Costs and benefits of auditors' disclosure of critical audit matters: Initial evidence from the United States

In an effort to make audit reports more informative to financial statement users, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) requires an expanded audit report in which auditors are required to disclose critical audit matters (CAMs). The new standard (AS 3101) became effective for audits of financial statements of large accelerated filers for fiscal years ending on or after June 30, 2019. Using a sample of annual reports of large accelerated filers with and without CAM disclosures, we examine the costs and benefits of the mandatory disclosure of CAMs in auditors' reports. Our evidence suggests that compared to auditor reports reporting no CAMs, the presence of a single CAM disclosure in the auditor's report provides incremental information to equity investors without a significant increase in audit costs. However, using the benchmark of a single CAM disclosure, multiple CAMs in an auditor's report results in higher audit fees and longer audit delays.     

An Empirical Investigation of the Influence of Qualitative Risk Factors on Canadian Auditors’ Determination of Performance Materiality*

This paper presents the results of a field experiment that tested the effects of various qualitative risk factors suggested by auditing standards and prior literature on practicing Canadian auditors’ estimates of performance materiality, a concept introduced by Canadian Auditing Standard (CAS) 320, in the audit of specific accounts in a financial statement audit. Ninety‐four practicing auditors responded to four scenarios and, based on “good” and “bad” versions of six qualitative risk factors, revised or not, as they deemed appropriate, initially established performance materiality for the audit of four different transaction streams/account balances. For all four scenarios, on average, the auditors revised, to a statistically significant degree, performance materiality, downward on the basis of “bad” information and upward on the basis of “good” information. Different combinations of transaction streams/accounts and risk factors were associated with different magnitudes of revision. However, at the level of individual participants, responses were quite varied. Some participants did not revise performance materiality and some even stated that performance materiality should not be revised based on risk‐related information. It may be that the concept of performance materiality as promulgated in CAS 320 and the relationship between overall materiality, performance materiality, and risk requires clarification to provide appropriate guidance for auditors to make performance materiality judgments.     

An empirical study of audit expectation-performance gap: The case of Libya

The purpose of this research is to empirically examine the causes of the audit expectation gap in Libya. The study builds on the frameworks developed by Porter (1993) and Porter & Gowthorpe (2004) to investigate the influence of the audit expectation gap to the auditing profession in the case of Libya. The data was collected through a questionnaire survey randomly selected members of four broad interest groups including auditors, auditees and audit beneficiaries both inside and outside the financial community were followed by in-depth interviews. A total of 988 questionnaires were distributed from which 431 questionnaires with usable responses were received from four groups. The overall usable response rate was 44%, ranging from 47% for the financial community audit beneficiaries to 41% for the auditors group. The findings of the study revealed that there exists audit expectation-performance gap and that the gap is as result of the following factors in different levels of percentages. Deficiency standards and deficient performance gaps constitute 49% and 15%, respectively, of the audit expectation-performance gap. The audit expectation-performance gap derives from society having unreasonable expectations of auditor’s significant proportion 36% of the gap. As result of the following interviews demonstrated that the objectives of auditing are not as clear to the financial statement users as they are to the auditors and the financial statement preparers in Libyan business environment. Further, we observe that reducing the expectations gap is to improve knowledge responsibilities between the auditors and user groups and understanding of the auditor’s role and responsibilities through the provision of auditing illegal acts.     

An Empirical Investigation of the Interface Between Internal and External Auditors

Professional standards place specific responsibilities on auditors for the discovery of material mis-statements in reports of corporate financial performance. Certain factors have been shown to increase the likelihood of fraudulent financial reporting. One warning sign is the potentially pervasive effect of a weak internal control environment consistent with a weak internal audit group. This study investigates the impact of internal audit department quality differences on auditors ‘willingness to place reliance on the work performed by internal auditors. The study also gives consideration to auditors’ recent experiences with material errors and irregularities and examines the influence of two previously untested individual auditor differences on audit judgment decisions: (1) conflict management style and (2) perception of internal/external auditor communication barriers. The results indicate that auditors attend to internal audit department quality differences and that individual auditor differences exhibit significant influence over auditor judgments. Implications for audit practice are considered and directions for future research are suggested.     

