Search results

Purpose: Development of an approach, methods to the internal audit of tax differences, analysis of the peculiarities of the application of internal audit procedures of tax differences and their reflection in the software in Ukraine.

Need for the Study: One of the most important general economic and accounting problems both in practical and scientific terms is the problem of determining the financial results of the enterprise, the methodology of its calculation and methods of taxation.

Questions of consistency of indicators of tax and financial accounting arise constantly as the results revealed according to tax accounting data, considerably deviate from real financial results of activity of the enterprise according to financial accounting data. This leads to tax differences. Moreover, significant deviations can be both in one direction and in the other. These indicators are important for study and analysis.

Methodology: The method of a systematic approach was used to reveal the content of tax differences and build the methodology of internal audit. Selective research, grouping, generalisation are used to study the state of the methodology and organisation of accounting for tax differences and their internal audit.

Findings: The study of the organisation and methods of internal audit allowed the authors to develop their methods of internal audit of tax differences. The chapter highlights such elements of internal audit as sources of information, audit directions, objects of audit and possible typical errors that may be identified during the internal audit. Sources of information for internal audit of tax differences are divided into groups: primary documents, accounting records, reporting and legislation. The authors systematised tax differences and analysed their impact on the pre-tax financial result. Possible errors in accounting for tax differences and ways to correct them are considered. The authors present options for displaying tax differences in software products used in Ukraine.

Practical Implications: This chapter examines the key components of the methodology of auditing the financial statements of the enterprise in terms of indicators of tax differences, the use of which ensures the reliability of reporting, avoids penalties from the tax authorities and ensures the prospects for the organisation. The possibility of digitalisation of accounting for tax differences on the example of software that is popular in Ukraine is considered. The pre-tax financial result is a consolidated, aggregate indicator that is determined by comparing income and expenses from different activities recognised per accounting rules and in most cases cannot be used to calculate income tax without appropriate adjustments.

The purpose of this study is to examine the association between auditor industry specialization and accounting quality in the European Union (EU).

This study employs a difference-in-differences design and explores audit quality from different industry specialist perspectives and different accounting standard regimes. Specifically, this study examines accounting quality among audits performed by non-industry specialists, EU member country-level industry specialists (EUM-level), EU community-level industry specialists (EUC-level), as well as joint industry specialists.

This study finds evidence of an improvement in accounting quality among audits performed by non-industry specialists post-IFRS. There is also evidence of an improvement in accounting quality among audits performed by EUC-level industry specialists post-IFRS. In addition, accounting quality among audits performed by EUM-level industry specialists seems to be greater than that of audits performed by non-industry specialists in either the pre-IFRS period or the post-IFRS period. Overall, the mandatory adoption of IFRS in the EU appears to be associated with an improvement in accounting quality among some auditor groups.

Industry specialization and accounting quality are not directly observable constructs; this study inevitably employs proxy measures for both. The findings of this study are location-specific and apply to mandatory IFRS adopters only.

This study informs regulators with respect to the importance of industry specialist auditors and financial reporting quality, particularly within the context of the EU. The findings suggest that industry specialists were a significant accounting quality determinant during the mandatory adoption of IFRS. The findings have implications for regulators in the EU and beyond.

This study is among the first to investigate the impact of auditor specialization on accounting quality in the EU, particularly in connection with the adoption of IFRS.

The purpose of this paper is to report findings of audit quality differences amongst audit firms in a developing country. Specifically, the authors examine the assumption of marked audit quality differences amongst large audit firms (Big 4s) and the small and medium practices (SMPs).

First, the authors develop scales for assessing perceived audit quality in the financial services sector based on qualitative data obtained from 106 audit practitioners, 31 credit analysts and 13 board members. The authors use NVivo© to analyse the 13 transcribed interviews and follow “cross-case analysis” to visualize dimensions and scales of audit quality. Then the authors use measurement scales developed and obtain quantitative data from 183 board members and top executives in the financial services sector and test for perceived audit quality differences amongst audit firms using a Mann-Whitney U test.

The findings suggest that audit quality is a multi-dimensional construct comprising of levels of discretionary accruals; compliance of audited accounts to accounting standards, law and regulations; and audit fees. Based on these measures, the authors find that Big 4 audit firms ensure more compliance with accounting standards, law and other regulatory requirements than SMPs. However, taking all the three audit quality dimensions together reveals no significant differences in audit quality levels between Big 4 and SMPs.

