scholarly journals Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on PCAOB Release No. 2015-004, Supplemental Request for Comment: Rules to Require Disclosure of Certain Audit Participants on a New PCAOB Form

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. C1-C10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus M. Doxey ◽  
Marshall A. Geiger ◽  
Karl E. Hackenbrack ◽  
Sarah E. Stein
Keyword(s):  
Data Availability ◽  
The Public ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
New Form

SUMMARY On June 30, 2015 the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) issued a supplemental request for comment on its 2013 reproposal to require auditors to disclose in the auditor's report the name of the engagement partner and information about certain other participants in the audit. The supplemental request solicited public comments on an alternative to disclosure of this information in the auditor's report, namely that audit firms report (1) the name of the engagement partner, and (2) the names, locations, and extent of participation of other audit participants in a new form (Form AP) to be filed with the PCAOB within 30 days of the date the auditor's report is first included in a document filed with the SEC. The comment period ended on August 31, 2015. This commentary summarizes the participating committee members' views on the alternatives presented in the supplemental request for comment. Data Availability: The exposure drafts of the proposed and reproposed rules, the supplemental request for comment, and related information are available at: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Pages/Docket029.aspx

scholarly journals Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on PCAOB Release No. 2013-009, Proposed Rule on Improving the Transparency of Audit: Proposed Amendments to PCAOB Auditing Standards to Provide Disclosure in the Auditor's Report of Certain Participants in the Audit

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. C1-C7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Urton L. Anderson ◽  
Lisa Milici Gaynor ◽  
Karl E. Hackenbrack ◽  
Ling Lei Lisic ◽  
Yi-Jing Wu
Keyword(s):  
Data Availability ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
The Public ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Public Accounting Firms ◽  
Auditing Standards

SUMMARY On December 4, 2013 the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) solicited public comments on its reproposed amendments to its standards that would improve the transparency of public company audits. The amendments would require (1) disclosure in the auditor's report of the name of the engagement partner, and (2) disclosure in the auditor's report of the names, locations, and extent of participation of other independent public accounting firms that took part in the audit and the locations and extent of participation of other persons not employed by the auditor that took part in the audit. The comment period initially ended on February 3, 2014, but was subsequently extended to March 17, 2014. This commentary summarizes the contributors' views on these amendments. Data Availability: The exposure drafts of the proposed and reproposed rules and related information are available at: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Pages/Docket029.aspx

Hiring Auditors with a Part II Quality Control Report: An Opportunity for Increased Earnings Management or Lower Audit Fees?

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-93
Author(s):  
Jared Eutsler ◽  
D. Kip Holderness ◽  
Megan M. Jones
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Fiscal Year ◽  
The Public ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Public Company ◽  
General Demand ◽  
Systemic Quality

ABSTRACT The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board's (PCAOB) Part II inspection reports, which disclose systemic quality control issues that auditors fail to remediate, signal poor audit quality for triennially inspected audit firms. Auditors that receive a Part II inspection report typically experience a decrease in clients, which demonstrates a general demand for audit quality. However, some companies hire auditors that receive Part II inspection reports. We examine potential reasons for hiring these audit firms. We find that relative to companies that switch to auditors without Part II reports, companies that switch to auditors with Part II reports have higher discretionary accruals in the first fiscal year after the switch, which indicates lower audit quality and a heightened risk for future fraud. We find no difference in audit fees. Our results suggest that PCAOB Part II inspection reports may signal low-quality auditors to companies that desire low-quality audits. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.

scholarly journals Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on the PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter 029: PCAOB Release No. 2011-007, Improving Transparency Through Disclosure of Engagement Partner and Certain Other Participants in Audits

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. C1-C6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith L. Jones ◽  
Jagadison K. Aier ◽  
Duane M. Brandon ◽  
Tina D. Carpenter ◽  
Paul Caster ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Exposure Period ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Audit Report ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Comment ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Public Accounting Firms ◽  
Auditing Standards

