fail to meet the standard of due care specified in legal and professional rules. I find the following results. (1) If due care is sufficiently close to the efficient level, a negligence rule distorts auditors’ incentives less than strict liability. Under strict liability, optimism makes the auditor overestimate the chances of finding material mistakes and thus induces suboptimal care. (2) If due care is too strict, the auditor will not exert due care but the same level of suboptimal care under either liability rule. (3) With increasing optimism and in the absence of punitive damages, strict liability becomes less preferable to a precise negligence rule. This statement also holds for vaguely defined standards of due care if due care is sufficiently strict or if auditor optimism is sufficiently high. (4) Punitive damages counteract suboptimal incentives generated by auditor optimism, especially under strict liability.  相似文献   

5.
In recent years, considerable pressure has grown within the British auditing industry for limitation of liability arising from negligent mis-statements in audit reports. Under British company law, auditors are forbidden from contracting with companies for their liability to be restricted. This legal provision was introduced in the Companies Act 1929 as a byproduct of legislation relating to directors' liability. The paper explores the background to this legal provision, observing that auditor liability cannot be viewed as a self-contained matter of interest only to a limited community. Attitudes to auditor liability have been shaped against a background of changes in the law of negligence, some, but by no means all, arising from cases involving auditors. Moreover, changing concepts of the position of the auditor within corporate governance structures have at different times encouraged and discouraged the assimilation of the legal treatments of auditors and directors. These concepts themselves reflect differing notions of what actually constitutes the “company”: a collectivity of shareholders or a separate entity controlled by directors. These notions emerged against a background of corporate failure and the need to allocate losses among various parties with different degrees of culpability for failure. However, legal developments do not account by themselves for changing attitudes within the auditing industry towards unlimited liability; acceptance of full responsibility for one's statements, adopted as a badge of professional status, has more recently been seen as inhibiting the commercial development of British auditing.  相似文献   

6.
从注册会计师的注意义务看独立审计准则的法律地位   总被引:17,自引:0,他引:17  
颜延 《会计研究》2003,17(6):25-31
注册会计师承担的审计责任是一种注意义务违反的过失责任。相对于普通人而言 ,注册会计师注意义务是一种高度的注意义务 ;相对于其专业团体而言 ,注册会计师注意义务必须达到的仅仅是本团体中一般人的水平 ,即所谓的“合理谨慎”。独立审计准则是判断注册会计师注意义务的基础 ,它发端于司法实践 ,在发展过程中也得到了司法实践的支持和肯定。中国独立审计准则的制订 ,履行的是一个立法程序 ;独立审计准则在中国具有法规的地位。法律赋予独立审计准则作为注册会计师注意义务判别标准的抗辩地位。最后 ,本文对有关独立审计准则的非难提出了质疑 ,认为尊重独立审计准则的法律地位 ,是促进审计准则发展的前提 ;尊重会计专业团体的生存方式 ,是法学家应有的品格。  相似文献   

7.
Scope of Auditors' Liability,Audit Quality,and Capital Investment   总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2  
One of the fundamental issues in the discussion of auditors' liability is to whom auditors should be held liable for ordinary negligence under common law. Three judicial viewpoints prevail: the restrictive privity approach, the more liberal Restatement approach, and the most liberal foreseeability approach. To compare these three approaches from an efficiency perspective, this paper develops a model that features an owner-managed firm, an independent auditor, a continuum of unrelated lenders, and an impartial court. Double effort-incentive problems appear for the firm and the auditor. The firm has an additional incentive problem due to the sequential nature of its borrowing. This paper shows that the effort-incentive problem and the sequential borrowing problem of the firm render unambiguous improvements in audit effort/quality, capital investment, and social welfare as the judicial approach governing the scope of auditors' liability becomes more conservative.  相似文献   

8.
Why Press Coverage of a Client Influences the Audit Opinion   总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2  
In this study I use an experiment to examine why auditors are more likely to issue going–concern opinions when the client has been the subject of negative press coverage prior to the date of the audit opinion. I find no evidence that negative press coverage increases auditors' perceptions of legal liability, as was suggested in the prior literature. I do find, however, that negative press coverage increases auditors' perception of a client's bankruptcy probability and this, in turn, leads auditors to modify the audit opinion. Because the press coverage presented in this study provides no new information, the results suggest that auditors react too strongly to redundant information. This over–reaction can result in inefficient allocation of audit resources and can have deleterious affects on clients. Accordingly, policy makers, auditors and their clients might be interested in how auditors' reliance on redundant information can be reduced.  相似文献   

