Search results

This study aims to investigate the moderating effect of the COVID-19 epidemic on the relationship between key audit matter (KAM) and auditing quality.

The authors use the ordinary least squares regression on data from 942 firm-year observations of Jordanian non-financial institutions across the period (2017–2022) to test the hypotheses. The authors use content analysis method to measure levels of KAM disclosure.

The investigation’s findings highlight the importance of KAM disclosure in achieving audit quality in line with international standard on auditing no. 701 (ISA-701) requirements. COVID-19 is also found to have a positive relationship with audit quality, further confirming the crisis’s devastating impact on audit complexity and risks and providing evidence for the need for supplementary, high-quality audit services. Due to the correlation between KAM disclosure and increased auditor workload and responsibility, the analysis reveals that the COVID-19 factor strengthens the link between KAM disclosure and audit quality.

This study has the potential to be used as a basis for the creation of a new regulation or standard regarding the reporting of unfavourable events in financial filings. This study’s findings provide standard-setters, regulators and policymakers with current empirical data on the effects of implementing ISA-701’s mandate for external auditors to provide more information on KAM. The COVID-19 crisis offers a suitable setting in which to examine the value of precautionary disclosures in times of economic uncertainty, as well as the significance of confidence interval disclosures and the role of external auditing in calming investor fears. This analysis is helpful for stakeholders, regulatory agencies, standard-setters and readers of audit reports who are curious about the current state of KAM disclosures and the implementation of ISA-701. The results may have ramifications for academia in the form of a call for more evidence expanding this data to other burgeoning fields to have a clear explanation of the real impact of reporting KAM on audit practices.

To the authors’ awareness, this research is one of the few empirical studies on the effect of the COVID-19 crisis on auditing procedures, and more specifically, the effect of disclosures on KAM by external auditors on audit quality. This study’s findings represent preliminary scientific evidence linking the pandemic to business performance. Minimal research has been done on how auditors in developing nations react to pandemic investor protection and how auditors’ enlarged reporting responsibilities affect them. The vast majority of auditing studies have been conducted in a highly regulated system, so this research contributes by examining audit behaviour in a weak legal context.

This study aims to examine how new regulation changes for the auditor’s report, so-called key audit matters (KAMs), influence tax avoidance.

This study uses data from firms listed on the Omani capital market over the period 2012–2019 and analyzes these data using pooled panel data regression with a robust standard error. It uses two common proxies for tax avoidance and two measures for the KAMs disclosure requirement.

This study finds a sharp decrease in the effective tax rate following the introduction of KAMs disclosure and the issuance of more KAMs in audit reports. This result is supported by several robustness checks. In an additional analysis, the authors observe interesting results, indicating that real earnings management mediates this association, while the audit committee plays a moderating role. The authors do not find a moderating effect of Big4 on this association, but find discrepancies within the Big4 firms in relation to this moderating effect.

The results of this study indicate that although the introduction of the KAMs disclosure requirement may have positive consequences, it may also lead to unintended negative consequences. This conclusion has not been comprehensively reported in literature.

Financial reports are the basis of economic decisions that affect organizational interests and shareholders. However, there is a severe research gap concerning the factors affecting the quality of financial information (such as audit report readability and tone). Therefore, considering the importance of presenting high-quality financial information, this study aims to investigate the impact of intellectual capital (IC) and its components on the audit report's readability and tone.

The multivariate regression model tests research hypotheses. Then, hypotheses are tested via a sample of 824 observations of the listed companies on the Tehran Stock Exchange (103 companies) from 2014 to 2021, using the multivariate regression model based on pooled data and fixed effects.

Results determine that customer capital (CC) and structural capital (SC) are likely to influence the audit report tone positively. In general, the IC and human capital (HC) negatively impact auditors' tone. More analyses also document that IC and its CC, HC and SC components positively and significantly affect audit report readability based on two readability indices, including FOG and text length. Finally, findings pertaining to the third readability index (Flesch index) reveal that only HC and SC are robust based on this measurement, whereas the IC and CC have a negative and significant impact on the readability of auditors’ reports.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to address this issue in emerging markets, and it provides helpful insights for users, analysts and legal institutions regarding IC, which significantly affects audit report readability and tone.

In this study the authors examine the nature and contents of key audit matters (KAMs), and the consequences of KAMs reporting on audit quality in the context of a developing country, Bangladesh. The authors’ proxies of audit qualities are discretionary accruals, small positive earnings surprise, audit report lag, earnings management via below the line items and audit fees.

The authors use content analysis of the KAMs for the period 2018–2021 to understand the nature and extent of KAMs reported by auditors in Bangladesh. The authors then use multivariate regression analysis to examine the effect of the number and content characteristics of KAMs on audit quality by using multivariate regression analysis.

Auditors in Bangladesh disclose a higher number of KAMs compared to other countries, disclose short descriptions of KAMs and industry generic KAMs. The authors document significant cross-sectional variations in the number and content characteristics of KAMs reported by auditors in Bangladesh. The authors’ pre-post analysis suggest that audit quality has improved after the adoption of KAMs. Cross-sectional analysis suggests that KAMs number and content characteristics are related to audit quality.