In terms of auditor selection and retention, it is important that audit firms are assessed based on their ability to constrain discretionary accruals, to produce audited accounts that comply with requirements of accounting standards, the law and regulations; and to examine the fees they charge in relation to quality of service, than on their size. Also, as the results of this study suggest that Big 4 audit firms might be needed for compliance with accounting standards, law and other regulatory requirements, their audit ties in with the most basic level of auditing requiring probity and legality which, in practice, requires a low level of judgement to be exercised by those performing the audit. It might be useful for Big 4 and other audit firms to embark also on higher level of auditing requiring higher level of judgement. Future research may wish to examine auditing firms’ proclivity to higher level judgment audit.

Previous research reveals no consistent way of measuring audit quality and has been inconclusive on the subject of audit quality differential amongst audit firms. The authors create audit quality scales which can be used in assessing perceived audit quality in a developing country context and provide initial evidence of no significant differences between large audit firms and the SMPs regarding audit quality in Uganda.

This study aims to examine whether audit partners’ gender affects the year-to-year changes (year-to-year additions and drops) of key audit matters (KAMs) identified in the audit report. This study also examines whether female audit partners’ audit experiences, accounting education and narcissism reduce the difference in time variances of KAMs reporting between female and male audit partners. This study defines the year-to-year additions and drops of KAMs as the time variance of KAMs.

Data of this study includes the audit reports of Australian Securities Exchange 300 companies for the period from 2017 to 2021. This study also applies the theory of female auditors’ preference for anchoring and availability heuristics. This study uses multivariate regression with robust standard errors clustered by the firms. This study also uses several robustness tests.

The findings suggest that female audit partners disclose fewer time variant KAMs in that they have a lower tendency both to add new KAMs and to drop old KAMs. Further analysis suggests that the differences between female and male audit partners decrease as the female audit partners’ experience increases or if the female audit partner possesses a bachelor’s degree in accounting. Female audit partners’ narcissism also reduces the gender gap in the time variances of KAMs.

The fact that female audit partners report more stable KAMs implies that there are differences between female and male audit partners in the way audit risk assessments are conducted, audits are planned and professional judgement is applied by female and male audit partners.

The findings imply that female audit partners’ experience, accounting education and narcissistic personality can play a significant role in explaining the differences in audit outcomes produced by male and female audit partners.

This study is novel in showing that female audit partners report more stable and less time-variant KAMs. The findings of this study may inform audit firms and regulators that female audit partners’ experience, tertiary qualifications in accounting and narcissistic personality traits may be effective means of reducing the gender gap in auditing. The findings also imply that auditors’ observable and unobservable personality traits affect audit outcomes.

This study aims to explore the effect of negotiating audit differences on auditors’ internal control deficiency (ICD) severity assessments, an ensuing, non-negotiated judgment, in an integrated audit.

The experiment manipulates the client’s concession timing strategy as either immediate or gradual, holding the outcome constant. A total of 34 auditors (primarily managers) resolve an audit difference with the client.

The client’s concession timing strategy during the negotiation of an audit difference spills over to affect auditors’ severity assessment of a related ICD. Auditors judged the ICD severity to be higher (lower) in the immediate (gradual) condition. Client retention risk inferences mediate this effect.

The effect on auditors’ ICD severity assessments may not ultimately affect the audit report. Participants did not control their negotiation strategy, allowing the client’s negotiation strategy and the outcome to be held constant; it is possible that interactive effects between the client and auditor’s strategy might affect the study’s implications.

Features of the auditor–client negotiation process may influence auditors’ downstream, post-negotiation judgments and may therefore help to explain empirical evidence and Public Company Accounting Oversight Board inspection findings that show auditors often fail to identify an internal control material weakness after identifying a financial statement misstatement.

This paper expands current negotiation research by exploring the impact of inferences made based on counterparty concession strategy for downstream, non-negotiated judgments and current integrated audit research by identifying client retention perceptions as a driving factor of lower ICD severity assessments.

There has been growing concern worldwide regarding audit quality in Japan after the Kanebo and Olympus accounting scandals. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Japanese audit market from 2001 to 2011 to determine whether audit quality differs between Big N and Non-Big N audit firms and whether this difference, if existed, changed during 2007 when the number of big audit firms declined from four to three and the requirements of audit quality became more rigorous.

This study employs a sample of Japanese listed firms from fiscal year 2001 to 2011. Five proxy variables for audit quality are used and the data are analyzed using the propensity score matching method.

The authors show that irrespective of their size, all audit firms in Japan provide the same quality of service, when controlling for client characteristics including keiretsu, foreign sales ratio and bankruptcy risk measured in Japan. Additionally, the results suggest that although only three major audit firms remain in the Japanese audit market after the dissolution of PricewaterhouseCooper’s Chuo-Aoyama firm in 2007, the audit quality difference between Big N and Non-Big N remained unchanged before and after 2007.