9.
Jochen Bigus 《Abacus》2015,51(3):356-378
Do auditor reputation effects evolve the same way under precise negligence as under vague negligence? Or are there differences? We assume that investors update their beliefs on unobservable auditor quality when an auditor discloses an inaccurate report. We call this a reputation effect. A necessary condition for reputation effects to occur is that, ex ante, investors expect ‘good’ auditors to take more care than ‘bad’ auditors such that ‘good’ auditors are less likely to issue an inaccurate report. Consistent with empirical evidence, we assume that wealthier (‘good’) auditors tend to take more care than less wealthy (‘bad’) auditors. We find that under vague negligence, reputation effects will occur, inducing both types of auditor to increase the level of care taken. A ‘good’ auditor is likely to exert excessive care. Then, even in the absence of auditor risk aversion, a (properly defined) liability cap is necessary to induce efficient incentives. A contractual liability cap is preferable to a legally fixed liability cap. Under precise negligence, a ‘good’ auditor will exert the standard of due care. However, a ‘bad’ auditor will also do so if sufficiently wealthy. Consequently, ex ante, investors do not expect different levels of care to be taken or reputation effects to occur. A liability cap is not desirable. This paper highlights the importance of non‐legal sanctions in auditor liability. Finally, it links the ‘reputation’ and ‘deep pocket’ hypotheses, both of which have attempted separately in the past to explain the positive correlation between auditor size and auditor quality.  相似文献   

10.
The decision in AWA Ltd v Daniels has important implications for auditors, directors and other professionals providing accounting services to clients. Previously, where the external auditor had been negligent, Australian courts awarded full damages against the auditor in favour of the plaintiff In AWA, a defence of contributory negligence succeeded and damages were apportioned between the company and the external auditor. Also, the auditor succeeded in a claim for contribution against the chief executive officer. This paper analyses the implications of the AWA decision for internal and external auditors and management. It examines issues related to contributory negligence and contribution. These issues are important in the light of recent discussion about reform of the law concerning "proportional" liability.  相似文献   

11.
There are serious concerns in some Western countries that methods should be found to resolve what is commonly referred to as the auditing profession's liability crisis. A number of legislative-based proposals to limit auditors' liability have been suggested. However, anxiety has been voiced relating to the inherent uncertainties attached to such apparently untested reforms. In this respect it is interesting to note that for more than sixty years the German auditing profession has operated within a regulatory environment in which liability is restricted by a legislatively sanctioned universal cap. We document the German experience and consider whether their form of liability restricting mechanism can provide a contribution to the debate concerning the efficacy of proposals to reform auditor liability elsewhere. We draw attention to the fact that at this time when the auditing professions in other countries are campaigning for reductions in liability exposure, it is interesting to observe that the German auditing profession has recently campaigned for increases in exposure. We use this and related events to suggest that the German experience illustrates that it is unlikely that the liability crisis can be resolved by simply changing the legal basis upon which financial penalties for auditors are assessed. We argue that a necessary precursor to a redesign of penalty mechanisms is a need to obtain measured consensus concerning identification of the constituency of claimants that should have rights to pursue auditors in the courts. Such an identification process needs to be firmly based within a model of corporate governance which reflects what can reasonably be expected from and provided by the auditing profession. In this respect we support the application of the intermediate form of corporate governance which until relatively recently characterized the German system. Within this system auditors were ascribed a less influential role than was envisaged in Anglo-American traditions. This arose since they acted principally as information agents to an influential supervisory board rather than as shareholders' representatives.  相似文献   

12.
This study provides evidence on how audit firms' decisions to use offshore (outsourced) auditors or to assign on-site (local) auditors extensive overtime affect judges' evaluation of auditor legal liability I conduct a behavioral experiment in which actual judges responded to a hypothetical audit lawsuit. The results suggest auditors may be penalized during the litigation process depending on the extent of overtime or off-shoring and judges' attitude toward the public accounting profession. Judges with a positive attitude toward public accounting assessed more liability for an audit firm that used offshore (outsourced) auditors than for the use of extensive overtime for on-site auditors or a control condition. However, judges with a negative attitude toward the auditing profession assessed higher liability for auditors except when on-site auditors bore significant overtime in the final weeks of the audit.  相似文献   