The authors’ findings imply that the KAMs reporting has the potential to play significant monitoring role in reducing the opportunistic behavior of managers. Hence, KAMs reporting can play a significant role in reducing the agency problem. For regulators, shareholders and corporate managers, the authors’ findings imply that if the audit quality is to be increased, the audit effort should be supported by an appropriate amount of audit fee.

The content characteristics of KAMs significantly influence managerial reporting behavior and affect the level of audit efforts.

Unlike developed countries (Gutierrez et al., 2018; Lennox et al. 2022), this study supports that KAMs reporting improves audit quality and control opportunistic behavior of managers in developing countries. The authors show that even though the KAMs disclosure quality is poor, it has the potential to improve financial reporting quality.

This study aims to examine the strategies that auditors in Bangladesh follow in identifying and reporting key audit matters (KAMs). The study also examines the factors affecting auditors’ strategies in the identification and disclosures of KAMs.

The authors have conducted interviews with audit partners, chief financial officers (CFOs) and regulators involved in KAMs reporting and monitoring. The authors have used the lens of institutional theory of coercive, mimetic and normative isomorphism and the concept of decoupling.

Auditors have used a decoupling strategy by identifying and reporting greater number of industry-generic KAMs than that of other countries in an effort to minimize risks and avoid regulatory scrutiny, although they disclose remote risks as KAMs and mask severe problem areas of the client. Because of the principle-based approach of International Standards on Auditing (ISA) 701 and because of the pressure and misunderstanding from the audit committee, auditors report industry-generic items and generic descriptions of KAMs.

The findings have important implications for the standard setters and local and global audit firms for the diffusion of new auditing standards in different jurisdictions. Without the development of audit firm-level capability and the corporate governance environment, changes in standards may not be effective in achieving the objectives of the standards.

Although auditors consider that the KAMs reporting requirements provide with opportunities to enhance audit profession’s legitimacy and public trusts, the actual KAMs reporting practices are driven by the market logic, an urge to maintain the status quo with clients and eventual rationalization of the impairment of professional independence.

Given the dearth of prior research on the implementation and diffusion patterns of ISA 701 KAMs reporting, this study fills the gap in the literature. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first known study to examine auditors’ strategic responses to balance among conflicting priorities in reporting KAMs.

This paper aims to explore the potential effect of key audit matters (KAM) on the audit report lag (ARL). In particular, it aims to discover whether the number of KAMs reported by an audit firm in Jordan is related to the length of its ARL.

The authors analysed data from the first three years of KAM reporting in Jordan (2017–2019) for 194 public listed Jordanian companies to examine the relation between the number of KAMs and the ARL, taking into account several control variables related to the Jordanian context.

This study found that there is no statistically significant relation between the number of KAMs reported by Jordanian audit firms and their ARLs, suggesting that the KAM reporting in Jordan is somewhat superficial, with the selection of what is actually reported as a KAM not directly related to the efforts needed to deal with its concerns. However, this study also found statistically significant positive relations between the ARL and each of audit fees, audit firm size, the issuance of a qualified audit opinion and company leverage and a statistically significant negative relation between the ARL and company profitability.

This is one of the very few studies to cover the potential relation between KAM reporting and the ARL. In a developing country context characterised by limited demand for an external audit of high quality, this study finds that auditors may decouple on their reporting of KAMs by not actually making significant efforts to deal with them.

This paper aims to investigate the impact of the implementation of the critical audit matters (CAMs) disclosure requirement and the subsequent relationship between CAM disclosures and audit report lag, as well as audit fees in the USA.

This study used difference-in-differences analyses to investigate the impact that the implementation of the requirement for auditors to report CAMs on their audit report has on the audit process. It also used levels regression models to examine the relationship that CAM disclosures have with audit report lag and audit fees.

This study found that the implementation of the CAM disclosure requirement in the USA reduced audit report lag while not significantly affecting audit fees. This suggests that the CAM disclosure requirement may increase the cooperation between auditors and managers and improve the efficiency of the audit process.

This study’s results are informative for assessing the economic impact of requiring CAM disclosures, which should be of importance to regulators, auditors and accounting researchers.

This study used different approaches to investigate two aspects of the CAM disclosure requirement – the effect of the implementation of the disclosure requirement and the subsequent effects related to CAM reporting outcomes. Unlike many previous studies investigating CAM disclosures, which relied on experiments and questionnaires, this study used actual CAM disclosure data in the USA to investigate the impact on audit report lag and audit fees.

This paper examines the organizational resilience of audit firms during the early stages of COVID-19. The unexpected restrictions placed on travel and on-site working created unanticipated barriers for auditors in Hong Kong. The authors expect that auditors with greater organizational resilience can respond to unexpected situations and restore expected performance levels relatively quickly.

The authors utilize a sample of 1,008 companies listed on Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX) with a financial year-end of December 31. The authors identify five proxies contributing to organizational resilience: auditor size, industry specialization, diversity, geographic proximity to the client and auditing a new client. The authors use audit report timeliness as this study's main dependent variable.

