Audit Standards and Auditor Liability: A Theoretical Model

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.     

Legal systems and auditor independence

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.     

审计失败中的审计责任认定与监管倾向:经验分析

监管者对审计责任的认定倾向是审计执业环境的重要构成。本文选取1999—2006年间中国证券市场发生的72例财务报表审计失败进行观测,发现:(1)在监管实践较早期间(1999—2002年间)的审计失败样本观测中,88.2%的审计师遭到处罚;而2003—2006年间的审计失败观测中仅有23.6%的审计师遭到处罚;(2)在控制了审计失败观测的公司受处罚严厉度、舞弊期跨度、舞弊期间审计意见类型以及审计师规模后,仍能检测到近年来审计责任认定的显著缓和趋势;(3)即使对于审计师受到处罚的审计失败观测,在1999—2002年间平均82.7%的虚假陈述事项需要由审计师承担审计责任,而在2003—2006年间仅有平均41.2%的虚假陈述事项须由审计师承担责任。综上,监管机构在近年来对会计师事务所或签字注册会计师的审计责任认定显著趋于缓和与稳健;审计执业环境的这种变化趋势亦可为未来监管和司法实践中的审计责任界定提供有益的借鉴。     

AUDITOR PREFERENCES FOR LIABILITY LIMITATION

Debate over statutorily limiting auditor civil liability has implicitly assumed auditors are homogeneous in their preferences for capping liability. This study examines the preferences of auditors for limiting auditor liability and investigates reasons for the preferences. The study uses an Australian setting in which there has been a persistent debate for a decade or more over regulatory intervention in this area. The study provides a background to the debate over this issue and addresses the effects of two factors suggested by the extant literature, namely auditor size and the business risk of an auditor's client portfolio. These factors are argued to affect the expected costs of litigation facing auditors and therefore their preferences on capping liability. Using the submissions by audit firms on an Australian Companies and Securities Law Review Committee Discussion Paper on limiting auditor liability, the study finds larger audit firms that have greater capacities to lobby and greater expected costs of litigation from unlimited liability than smaller firms, dominate the respondents on the Paper and tend to be more supportive of liability limitation than smaller audit firms. Within the array of possible methods of capping liability canvassed by the Discussion Paper, the study documents evidence of diversity in preferences among audit firms. Larger audit firm size is associated with a preference for a group of methods that provides such firms with opportunities to benefit from the capping at the expense of the smaller audit firms. The method most preferred by the larger audit firms is the multiple of fee with a prescribed minimum. Perhaps not surprisingly, this is also the preferred method of the professional accounting bodies in Australia. As to the effect of the riskiness of the client portfolio on preferences for methods of limiting liability, the study finds that higher business risk in an auditor's portfolio is associated with a preference for methods that give greater control over their liability exposure. The study has implications for the impact of regulation of capping liability on competition in the audit services market.     

An Analysis of Potential Legal Liability Incurred Through Audit Expert Systems

The introduction of expert systems technology into the audit environment has opened a new avenue of auditor legal liability. This paper examines the potential impact expert systems will have on auditor liability. The presentation of this new avenue of auditors' legal liability explores both the potential for litigation under failure of auditor/expert system collaboration to yield prudent decisions and the failure to use an available expert system. The risks evolving from failure to use an available expert system include the possibility that the system could be used against the auditor in the courtroom. While case law will ultimately determine the bounds of this liability, this paper acquaints the reader with the important legal issues involved and the varied outcomes that could emerge. It should also be noted that while the specific example presented in this paper relates to the audit profession, the legal concepts are of equivalent concern to other professions enduring broad implementation of expert systems.     

Consulting revenue sharing,auditor effort and independence,and the regulation of auditor compensation

The joint provision of audit and non-audit services by audit firms to their audit clients has posed a threat to auditor independence. To mitigate the independence problem, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a regulation (SEC, 2003) that prohibits audit partners from receiving compensation for the sale of non-audit services to their audit clients. This study examines the effects of this regulatory change on the effort and reporting decisions of audit partners. We show that partners in an audit firm strategically change the firm’s liability-sharing rule. As a consequence, the regulation restores truthful reporting but has an undesirable negative effect on audit effort. The effect of the regulation on the welfare of the economy (defined as the total payoff to both audit firms and their clients) hinges on the tradeoff between the benefit of the regulation, which is derived from the inducement of truthful reporting, and the cost of the regulation, which results from less diligent audit work. We show that the regulation is more likely to increase the welfare in a strong legal regime (where the legal liability cost of auditor litigation is high) than in a weak legal regime.     