The effect of fair disclosure regulation on timeliness and informativeness of earnings announcements

This paper examines the effect of Korea’s fair disclosure regulation on the timeliness and informativeness of earnings announcements. The present regulation for Korean listed firms requires that if a company’s sales revenue, operating income (or loss) and net income (or loss) have changed by over 30% compared to the prior year, the firm must disclose this information through a preliminary financial report (PFR) even before the company is audited by external auditors. To analyze the effects of this policy, we first investigate the timeliness of preliminary financial report disclosures. We examine the extent to which Korean listed companies actually comply with the requirement for prompt notification of information concerning material changes in financial performance. Second, we investigate the informativeness of preliminary financial reports by analyzing differential stock market reactions to different timings of preliminary financial report disclosures. Our empirical results reveal that more than half of our sample firms release their preliminary financial reports after external audits are completed, thereby potentially invalidating the effectiveness of the regulation. In addition, we find that preliminary financial reports have information value only if they are disclosed prior to annual audit report dates. This finding supports the notion that timeliness increases the informativeness of preliminary financial report disclosure by curbing insiders’ ability to potentially profit from their information advantage.     

Disclosure Of Audit Committees by Public Companies in Australia 1988–1990

The existence of audit committees in public companies can improve the quality of the financial reporting process, aid the actual and perceived independence of both the internal and external auditors, and improve financial statement users' confidence in the quality of the information. These benefits will be enhanced by disclosure of audit committees in the financial statements. This study examined the incidence and form of the disclosure of audit committees in annual reports by major Australian public companies over the period 1988–1990. The results showed that disclosures by larger companies increased during this time. Rates of disclosure varied considerably depending on the auditor and was positively associated with the size of the organisation. Companies with audit committees are encouraged to consider enhanced methods of disclosure such as those outlined in AUP 31 Communication with an Audit Committee.     

The association between municipal disclosure practices and audit quality

This study examines the impact of two proxies for audit quality on a model of public sector disclosure for a sample of municipal governments. I argue that more complete disclosures enhance the reputation of an independent auditing firm and that independent auditors, seeking to maintain a reputation of higher quality, positively influence the level of financial disclosures appearing in their clients' financial statements.Specifically, a variable indicating the presence of a (then) Big Eight auditor and regression residuals from a model of audit fees were used as surrogates of audit quality. These were included in a model designed to explain variation in an index representing financial disclosures required under generally accepted accounting principles for local governments. The results provide evidence in support of the hypothesized relationship between audit quality and disclosure.     

A parsimonious model to forecast financial distress,based on audit evidence

This paper provides evidence that audit reports convey relevant evidence for inferring the existence of underlying, unrevealed, financial imbalances. Unlike previous works, which studied US listed-firms bankruptcy, our research deals with Spanish non-financial SMEs under financial stress. Our results indicate that the audit of distressed SMEs has several distinctive features: higher auditor rotation, more qualified reports, and non-compliance with deadlines to approve and file the annual financial statements. We use this evidence to build and test a parsimonious and reliable forecast model. Several implications for auditors’ independence, information quality, and failure forecast are discussed.     

The materiality of country-specific geographic segment disclosures

SFAS 131 (1997) substantially changed geographic segment reporting in the United States by requiring disclosures to be made by individual foreign country when operations in an individual country are material. Although SFAS 14 (1976) provided a quantitative threshold for determining separately reportable segments, SFAS 131 provides no guidance for determining when operations in an individual country are material. In SAB 99 (1999), the SEC reminds firms that exclusive reliance on quantitative benchmarks to assess materiality is inappropriate; qualitative factors also should be considered.Using financial analysts as subjects, we conduct an experiment to examine two possible benchmarks for determining the materiality of operations in an individual foreign country: (1) the percent of total operations located in an individual country (a quantitative benchmark) and (2) the level of risk associated with the country in which the operations are located (a qualitative benchmark). The results indicate that across two regions both the magnitude of operations and the level of country risk significantly affect financial analysts’ judgments about firm risk. However, the effect that the magnitude of specific country operations has on risk assessment does not apply to countries of relatively high and relatively low risk. These results suggest that, although materiality is often evaluated in quantitative terms, the qualitative criterion of country risk may dominate in importance.     