This study's full-sample results suggest that larger auditors, industry specialists and auditors with closer relationships to clients issued more timely audit reports during the pandemic. The analysis of a subsample of companies that initially published unaudited financial statements reveals that industry expertise and longer auditor-client relationships significantly reduced the need for year-end audit adjustments. Finally, the authors find that larger auditors were more likely to offload clients, whereas industry specialists were more likely to retain clients.

The results of the paper suggests that audit firm characteristics associated cognitive abilities, behavioral characteristics and contextual conditions are associated with audit firm organizational resilience and, consequently, helps auditors respond unexpected changes in the audit environment.

The findings of the paper are informative for those involved in audit firm management or auditor hiring and retention decisions.

This study is the first to link organizational resilience to the performance of audit firms in a time of unexpected events. The authors connect three auditor and two auditor-client dimensions to the organizational resilience of the audit firms.

The study examines the changes in audit market concentration, auditor choice and audit quality in Russia following International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption. Scholars have called for further examination of the effects of IFRS adoption on auditors, with an emphasis on the importance of analyzing emerging markets that are characterized by enforcement challenges and lack of proper infrastructure. It focuses on a unique feature of Russian companies – dual audits under Russian Accounting Standards (RAS) and IFRS – and investigates changes in audit concentration and audit quality for the two audit markets.

The authors rely on the audited financial statements of Russian public companies and perform pre-/post-IFRS adoption estimation using a logit regression to ascertain whether public firms change auditors from local firms with limited IFRS expertise to those with global reputation, namely Big 4 audit firms. Further, they examine whether the change in audit market concentration post-2012 affects audit quality as proxied by companies' propensity to receive a modified audit opinion and discretionary accruals. Auditor attributes were hand-collected from audited financial statements and matched with financial variables from Datastream.

The IFRS audit market was dominated by the Big 4 audit firms prior to 2012, and there is strong evidence that audit market share (concentration) increases for IFRS reports but not for RAS reports. In addition, companies are more likely to choose a Big 4 audit firm for an RAS audit, conditional upon a Big 4 firm conducting the IFRS audit. The authors do not find evidence of decrease in the probability of audit firms issuing a modified audit opinion under either RAS or IFRS, indicating that, in the Russian setting, increased auditor concentration post-IFRS adoption does not lead to enhanced risk or decline in audit quality. Moreover, they find that discretionary accruals decline post-2012. Overall, the findings indicate that the concern of global regulators regarding audit market concentration is not justified.

The Russian reporting environment is unique and generally characterized by significant agency problems, and the study’s estimation sample is not large, compared to prior studies conducted predominantly in Western jurisdictions. Nevertheless, the authors shed light on the audit concentration phenomenon within emerging markets, for which empirical evidence is scarce. Future research could explore the impact of other capital market events and exogenous shocks, not limited to IFRS adoption, on the characteristics of Russia's audit market.

The IFRS reporting regime is commonly associated with enhanced reporting quality and improved information transparency among public companies. Yet, impairment of audit quality as a result of IFRS-driven increase in audit market share of Big 4 can potentially negate these capital market effects. This study shows that the concerns of global regulators are not valid and that audit quality does not change with increased share of Big 4 post-IFRS adoption.

Dual audits, whereby companies must prepare two sets of financial statements per the IFRS mandate, are not unique to Russia, and the evidence of IFRS reporting on the structural changes in the audit market and implications for audit quality under a dual regime is scarce. Accordingly, the study's findings are important and timely and are expected to aid regulators of countries that have announced or are contemplating the adoption of IFRS for public reporting purposes.

The authors examine the association between two important audit partner characteristics and the readability of key audit matters (KAMs) disclosed in the audit reports. Specifically, the authors examine how the readability of KAMs is associated with audit partner tenure and workload.

The authors conduct the study in the audit context of Norway and applied the Flesch reading ease scale to measure the readability levels of reported KAMs in the audit reports of companies listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange. Panel data estimation techniques are applied in estimating how partner tenure and workload are associated with the readability of KAMs. In addition, several robustness tests including different measures of KAMs readability and subsample analyses are performed.

The authors find that audit partner tenure and workload have significant associations with the level of KAMs readability. Specifically, the results show that the reported KAMs become more readable as the audit partner tenure increases but are less readable for partners with more workload. These results appear stronger in subsamples of KAMs typically noted to be more complex and associated with higher risks.

As KAMs represent the most significant issues in financial statements audit, these results provide important insights to stakeholders on the potential impact of audit partner tenure and workload on KAMs readability. Less readable KAMs could derail stakeholders' desire to bridge the information gap between auditors and users of the audit report. The uniqueness of this study lies in its focus on audit partner characteristics as opposed to the audit firm.

Excessive audit partner workload impairs KAMs readability.

As KAMs represent the most significant issues in financial statements audit, these results provide important insights to stakeholders on the potential impact of audit partner tenure and workload on KAMs readability. Less readable KAMs could derail stakeholders' desire to bridge the information gap between auditors and users of the audit report. The uniqueness of this study lies in its focus on audit partner characteristics as opposed to the audit firm.