Search results

Examines the influence of various audit firm and client characteristics on compliance with Generally Accepted Auditing Standards’ (GAAS) reporting standards for private sector audits performed by small audit firms. Because prior studies in this area have focused on public sector audits, an important contribution of this study is the use of an observable quality measure as the dependent variable on audits performed in the private sector. Obtains data for the study from the quality reviews of firms licensed to practise in the State of Arkansas during the years 1989‐1991. Suggests that audit fees, the complexity of the engagement and membership in the state Certified Public Accountants’ society are positively related to compliance with GAAS reporting standards on private sector engagements performed by small audit firms. In addition, firm size is negatively related to compliance with GAAS reporting standards on private sector engagements performed by small audit firms.

As investors and companies become more accustomed to crossing national borders to invest or raise capital, interest in comparing international and national accounting and auditing standards is growing. Compares two concepts crucial to planning and performing the audit work: audit risk and materiality. Differences between international and US guidance would imply that the two sets of standards require different levels of audit work; this situation would be a concern to investors and auditors. Similarities in the international and US standards would suggest consensus regarding the levels of work. Shows that the comparison of ISA 6 to SASs 47 and 55/78 indicates many similarities and few differences between international and US guidance.

Internal auditing assumes an increased responsibility for the evaluation of entity operations as a service to management and the board of directors. Quality assurance review is the process through which assurance is obtained that the internal auditing department’s work is done in accordance with the Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. This study examines the current practices of quality assurance review in South Africa. Although not all organisations surveyed do perform internal auditing quality assurance reviews, the organisations that do, benefit from them. Various methods are used in practice to perform internal and external quality assurance reviews. This study provides information on the processes and procedures used in quality assurance review programmes.

This chapter presents an approach for teaching divergent and evolving auditing standards in an introductory auditing course. The existence of divergent and continually evolving auditing standards can be challenging for students and for auditing educators. In addition to two separate sets of standards in the United States for the audits of public companies (issuers) and nonpublic companies (nonissuers), auditors also need to be aware of the growing prominence of international standards. In addition to providing background information on standard-setting bodies and divergent auditing standards, and suggestions for simplifying the process of guiding students to an understanding of these standards, this chapter provides figures that can be used for demonstration in class, along with a series of brief internet-based research exercises. The exercises and examples provided may help auditing educators to facilitate students’ understanding and mastery of the fundamental elements of the domestic and international auditing standard-setting forces and activities that impact, directly or indirectly, auditing practice in the United States and abroad.

Financial crises in the international markets, which have global effects, have increased the importance of internal auditing especially in the banking sector in recent years. Minimizing the negative effects of crises is closely related to the establishment and functioning of an effective internal control system. International internal audit standards (IIAS) issued by the International Internal Audit Standards Boards are internationally applicable standards that contain the basic requirements for the professional implementation and evaluation of the effectiveness of internal auditing. In developing countries where the effects of crises are intensely felt, public banks are one of the most important actors of the financial system. An effective internal control structure in public banks and in compliance with international standards is necessary for a strong and fragile financial system. The purpose of this study is to examine the internal audit activities in public banks in terms of compliance with international standards. In this study conducted at one of the leading state-owned bank in Turkey, the bank’s internal control procedures and internal control activities reports were examined. In addition, the Bank’s internal audit activities were analyzed by conducting interviews with bank officials for a better understanding of the internal control system. The IIAS, which are grouped under two main headings, are related to the internal audit activities of the related bank. It is thought that the study will guide banks and auditors in terms of demonstrating the application of IIAS, which usually consist of abstract statements.

In this chapter, we study the evolution of the auditor’s report from its emergence more than 150 years ago to the present. During this period, the standard auditor’s report has evolved from a rudimentary form to its current and more sophisticated structure with a clearly defined title, addressed to specific entities, and systematically divided into sections that are meant to highlight certain aspects of the audit examination. We describe the major events that have affected the financial reporting environment in the United States and, in turn, how these events have transformed the auditor’s report over the last century. As will be demonstrated in the chapter, the progression of the presentation of the auditor’s report, from being a certification to the standard report of the present day, has been guided primarily by the kind of information that investors and creditors wanted to know in relation to their investments in public companies. However, the desire for that information was often influenced by periodic incidents of corporate scandals. These scandals made it imperative that a monitoring mechanism was established to maintain the confidence of investors and creditors in the reporting of financial information about companies and the overall functioning of the capital markets.