Alternative perspectives to deal with auditors’ agency problem

Auditors’ agency problem stems from the mechanism according to which auditors (the agents) are being appointed to companies and paid for their services by the managements they audit (the principals). This mechanism creates an inherent conflict of interests for auditors. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was enacted as part of the efforts to strengthen auditors’ independence and mitigate the effect managements have on their auditors. However, the Act has been, and still is criticized for deficiencies embedded in its provisions. This paper presents an alternative regulatory framework for auditors based on analysis of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act provisions related to auditors and of other perspectives to deal with auditors’ agency problem from previous studies. The proposed framework aims to decrease the ability and incentives of both managements and auditors to collaborate in financial statement fraud. Under the premise that auditors need to function in a framework that discourages immoral behavior, the main provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act related to auditors’ independence are addressed, requiring audit-firm rotation instead of audit-partner rotation, and expending the time-window between provision of audit and non-audit services. In addition, it is proposed that retiring audit firms accompany “entering” audit firms until completion of the first annual financial statement audit and that audit fees will be scrutinized by the SEC.     

Processes of auditability in sustainability assurance – the case of materiality construction

This study examines how financial audit-styled concepts such as materiality are transferred to non-financial audit arenas. Drawing on a case study of assurors working within a Big 4 professional services firm, we uncover a number of interrelated features of the materiality determination and assessment process within sustainability assurance (assurance on sustainability reports). We illustrate how assuror flexibility, underpinned by assuror intuition, is central to uncovering assurance technologies deemed capable of addressing the materiality of ambiguous sustainability data. Assurors with no financial audit background retrospectively rationalise their intuition using the assumed authority of structured financial audit methodologies. This facilitates the tentative translation of financial audit knowledge to the sustainability assurance domain. Collaborative, holistic decision-making processes inform the assurors’ continual construction of materiality and are characterised by alliances of (accountant and non-accountant) ‘expert’ assurors merging formal and tacit knowledge. These alliances seek social cohesion within sustainability assurance teams in order to establish a social consensus among assurors around the materiality determination and assessment process. Our analysis develops and extends Power’s theorisation of how new areas are made auditable and advances our understanding of the more practical aspects of non-financial assurance services offered by Big 4 professional services firms.     

The Small Company Audit Qualification: A Preliminary Investigation

In recent years there has been much debate in the UK regarding the value and feasibility of the small company audit. The lack of formal internal control systems and the application of universal auditing standards has given rise to the use of a special ‘Small Company (Example 6) Audit Qualification’. However, doubts concerning the uniformity of practice between auditors has created difficulties for users in interpreting its meaning. This paper examines the extent to which a number of financial, organisational and auditor variables are able to explain the receipt of a ‘Small Company Audit Qualification’. The main empirical findings, using multivariate logistic analysis on a sample of 540 small company reports, are that companies audited by large audit practices, companies which had a prior year qualification, a secured loan, declining earnings, large audit lags and few non-director shareholders were more likely to receive an audit qualification than other companies.     

Accountability and auditors’ materiality judgments: The effects of differential pressure strength on conservatism,variability, and effort

This study investigates the effects of differential accountability pressure strength on auditors’ materiality judgments. We evaluate whether incremental levels of accountability (i.e., review, justification, feedback) increase judgment conservatism, decreases judgment variability, and increases effort. One hundred sixty auditors participated in a between-subjects experiment that included a planning materiality task and a proposed audit adjustment materiality task. As predicted, auditors under higher levels of accountability pressure (i.e., justification, feedback) provided more conservative materiality judgments and had less judgment variability than auditors under lower levels of pressure (i.e., review, anonymity). The results also indicate that accountability strength was positively related to the amount of time spent on the task, explanation length, and consideration of qualitative materiality factors. Finally, the results show that use of a planning materiality decision aid influenced the accountability effects for the planning materiality judgment. These judgments were more conservative and less variable when the planning materiality decision aid was available. We consider implications for research, practice, and policy in the context of the study’s limitations.     