13.
This paper examines whether an appropriate legal system, which is a combination of a legal regime and a damage apportionment rule, effectively enhances auditor independence. Economic and psychological hypotheses derived from a one-period game model in which the auditor may commit either a technical audit failure (resulting from the auditor’s inability to detect true output given a lack of audit effort) or an independence audit failure (resulting from the auditor’s intentional misreporting on false output) are tested. Three major findings are documented. First, auditor independence affects firm investment, which in turn affects audit effort. Under this strategic dependence, no single legal system can provoke audit effort, improve auditor independence, and encourage firm investment simultaneously. To enhance auditor independence and motivate investment, a legal system consisting of both a strict regime and a proportionate rule is preferred. Second, the strict regime induces more auditor independence than the negligence regime, while the proportionate rule induces higher audit effort than the joint-and-several rule. Finally, auditors’ moral reasoning and penalty for misreporting are both positively associated with their independence. In addition, the effect of moral reasoning on auditor independence diminishes as the level of penalty increases. These two results hold only when the legal systems that auditors face are considered.  相似文献   

14.
15.
The International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) recently finalised several significant and controversial reforms of the audit reporting model. The reforms are in response to long‐standing criticisms about the form and content of the existing audit report. This study critically examines the current audit report reforms and their implications. In particular, we investigate the perceptions of prominent stakeholders in respect of these reforms and then evaluate the implications of the reforms on the informational value of the audit report, audit quality and audit costs. The findings suggest that the changes to the audit report are of significant informational value to users, while the implications for audit quality are unclear. Indeed, the changes would increase audit costs and potentially the legal liability of auditors. This appraisal is timely given the efforts made by the IAASB in commissioning these reforms to enhance the relevance and informational value of the audit report.  相似文献   

16.
JOHN E. McENROE 《Abacus》1993,29(2):160-178
The process by which auditing standards are established in the United States was criticized by the late Senator Metcalf (1977) and more recently by the Treadway Commission (1987). Their allegations involving the Auditing Standards Board (ASB) encompass many perceived deficiencies, ranging from the charge that the large accounting firms dominate the standard-setting process, to the notion that the auditing standards currently promulgated do not address emerging policy issues on a timely basis. However, despite these criticisms, there is a paucity of empirical research involving the actual formulation of auditing standards in the United States. Accordingly, this research investigates certain behavioural facets involving the evolution of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 54, Illegal Acts by Clients , along certain dimensions, including audit-firm size. Specifically, the paper examines reactions to the exposure draft of SAS 54 and the extent to which written suggestions were incorporated into the final standard. The results do not support the proposition that either audit firm size or an employee's membership on the ASB has a significant impact on achieving the integration of a respondent's comments into the final audit statement.  相似文献   

17.
本文分析了我国签字注册会计师强制轮换制度对审计质量的影响,并检验了影响制度效果的主要因素。研究发现,强制轮换制度总体上没有显著提高审计质量,其原因一是强制轮换制度执行中存在规避行为,导致审计师变更频繁和过渡审计师的出现,其对应审计质量较低;二是强制轮换制度实施后,新任审计师的平均专业胜任能力下降,导致审计质量下降。而具有原客户审计经验的审计师在被强制轮换后重新审计该客户的审计质量较高,这能在一定程度上抑制上市公司审计质量的整体下滑。本文的发现对进一步完善签字注册会计师强制轮换制度有较好的参考意义。  相似文献   

18.
This paper traces the establishment of the reconstituted Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) as a result of the CLERP (Audit Reform and Corporate Disclosure) Act 2004, and its progress in developing auditing standards that are "in the public interest". The paper canvasses the composition of the AUASB, its transparency and due process, its relationship with the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and the Financial Reporting Council, and its resourcing and attitude to researching issues of importance in auditing. The paper discusses methods that might be used to provide evidence of the efficacy of the reforms to auditing standard-setting.  相似文献   

19.
We incorporate the concept of evidentiary standard to the analysis of the negligence rule under liability insurance and court errors. When the postaccident evidence is privately contractible and not too noisy, efficiency is achieved by both strict liability and a negligence rule with appropriate due care and evidentiary standards. When the evidence is not directly contractible, trial outcomes represent useful contractible information for the risk‐incentives tradeoff in the liability insurance policy. Strict liability is then inefficient and dominated by the negligence rule. The negligence rule can itself be improved upon by decoupling damages from the harm suffered by the victim.  相似文献   

20.
There have been fundamental shifts in the legal liabilities of auditors in the twentieth century. The article analyses myriad cases. It reveals that case rulings in the later decades moderated previous decisions that had resulted in an expansion of the scope of auditor liability. It shows that there has been a convergence in approach within Commonwealth nations in respect of auditor liability for negligent misstatements. Numerous factors are identified that explain, first the expansion of auditor liability in the early to middle decades of the twentieth century, and also its subsequent reversal in latter decades. The article concludes by arguing that the current positions not likely to remain. The decisions of the courts are shown to be the products of continual struggle to balance the respective rights and interests of auditors, investors (both current and prospective) and the wider community.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号