SUMMARY In October 2011, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB or Board) issued a release to solicit public comment on amendments to its standards that would improve the transparency of pubic company audits. The objective of the release was to solicit public comments on a proposed standard that would (1) require registered public accounting firms to disclose the name of the engagement partner in the audit report, (2) amend the Board's Annual Report Form to require registered firms to disclose the name of the engagement partner for each audit report already required to be reported on the form, and (3) require disclosure in the audit report of other independent public accounting firms and other persons that took part in the audit. The PCAOB provided for a 91-day exposure period (from October 11, 2011, to January 9, 2012) for interested parties to examine the release and provide comments. The Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association provided the comments in the letter below to the PCAOB on PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter 029: PCAOB Release No. 2011-007, Improving Transparency Through Disclosure of Engagement Partner and Certain Other Participants in Audits. Data Availability: Information about and access to the release is available at: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Docket029/PCAOB_Release_2011-007.pdf

scholarly journals Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 37: PCAOB Release No. 2011-006, Concept Release on Auditor Independence and Audit Firm Rotation

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. C15-C27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith L. Jones ◽  
Jagadison K. Aier ◽  
Duane M. Brandon ◽  
Tina D. Carpenter ◽  
Lisa M. Gaynor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Exposure Period ◽  
Auditor Independence ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Professional Skepticism ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Comment ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation

SUMMARY In August 2011, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB or Board) issued a concept release to solicit public comment on the potential direction of a proposed standard-setting project on means to enhance auditor independence, objectivity, and professional skepticism. The Concept Release sought comments on and explores in detail the possibility of mandatory audit firm rotation. The PCAOB provided for a 121-day exposure period (from August 16 to December 14, 2011) for interested parties to examine and provide comments on the concept release. The Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association provided the comments in the letter below (dated December 13, 2011) to the PCAOB on PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 37: PCAOB Release No. 2011-006, Concept Release on Auditor Independence and Audit Firm Rotation. Data Availability: Information about and access to the release are available at: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Docket037/Release_2011-006.pdf

scholarly journals Auditor Fees and Going-Concern Reporting Decisions on Bankrupt Companies: Additional Evidence

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. A13-A27 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J. Read
Keyword(s):  
Audit Fees ◽  
Auditor Independence ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Audit Failure ◽  
The Public ◽  
Going Concern ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Reporting Decisions ◽  
Auditor Fees

SUMMARY The recent growth in non-audit services (NAS) at the major audit firms has the attention of auditing regulators. On several occasions recently, board members of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) have indicated that the rise in NAS may place auditor independence at risk (Harris 2014; Tysiac 2014). Impaired independence can result in audit failure, which includes situations when auditors fail to issue going-concern (GC) audit opinions to soon-to-be bankrupt companies. In this paper, I examine the association between the propensity of auditors to issue GC opinions and NAS fees (and audit fees) to 203 bankrupt companies during 2002–2013. In analysis, I find no significant relation between GC decisions and NAS fees and audit fees. My results may interest U.S. regulators, who recently expressed concerns about the threat to auditor independence from the spike in NAS at the major firms. Data Availability: Publicly available from sources identified in the paper.

scholarly journals Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on the PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 34: PCAOB Release No. 2011-003, Concept Release on Possible Revisions to PCAOB Standards Related to Reports on Audited Financial Statements.

2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. C1-C14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph F Brazel ◽  
Paul Caster ◽  
Shawn Davis ◽  
Steven M Glover ◽  
Diane J Janvrin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Exposure Period ◽  
Financial Statements ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Financial Statement ◽  
The Public ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Auditor Reporting

SUMMARY Recently, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB or Board) issued a concept release to solicit public comment on the potential direction of a proposed standard-setting project on the content and form of reports on audited financial statements. The objective of the concept release was to discuss several alternatives for changing the auditor's reporting model that could increase its transparency and relevance to financial statement users, while not compromising audit quality. To that end, the alternatives included (1) a supplement to the auditor's report, in which the auditor would be required to provide additional information about the audit and the company's financial statements (an “Auditor's Discussion and Analysis”), (2) required and expanded use of emphasis paragraphs in the auditor's report, (3) auditor reporting on information outside the financial statements, and (4) clarification of certain language in the auditor's report. The PCAOB provided for a 102-day exposure period (from June 21 to September 30, 2011) for interested parties to examine and provide comments on the conceptual approaches to rulemaking that might complement the application of Section 105(c)(6). The Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association provided the comments in the letter below to the PCAOB on the PCAOB Release No. 2011-003, Concept Release on Possible Revisions to PCAOB Standards Related to Reports on Audited Financial Statements. Data Availability: Information about and access to the release is available at: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Docket034/Concept_Release.pdf

scholarly journals Comments of the Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on PCAOB Reproposed Auditing Standard on Related Parties

