Does Auditor 'Commentary' in Unqualified Audit Reports Reflect Financial Misstatement Risk?

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Czerney ◽  
Jaime J. Schmidt ◽  
Anne Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Financial Misstatement ◽  
Audit Reports

Does Auditor Explanatory Language in Unqualified Audit Reports Indicate Increased Financial Misstatement Risk?

2014 ◽  
Vol 89 (6) ◽  
pp. 2115-2149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Czerney ◽  
Jaime J. Schmidt ◽  
Anne M. Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Financial Statements ◽  
Financial Statement ◽  
Financial Reporting Quality ◽  
Accounting Principles ◽  
Client Relationship ◽  
Financial Misstatement ◽  
Audit Reports

ABSTRACT According to auditing standards, explanatory language added at the auditor's discretion to unqualified audit reports should not indicate increased financial misstatement risk. However, an auditor is unlikely to add language that would strain the auditor-client relationship absent concerns about the client's financial statements. Using a sample of 30,825 financial statements issued with unqualified audit opinions during 2000–2009, we find that financial statements with audit reports containing explanatory language are significantly more likely to be subsequently restated than financial statements without such language. We find that this positive association is driven by language that references the division of responsibility for performance of the audit, adoption of new accounting principles, and previous restatements. In addition, we find that (1) “emphasis of matter” language that discusses mergers, related-party transactions, and management's use of estimates predicts restatements related to these matters, and that (2) the financial statement accounts noted in the explanatory language typically correspond to the accounts subsequently restated. In sum, our results suggest that present-day audit reports communicate some information about financial reporting quality.

Does the use of honorific appellations in audit reports connote higher financial misstatement risk? Evidence from China

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 154-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Chen ◽  
Xingqiang Du ◽  
Shaojuan Lai ◽  
Mary Ma
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Auditor Independence ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Public Firms ◽  
Financial Misstatements ◽  
Financial Misstatement ◽  
Chinese Auditors ◽  
Audit Reports

Purpose From the sociolinguistic perspective, the purpose of this paper is to examine whether the honorific and actual-name appellations that Chinese auditors use to address clients in audit reports connote differential financial misstatement risk. Specifically, the authors hypothesize that auditors’ use of honorifics signals their inferior social status relative to their clients, thereby leading to compromised auditor independence, lower audit quality, and higher financial misstatement risk. Design/methodology/approach The authors use a sample of manually coded appellation data from audit reports of Chinese public firms between 2003 and 2012 to conduct the research. Findings The authors find significantly greater financial misstatements, both in terms of likelihoods and magnitudes, for companies addressed by honorifics than for those addressed by actual names. Moreover, compared to auditors’ consistent honorific usage, discretionary honorific usage has a stronger positive association with misstatements. The authors further show that the positive association between honorific usage and client misstatement risk weakens when the audit firm is a Top 10 accounting firms in China, is an industry specialist, is formed as a partnership, or resides in a more concentrated audit market. Originality/value This study contributes to the sociolinguistics literature in accounting and provides evidence supporting the reform proposed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board to enhance the usefulness of audit reporting.

Timeliness of Tunisian Audit Reports: An Empirical Investigation based on Ownership and Partnership Visions

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mondher Fakhfakh
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Empirical Investigation ◽  
Financial Statements ◽  
Qualitative Feature ◽  
Transmission Delays ◽  
Emerging Country ◽  
Audit Reports ◽  
Audit Information

Timeliness of audit reports is a qualitative feature that enhances the usefulness of audited financial statements. As an emerging country, Tunisia has modernized its accounting legislation to enhance the quality of financial reporting. This legislation encourages independent auditors to optimize the transmission delays of audit reports. The authorities assume that the satisfaction of stakeholders is secured by regulating disclosure of audit reports. Our research analyses the date of issue of Tunisian audit reports and timeliness of audit information for shareholders and all users of financial statements (stakeholders). This paper provides new empirical evidence about the timeliness of audit reports in Tunisia. It holds two dates that influence the needs of users of financial statements: the date of signature of the auditors and the date of publication of the audit reports in the financial bulletin. The same article discusses the variability of the timeliness of audit reports and the factors that explain the delay information.