Disclosure of fair value measurement in goodwill impairment test and audit fees

Recent increases in the occurrence and magnitude of goodwill impairment charges highlight the increasing importance of the role of the auditor in goodwill accounting. This study examines the association between disclosures about the fair value measurement of goodwill and audit fees. We find that goodwill-related disclosures are positively related to audit fees, consistent with the idea that auditors increase their audit efforts to mitigate potential reputational and litigation losses (“audit risk effect”). Additionally, our results indicate that the information asymmetry and investor scrutiny moderate the association between goodwill-related disclosures and audit fees. One possible explanation is that auditors take goodwill-related disclosures as a signal of truthful goodwill accounting and this “signaling effect” partially offsets the “audit risk effect” of goodwill-related disclosures when information asymmetry or investor scrutiny is perceived as high.     

Reply to comments on “The association between European materiality estimates and client integrity, culture, and litigation”

The research examines the differences in materiality estimates for a sample of 181 experienced auditors from Big-Six firms located in Denmark, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Sweden, The Netherlands, and the UK. We asked each auditor to estimate materiality for a client whose integrity his/her firm rated as either high or low [Ir. Account. Rev. 1 (1994) 1.]. The research found that low client-integrity ratings resulted in lower materiality estimates for the European auditors. The research also indicates that as the cultural construct of Uncertainty Avoidance [Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences. Beverly Hills: Sage.] increased, materiality estimates also increased. Although one might have anticipated that materiality would decrease with the level of litigation, it, in fact, increased. We also compared the data from the western European countries with the estimates from a group of 83 auditors from the same Big-Six firms located in the United States.¹     

Disclosure strategies among S&P 500 firms: Evidence on the disclosure of non-GAAP financial measures and financial statements in earnings press releases

This paper examines the prominence of non-GAAP financial measures in press releases, testing whether managers emphasize these adjusted performance measures relative to GAAP numbers in four different settings where their disclosure helps managers reach strategic earnings benchmarks on a pro forma basis when they would otherwise fall short using GAAP numbers. Moreover, this research investigates the information content of disclosures reconciling non-GAAP to GAAP earnings (and other financial statements). The data is hand collected from quarterly earnings press releases of a sample of S&P 500 firms during the 2001–2003 period. In this particular sample, the disclosure of non-GAAP financial measures is frequent. The results suggest that managers strategically give more prominence to non-GAAP measures than to GAAP figures when the GAAP earnings number falls short of a benchmark but the non-GAAP earnings number does not. This disclosure strategy may influence the perception of the firm's financial results. Furthermore, the results suggest that both the reconciliation and the non-GAAP income statement contain information useful for users.     

The Effect of IPO Risks on Auditors’ Decisions: Auditor Designation Case

This study examines the effect of audit risks in the Korean initial public offering (IPO) market on the designated auditors’ decisions. The Korean External Audit Act requires firms to switch from incumbent to new auditors designated by the Securities and Futures Commission after the firm announces a future IPO. This study shows the effects of audit risks by examining if the quality of reported earnings and audit fees significantly differs between IPO‐eligible and IPO‐ineligible firms. Empirical tests first show that discretionary accruals are significantly lower for IPO‐ineligible firms than for IPO‐eligible firms in both the IPO designation period and the following review period. We interpret this result to mean that designated auditors evaluate the IPO‐ineligible (and eventually failed) firms’ listing possibility as low. Second, audit fees are higher for IPO‐ineligible firms in the auditor designation period. This reflects the fact that designated auditors are exposed to future audit risks associated with firms’ post‐IPO financial market troubles if IPO‐ineligible firms attempt to go public. Our study contributes to IPO‐related research by showing the effects of auditors’ risk evaluation on discretionary accruals and audit fees. This study also contributes to accounting policymaking regarding auditor independence.     

The effect of external audits of internal control over financial reporting on financial reporting for clients of Big 4, Second-tier,and small audit firms

The external audit of internal control over financial reporting (ICFR) is a very expensive and contentious aspect of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act (SOX). Larger public firms were first required to file a management report on and have an external audit of ICFR in 2004. Smaller public firms were first required to file a management report on ICFR in 2007 but are exempt from the audit requirement. Whereas most related prior research investigates the combined effect of management and auditor reports on financial reporting, this study examines the distinct effect of auditor reports on reporting quality. For companies audited by small auditors, we find evidence that financial reporting quality improves with an auditor report on ICFR. We find no evidence that auditor ICFR reports improve reporting quality for clients of Big 4 or Second-tier audit firms. Our study adds to the debate on the applicability of SOX Section 404 to smaller firms.