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. C23-C29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia Mintchik ◽  
Mikhail Pevzner ◽  
Gregory Sierra
Keyword(s):  
Data Availability ◽  
Public Companies ◽  
The Public ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Auditing Standards

SUMMARY On May 7, 2013, the Public Companies Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) solicited public comments on its reproposed exposure draft of the Auditing Standard on Related Parties (Docket 038: Proposed Auditing Standard on Related Parties and Related Amendments to PCAOB Auditing Standards). The two-month comment period ended on July 8, 2013. This commentary summarizes the contributors' views on this exposure draft. Data Availability: The exposure draft and other related information is available at: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Pages/Docket038.aspx

scholarly journals Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on PCAOB Release No. 2013-002: Proposed Framework for Reorganization of PCAOB Auditing Standards and Related Amendments to PCAOB Auditing Standards and Rules

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. C7-C10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Chun Feng ◽  
Mikhail Pevzner
Keyword(s):  
The Public ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Auditing Standards

SUMMARY On March 26, 2013, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) solicited public comments on its exposure draft of the Proposed Framework for Reorganization of PCAOB Auditing Standards and Related Amendments to PCAOB Auditing Standards and Rules. The comment period ended on May 28, 2013. This commentary summarizes the contributors' views on this exposure draft (the exposure draft and other related information are available at: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Pages/Docket040.aspx).

scholarly journals Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 042: PCAOB Release No. 2017-005, Proposed Amendments Relating to the Supervision of Audits Involving Other Auditors and Proposed Auditing Standard— Dividing Responsibility for the Audit with Another Accounting Firm

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. C11-C18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean A. Dennis ◽  
Denise Dickins ◽  
Christine E. Earley ◽  
Christine Nolder ◽  
Tammie J. Schaefer
Keyword(s):  
Data Availability ◽  
Audit Report ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Accounting Firm ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Auditing Standards

SUMMARY On September 26, 2017, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) solicited public comments on Proposed Amendments Relating to the Supervision of Audits Involving Other Auditors and Proposed Auditing Standard—Dividing the Responsibility for the Audit with Another Accounting Firm. The supplemental request for comment seeks commenters' views on the proposed amendments and standard related to audits involving accounting firms and individuals other than the accounting firm that issues the audit report. The comment period ended on November 15, 2017. This commentary summarizes the contributors' views on these amendments. Data Availability: The supplemental request for comment Proposed Amendments Relating to the Supervision of Audits Involving Other Auditors and Proposed Auditing Standard—Dividing Responsibility for the Audit with Another Accounting Firm is available at: https://pcaobus.org/Rulemaking/Docket042/2017-005-other-auditors-SRC.pdf, and the comment letter sent in by the Auditing Standards Committee is available at: https://pcaobus.org/Rulemaking/Docket042/020b_AAA.pdf.

scholarly journals The Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association is Pleased to Provide Comments on PCAOB Staff Consultation Paper No. 2015-01, The Auditor's Use of the Work of Specialists

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. C18-C37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer R. Joe ◽  
Diane J. Janvrin ◽  
Dereck Barr-Pulliam ◽  
Stephani Mason ◽  
Marshall K. Pitman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Availability ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Economic Implications ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Potential Improvement ◽  
Consultation Paper ◽  
Current Practices

SUMMARY On May 28, 2015 the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (hereafter, the Board) issued Staff Consultation Paper No. 2015-01 (hereafter, the Staff Consultation Paper) to seek information and input on the potential need to improve standards related to the auditor's use of the work of specialists. The Board requested input from investors, accounting firms, specialists, companies, and others (such as academics) about (1) current practices, (2) the potential need for changes, and (3) possible alternative regulatory approaches, and any associated economic implications, for potential improvement in standards related to oversight and assessing the objectivity of employed and engaged specialists. The comment period ended July 31, 2015. This commentary summarizes the contributors' views on selected questions posed in the Staff Consultation Paper. Data Availability: The invitation to comment (through July 31, 2015), with links to the Consultation Paper, is available at: http://www.pcaobus.org/Standards/Pages/SCP_Specialists.aspx

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document