LITIGATION RISK FOR AUDITORS AND THE RISK SOCIETY

The auditing industry has mounted a global campaign to reduce its liability. In Canada, it is attempting to change from a doctrine of joint and several liability to proportionate liability, to have the Federal government legislate a statutory cap on liability, or to have the Provincial governments approve the establishment of Limited Liability Partnerships. These initiatives are consistent with the proposals of the CPA firms in the US and the CA firms in the UK. This cross-national trend suggests that a global theory of society is needed to analyze the consequences of audit risk. This paper uses the “risk society” model proposed by Beck to understand why the audit industry focuses on reducing exposure to liability, rather than on improving the quality of audits. Beck's theory of “reflexive modernization” provides an analysis of the so-called “liability crisis” that attempts to overcome the institutional construction offered by the auditing industry. The paper recognizes that it is very difficult for observers outside of the large auditing firms to judge the real risks of audits and to develop alternative public policy options. Ideally, we should be able to evaluate litigation in a modern audit environment. However, the audit firms are not required to disclose sufficient information about their costs to determine the real impact. Meanwhile, professional groups are lobbying hard for changes that will reduce auditors risk without addressing the root causes of audit failures.