The study contributes to the lack of existing empirical evidence on audit quality in Japan, a country characterized with low audit litigation risk and more emphasis on auditor reputation, given the influence of the notable change in Japanese audit market competition from Big 4 to Big 3. The study’s research design contributes to the extant literature by using multiple proxies of audit quality.

The purpose of this paper is to examine if there exists a gender difference in overconfidence within an auditor population. Studies outside the accounting domain have found that men are more overconfident than women. It would be worthwhile to know if such a gender difference in overconfidence also exists within the auditor population. Such a gender difference could have far‐reaching consequences; among other things, it could explain why client firms with female audit partners have significantly higher audit fees. Because of substantial self‐selection and socialization it could however be that female auditors are as overconfident as their male colleagues.

As is common in the psychological literature, calibration tests were used to measure the degree of overconfidence of male and female auditors.

The results provide no evidence for a gender difference in overconfidence within a population of auditors and warrant against generalizing findings from non‐audit populations to auditors.

Consistent with previous research, overconfidence was treated as if it were a single construct. The different varieties of overconfidence may, however, not simply be interchangeable. It may be the case that one measure of overconfidence would produce a sex difference while the other would not.

This study contributes to the growing literature that examines the effects of gender on audit judgment and decision making. An important implication is that the results clearly warrant against generalizing findings from non‐audit populations to auditors.

This is the first study to investigate if a gender difference in overconfidence exists within an auditor population.

This study compares the perceptions of the users and preparers of financial statements to those of auditors, concerning messages conveyed by review and audit reports. Concern has been expressed about the ability of different groups to differentiate between the level of assurance provided by these engagements. All groups perceived that review reports provided less assurance than audit reports. Users placed less responsibility on the auditor with a review, whilst preparers did not perceive any difference in the auditor’s responsibility. Preparers and users placed a greater responsibility on management than did auditors, for maintaining internal control and accounting records. Auditors had stronger beliefs concerning reliability of the financial information with both reports, reflecting the scepticism of users and preparers and a need for auditors to improve their performance if auditing is to achieve its social function. Auditors also need to improve communication of the level of assurance provided and extent of work performed, and perceptions of auditor independence. The profession’s response to expectation gap issues has been largely defensive. This paper indicates a constructive and proactive approach is needed.

The study aims to determine whether audited organizations experience differences between external audits and official controls.

A survey among 100 organic food producers was conducted to explore differences regarding the usability of external audits and official controls. The survey was conducted in 2020 using the computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) method supplemented by the computer-assisted web interview (CAWI) method. Organizations processing organic farming products in Poland were chosen for the study.

Three primary benefits associated with external audits and official controls were identified, i.e. (1) enabling and initiating activities related to the improvement of the organization, (2) improving the financial performance of the organization and (3) enhancing credibility. For most organizations, the assessment of these features was at the same level for both external audits and official control. However, if these assessments differed, commercial audits were assessed at a higher level than official controls.

The study is limited to only one specific type of manufacturing organization and one European country.

The literature review shows some conceptual differences between audits and official controls, but the results of this study show that the business environment does not perceive these differences as significant. Thus, the value of the study is reflected in the conclusion that both external audits and official controls are considered useful and credible approaches to monitoring the quality within the organization, which allows us to state that external evaluation is generally seen as an opportunity to improve the performance of the organization.

This paper aims to investigate the relative importance of audit-team and audit-firm attributes in perceptions of audit quality by two groups of users of audit services: audit committee chairs/members (“insiders”) and financial analysts/fund managers (“outsiders”).

Using a survey questionnaire, data are gathered from 39 audit committee chairs/members and 42 financial analysts/fund managers and analysed using adaptive conjoint analysis.

The findings reveal that both groups perceive audit-team attributes as relatively more important than audit-firm attributes. This is consistent with expectations for “insiders”, but inconsistent with expectations for “outsiders”. Differences are also found in the internal ratings of some of the attributes, with “insiders” and “outsiders” placing different relative importance on some attributes.

The usual set of limitations that are present in a survey method also apply in this study, i.e. surveys rely on reports of behaviours rather than observations and are therefore susceptible to measurement error. A further limitation is that, in using adaptive conjoint analysis, the number of attributes that may be included in the survey is restricted and, consequently, the attributes selected may not be comprehensive or fully representative.

The study extends the scope of prior studies by examining the relative importance of audit-team and audit-firm attributes in perceptions of audit quality. In using conjoint analysis, the study makes a unique and innovative contribution by providing direct evidence on the relative importance of attributes in perceptions of audit quality for different users of audit services. The findings have implications for regulators and the accounting profession concerned with improving confidence in corporates and for audit firms in monitoring and promoting the quality of their audit services.