The typical unqualified audit report of publicly traded firms in the United States indicates the nature of the audit and an opinion that the firm’s financial statements fairly present the financial position and the results of operations of the audited company. Accordingly, some users of the financial statements, including investors, do not consider the unqualified opinion to be very useful in providing other informational value about the particular audit. In this paper, the authors examined the views of two stakeholders in the US financial reporting system, auditors in large public accounting firms and Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) in the Fortune 1000. The authors elicited their perceptions involving a Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) proposed auditing standard commonly referred to as “the other information standard.” This standard, if adopted, would require the auditor to evaluate information other than the audited financial statements and the related audit report for (1) a material inconsistency, (2) a material misstatement of fact, or (3) both, and if they exist, communicate them in the auditor’s report. The authors developed their research instrument based upon its perceived potential effects on the audit if adopted, some of which were referenced in the exposure draft of the proposed standard (PCAOB, 2013). They found that a majority of each groups believed, among other effects, that the proposed standard would increase audit costs, subject both the auditor and the reporting firm to increased litigation risk, and that its implementation costs by affected firms would exceed any benefits to financial statement users created by the standard.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the comment letters (CLs) in the standard-setting process of audits of less complex entities (LCEs). The objective is to gain insight into the overall picture of the CLs and to report on areas where comment providers agree or disagree with IAASB's Part 10.

A content analysis of 60 comment letter (CLs) was conducted to investigate the suggested additional Part 10 on audits of groups' financial statements in the proposed ISA for LCEs. Hence, this study examines three specific topics: (1) the views related to the use of the International Standard on Auditing (ISA) for LCEs for group audits in which component auditors are involved, (2) the proposed group-specific qualitative characteristics to describe the scope of group audits and, finally, (3) insights into the content of the proposed Part 10 and related conforming amendments. The Gioia method is used to provide a holistic approach to concept development of the arguments about the new Part 10.

The CLs stated that, while the proposed Part 10 has some weak points, it still provides a solid and practical structure within which to undertake an LCE group audit and a promising basis for further development. For instance, when discussing the improvements, the CLs stated that Part 10 should allow for more auditor judgment when determining when the involvement of component auditors renders a group audit complex. In addition, the CLs asserted that professional judgment should be engaged when considering the qualitative characteristics and the complexity of the group.

This study contributes to the very scarce research about the ISA for LCEs and the role of lobbying in shaping the audit standard-setting process.

The objective of this paper is to extend the debate on audit quality in the less complex entity (LCE) context by analyzing comment letters submitted to the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The IAASB has drafted a new, stand-alone standard for audits of LCEs’ financial statements.

The Gioia method is utilized to conduct the qualitative analysis. This enables the material to shine and provide a comprehensive picture of the important aspects of the comment letters about the International Standard on Auditing (ISA) for LCEs. A content analysis of the 145 comment letters is conducted to identify the extent of the support for and the arguments against the new, stand-alone draft standard for audits of LCEs’ financial statements. In addition, this study considers how the comment letters describe the respondents’ views on audit quality in relation to the new standard. Finally, the tone of the comment letters and audit quality arguments is investigated.

The findings provide a useful framework of the most frequently used arguments supporting and opposing the ISA for LCEs. Within the themes identified, a wide variety of issues and concerns are discussed. The results reveal that the arguments in the comment letters are contradictory. For instance, when discussing audit quality, those interest groups that perceived many positive opportunities in the adoption of the ISA for LCEs thought that the audit quality would increase. Conversely, those interest groups that were skeptical about the success of the ISA for LCEs argued that the audit quality could be compromised by the general prejudice that the ISA for LCEs might be perceived as a lower-quality audit with fewer procedures.

This paper is, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the first to examine the content of comment letters in the context of a new, stand-alone standard for audits of LCEs. The international audience can utilize the results in the context of the widely discussed issue of reducing LCEs’ auditing obligations. This study aims to contribute to the two streams of accounting literature concerning audit quality and political lobbying.