Corporate director liability and monitoring preferences

An important issue in the regulation of corporate behavior is its impact on the monitoring configuration selected by top management. In this article, we provide evidence consistent with the notion that the recent trend toward audit committee formation, and the movement toward Big-Eight auditors, are responses to increased legal exposure of the board of directors, notably stemming from the passage of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977. The costs associated with changes in monitoring configurations are also considered. In particular, it is argued that auditor assistance can substantially reduce the cost of audit committee formation. Because external auditors may have differential incentives to support audit committee formation, a hypothesis linking auditor identity and audit committee formation is offered. Recent auditor changes and audit committee formations of American Stock Exchange companies are examined to provide positive evidence for the theory. The data reveal a clear trend to form audit committees, and a movement to Big-Eight auditors. Underscoring the importance of auditor involvement, it is shown that audit committees were more likely to be formed given recent selection of a new Big-Eight auditor.     

监管风险、事务所规模与审计质量

我国会计师事务所规模与审计质量之间是否存在正相关关系,现有研究一直存在争议。本文从注册会计师的执业环境出发,对此进行了重新审视。用上市公司实际控制人的控制权与现金流权之差衡量事务所面临的监管风险,研究发现,大事务所只对监管风险较高的客户提供高质量的审计服务。进一步的研究表明,事务所面临的监管环境改善后,大事务所才对所有客户提供高质量的审计服务,审计质量与事务所规模之间的正相关关系不再依赖监管风险而存在。因此,在法律环境相对薄弱的情况下,加强监管是促使会计师事务所提供高质量审计服务的有效机制。     

How Do Various Forms of Auditor Rotation Affect Audit Quality? Evidence from China

The Enron/Arthur Andersen scandal has raised concerns internationally about auditor independence, audit quality, and the need for regulatory action such as mandatory auditor rotation. China's unique institutional features provide a setting in which we can compare comprehensively the various forms of auditor rotation at different levels (partner vs. firm) and in different settings (voluntary vs. mandatory). In addition, institutional conditions vary dramatically across China, which provides us with an opportunity to test whether the development of market and legal institutions affects the impact of rotation on audit quality. We expect that auditors are less (more) constrained by market forces and less (more) self-disciplined to maintain audit quality in regions with less (more) developed market and legal institutions. Therefore, mandatory rotation may play a more (less) important role in less (more) developed regions. Using auditors' propensity to issue a modified audit opinion (MAO) as a proxy for audit quality, we find that firms with mandatory audit partner rotations are associated with a significantly higher likelihood of an MAO than are no-rotation firms. However, this effect is restricted to firms located in less developed regions. We find similar evidence for voluntary audit firm rotation although the significance level is much weaker than for mandatory partner rotation. Other forms of auditor rotations (i.e., mandatory audit firm rotation and voluntary audit partner rotation), have no effect on MAOs.     

Shredded Reputation: The Cost of Audit Failure

In this article we investigate the impact of the Enron audit failure on auditor reputation. Specifically, we examine Arthur Andersen's clients' stock market impact surrounding various dates on which Andersen's audit procedures and independence were under severe scrutiny. On the three days following Andersen's admission that a significant number of documents had been shredded, we find that Andersen's other clients experienced a statistically negative market reaction, suggesting that investors downgraded the quality of the audits performed by Andersen. We also find that audits performed by Andersen's Houston office suffered a more severe decline in abnormal returns on this date. We are not able to show that Andersen's independence was questioned by the amount of non–audit fees charged to its clients.     

New Auditors’ Decisions for Released Firms from the Mandatory Auditor Designation Rule: Evidence From South Korea

This study examines the effect of the mandatory designation rule on audit fees charged and audit hours rendered by auditors for firms released from the mandatory auditor designation rule in the Korean audit market. Under the mandatory auditor designation rule, which took effect in 1991, problematic firms are assigned new auditors by the Financial Supervisory Service. Previous studies suggest that this regulation positively affects the quality of audits by promoting auditor independence. Thus, this study hypothesises that firms that have been subjected to mandatory auditor designation improve the quality of their financial reporting, and that auditors hired after the mandatory designation period account for reduced audit risks when determining audit fees and audit hours. This study shows that audit fees and audit hours of firms released from the mandatory auditor designation rule are lower than those of other initial audit engagements. Taken together, this study's findings reinforce the notion that auditors’ perceptions of changes in audit risk yield corresponding changes in the audit fees they charge and audit hours they render.     

Late for a very important date: financial reporting and audit implications of late 10-K filings

Delays in financial reports often reflect issues related to period-end accounting and audit processes. We investigate the impact of filing delays in connection with auditor characteristics on the quality of financial statements in a sample of firms that filed Form 10-K after the statutory due date. We find that late filing firms are associated with lower financial reporting quality compared to timely filing firms matched by propensity scores, where financial reporting quality is measured by the absolute value of performance-matched discretionary accruals and the probability of a late filing being restated in subsequent periods. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the adverse consequences of late filings can be largely mitigated by having a Big 4 auditor. The differential audit quality stems primarily from Big 4 auditors in large offices and is more pronounced when an auditor may need to draw on additional resources in a limited period.     