How a Shared Auditor Affects Firm-Pair Comparability: Implications of Both Firm and Individual Audit Styles

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 133-160
Author(s):  
Lili Jiu ◽  
Bin Liu ◽  
Yuanyuan Liu
Keyword(s):  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Financial Statement ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Audit Process ◽  
Personal Style ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Audit Reports ◽  
Practical Implications

SUMMARY In this study, we examine the roles of audit firms and individual auditors in improving financial statement comparability. We conduct the study in the Chinese setting, in which the identities of signing auditors are revealed in audit reports and accounting standards are principle based. After controlling for audit firm style, we find that firm pairs with shared signing auditors have incrementally greater comparability. Our results indicate that individual auditors exhibit their own personal style in implementing accounting standards and exercising professional judgment in the audit process. Overall, our study underscores the association between individual auditors and comparability, with practical implications for market participants and policymakers.

The Effect of Misstatements on Decisions of Financial Statement Users: An Experimental Investigation of Auditor Materiality Thresholds

2002 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brad Tuttle ◽  
Maribeth Coller ◽  
R. David Plumlee
Keyword(s):  
Economic Condition ◽  
Accounting Information ◽  
Critical Factor ◽  
Financial Statement ◽  
Asset Markets ◽  
Market Prices ◽  
Financial Misstatements ◽  
Experimental Asset Markets ◽  
Financial Misstatement ◽  
Materiality Thresholds

Auditors are faced with the dilemma of inferring materiality based, in part, on whether a given level of financial misstatement will affect the decisions of statement users. Misstatements in accounting information that are below the materiality threshold are not expected to change users' assessments of a company's economic condition. While the auditing profession accepts materiality in concept, its application in practice is more controversial. In certain settings, the nature of a misstatement, such as changing a small profit into a loss, may affect an auditor's materiality judgment. However, in many cases the magnitude of the misstatement is a critical factor in judging materiality. We focus solely on the issue of magnitude and examine whether financial misstatements that are at or below commonly applied materiality thresholds result in market prices that differ from those resulting from correctly stated information. We conduct a series of 12 experimental asset markets each consisting of 12 independent three-minute trading periods with six traders in each market. We then compare prices for companies generated by markets that are provided either correctly stated information, information containing misstatements that would typically be considered immaterial, or information containing material misstatements. Results indicate that undisclosed misstatements within materiality thresholds that are consistent with current audit practice do not affect market prices, while misstatements well above these thresholds do.

Market Reactions to a High-Quality Auditor and Managerial Preference for Audit Quality

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 131-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick J. Hurley ◽  
Brian W. Mayhew
Keyword(s):  
Loss Aversion ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Quality Competition ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Market Reactions ◽  
Comprehensive Theory ◽  
Audit Reports ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Quality Theory

SUMMARY We insert an automated high-quality (HQ) auditor into established experimental audit markets to test the impact of high-quality competition on other auditors' supply of and managers' demand for audit quality. Theory predicts that managers will demand high levels of audit quality to avoid investors' price-protecting behavior. This demand should result in the HQ auditor dominating the market and increase other auditors' audit quality provision to compete with the HQ auditor. However, we find that the HQ auditor does not dominate the market—despite holding audit costs constant and investors placing a premium on HQ auditor reports. We also find that adding an HQ auditor results in other auditors lowering audit quality. Additional analyses indicate some managers demand lower audit quality to avoid negative audit reports, consistent with loss aversion as a potential explanation. Our findings indicate a need to develop a more comprehensive theory of the demand for auditing. Data Availability: The laboratory market data used in this study are available from the authors upon request.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document