How individual auditor characteristics impact the likelihood of audit failure: Evidence from China

Audit failure imposes a severe loss on investors and damages market participants' confidence in financial reporting quality. This study investigates the impacts of individual auditor characteristics on the likelihood of audit failure. Chinese regulators mandate listed firms to disclose the engagement auditors' identity. Furthermore, the information regarding individual auditor characteristics in China is also publicly available. Utilizing this unique setting, we examine the relationship between individual auditor characteristics and the likelihood of audit failure in China during the period from 2000 to 2009. We document that individual auditors with more auditing experience are less likely associated with audit failure. We also find a weaker negative relationship between auditor education level and audit failure. Our study has important implications for both auditors and regulators by shedding lights on the determinants of audit failure and by providing guidance to the human resource management in audit firms.     

The ‘public auditor’: an experiment in effective accountability

Mutual associations were created to provide, through a system of self-help, for the welfare of members of the British working class increasingly separated from the family unit characteristic of an agricultural-based economy. The appropriate method for protecting the resources required at some future date by the poorly off in conditions of need produced a challenge for Parliament. This paper examines the development of the concept of the ‘public auditor’ to describe the individuals considered suitable to undertake the audit of mutual associations, and the increasing statutory emphasis on the desirability of appointing a person ‘carrying on publicly the business of an accountant’ to certify the annual returns made to the Registrar of Friendly Societies. This paper argues that statutory recognition of the accountant as a member of a skilled occupational group represents an important stage in the professionalisation process. This paper shows that the concept of the public auditor was rejected by most mutual associations, while the larger organisations made the voluntary decision to appoint professional accountants to undertake the audit function.     

Non-audit services provided to audit clients,independence of mind and independence in appearance: latest evidence from large UK listed companies

This paper investigates whether the provision of non-audit services (NAS) to audit clients impairs auditor independence of mind and independence in appearance. The main contributions of this paper are in terms of its timeliness with respect to regulatory changes, the simultaneous examination of both forms of auditor independence and the methodological innovation whereby it uses a variable derived from the level of abnormal audit fees as a moderating variable in order to capture the direct impact of the NAS fee level on auditor independence as well as how its influence is moderated by the level of unexpected audit fees. Our results indicate that auditor independence of mind is compromised by the size of NAS fees, particularly for clients who pay below the level of expected audit fee. The stock market perceives that auditor independence is compromised by NAS fees but, at the same time, additional tests indicate that there are benefits that accrue from NAS and, in particular, the relation between return and non-discretionary net income is increasing in NAS fees. The balance of evidence suggests that the European Union is correct in undertaking some reform of the auditing market.     

An empirical investigation of the impact of audit and auditor characteristics on auditor performance

We use a unique and confidential database of 15,392 tax audits performed by the Croatian Tax Administration during the 2002–2006 period to examine the impact of task complexity, auditor experience, and auditor effort on audit performance. We provide external validation to prior experimental and analytical research showing that task complexity decreases while auditor experience and effort increase audit performance. We also extend this literature by examining the roles of task complexity and experience in moderating the impact of the effort on audit performance. We find that task complexity mitigates, while experience enhances the positive relationship between auditor effort and performance. However, we also find that auditor experience reinforces the positive effect of auditor effort on performance to a greater degree when complexity is high. Taken together, our findings provide new evidence on how audit and auditor characteristics impact audit performance, and new insight into how task complexity and auditor experience separately and jointly moderate the impact of auditor effort on performance.     

会计师事务所行业专长与审计质量相关性的检验——来自中国上市公司审计市场的经验证据

行业专长是审计师专业技能的重要构成要素之一。国外大量的研究均证实会计师事务所的行业专长能够提高审计质量,而本文的研究却发现,在中国上市公司审计市场中,就总体而言,会计师事务所行业专长与审计质量负相关。进一步的分析则表明,目前我国会计师事务所总体上独立性相对不高、易受行业内经济依赖度的负面影响和行业专长发展程度较低是造成这种负相关性的主要原因。     

Auditor liability and excess cash holdings: Evidence from audit fees of foreign incorporated firms

Auditors of foreign cross-listed firms face liability arising from the nature of the institutional monitoring framework of legal claims that can potentially be brought against the auditor in both the home country and the US. This paper is the first to document the relationship between auditor liability and auditor pricing of excess cash holdings for foreign firms cross-listed in the US. Our findings indicate that auditors demand a fee premium for foreign incorporated clients with greater excess cash holdings, consistent with auditors recognizing the potential for legal exposure to agency conflict arising from foreign listed US traded clients. Furthermore, we examine aspects of foreign capital market protections, such as disclosure requirements, the strength of legal enforcement, and the strength of shareholder rights to better understand auditor perception of the liability they incur due to the agency costs associated with excess cash holdings. We find that there is a significant positive association between audit fees and excess cash holdings for firms where the country of incorporation permits greater liability of auditors in criminal and civil litigation. In addition, auditors assign higher audit fees to firms holding greater excess cash incorporated in countries with greater required accounting disclosure, stronger legal enforcement and stronger shareholder rights.