Search results

Audit consortium of joint and dual audits is one of the most controversial mechanisms aimed at improving audit quality and resolving several related debatable issues. This study aims to empirically investigate the impact of audit consortium on audit quality assessment in Egypt. It specifically examines whether audit opinion modification level is triggered by joint and dual audits existence and whether it is influenced by the relative importance of the auditor pair combination types.

A sample of companies listed on the Egyptian Stock Exchange constituting the EGX 30 index is examined over a period of five years, from 2016 to 2020. A quantitative research methodology is used, using content analysis of companies’ audit reports and carrying out longitudinal panel ordinary least squares multiple regression tests.

Results show that audit quality is significantly enhanced by conducting joint and dual audits of Egyptian companies’ financial statements. Findings indicate that both joint and dual audits significantly increase auditors’ propensity to modify audit opinions as compared to companies that engage in single audits. However, this increase in audit quality is not supported by the presence of Big 4 joint auditors or affiliated joint auditors, while the impact of Big 4 dual auditors cannot be confirmed. Nevertheless, such a potential increase in audit opinion modification is boosted by the presence of affiliated dual auditors, which appears to translate into higher quality.

The study has important implications for researchers, corporates, those charged with governance, financial statement users, auditors, regulators and standard setters, who might be interested in whether an audit consortium and a particular auditor pair combination are associated with superior audit quality. It provides empirical evidence that might contribute to the continuous challenge of promoting the quality and effectiveness of the external audit.

This study adds to the relatively limited and challenging literature on the potential contribution of audit consortium, using audit opinion modification level as a direct assessment of audit quality. It extends the scope of prior research by examining the existence of joint and dual audits and the relative importance of joint and dual auditor pair combination types. The study provides key insights from a distinctive and complex emerging audit market.

The primary objective of this paper is to investigate the relation between the joint provision of sustainability assurance and the readability of sustainability assurance statements. Additionally, it explores whether the presence of a female assurance partner influences the relation between the joint provision of sustainability assurance and the readability of sustainability assurance statements.

We analyzed a dataset comprising 882 firm-year observations from companies operating in sustainability sensitive industries for the period that spans the years 2016–2018.

The research indicates that joint sustainability assurance provision is associated with a more readable sustainability assurance statement, consistent with the “four-eyes” principle. Furthermore, the presence of a female assurance provider influences the joint assurance provision’s impact on sustainability assurance statement readability. Collectively, these results remain robust as they hold unchanged after controlling for endogeneity concerns.

This study provides novel insights into the recent sustainability assurance literature, being the first to examine joint assurance provision, assurance partner gender and sustainability assurance statement readability.

This study has the potential to catalyze regulatory and policy initiatives by providing compelling evidence in favor of mandating joint audits within the area of sustainability assurance practices. Additionally, this research contributes to the ongoing discussion about gender diversity in accounting and nonaccounting assurance firms, providing evidence of the positive impact of female assurance partners on sustainability assurance statement readability.

The regression results provide preliminary evidence on how the presence of a female audit partner influences the relationship between the sustainability assurance joint provision and sustainability assurance statement readability, an issue that has not been examined before.

This paper aims to examine the effects of the 2014 European regulatory reform on auditors’ activity, the audit outcome and the audit market, with a focus on the Spanish market.

The research is based on in-depth, semistructured interviews with partners of the main audit firms operating in the Spanish market. This qualitative approach provides a precise identification of the cause-effect relationships of the new measures introduced by the European audit regulation.

The findings indicate that, based on auditors’ opinions, the costs of the main regulatory changes outweigh the benefits. The European Union (EU) Audit Regulation imposes more demanding provisions, such as an extended auditor’s report, mandatory audit firm rotation, more banned nonaudit services and stricter quality controls, resulting in substantial side effects on audit activity and the audit market. This could undermine the objective of enhancing the quality of audit services.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to analyze the effect of the 2014 EU regulatory reform on audit activity, audit market and audit outcome based on auditors’ perceptions. The findings may be of interest to academics, professionals and regulators alike, as they offer valuable insights for assessing the effectiveness of the new audit provisions. Additionally, the qualitative methodology used facilitates a causal analysis of the key elements introduced by the regulations, potentially paving the way for future research avenues.

The purpose of this study is to provide a systematic review of research development on auditing in the European Union over the past decade and suggest future research directions.

Following the PRISMA protocol, the authors systematically reviewed the relevant literature and conducted a qualitative content analysis of 107 studies on auditing in the European Union published between 2012 and 2023.

The results indicate increased auditing literature in the European Union from 2012 to August 2023. Around 40% of the papers were focused on six nations: Germany, Spain, Italy, the UK, Sweden and France. Additionally, 35.5% of papers have been published in three major journals: Accounting in Europe, International Journal of Auditing and the European Accounting Review. Moreover, 82.24% of papers used quantitative methods, with a few using qualitative or mixed methods. Also, most of the studies in the sample endorsed the European Union’s auditing reforms, which included implementing a cap on nonaudit fees and enhancing the independence of audit committees. Contrary to this viewpoint, multiple studies have expressed disagreement with enforcing a total prohibition on nonaudit services, as certain services can enhance auditing quality. Similarly, other studies have contested the necessity of mandatory auditor rotation every 10 years, citing the significant additional expenses associated with this practice. Finally, further studies supported the European Union’s decision to make the joint audit voluntary, as it is related to high audit fees and low audit quality.

The limitations of this research primarily stem from the authors’ choices in selecting the database and defining the criteria for searching the studied papers.

This paper offers valuable insights into the future research prospects in the European Union’s auditing field. Hence, this analysis can be helpful for researchers and practitioners in developing this field based on future research recommendations and the identified themes.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first study to systematically review the developments of the European Union auditing literature over the past decade.

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.

This study aims to investigate the impact of audit fees on audit quality, the impact of audit quality on firm value and whether these effects are conditional on audit tenure by bringing evidence from an emerging market.

Different regression techniques are used, such as logistic regression, probit regression, ordinary least squares regression and fixed effects regression. The authors used panel data of 80 nonfinancial Egyptian-listed firms over 2016–2020.

The authors found a significant positive relationship between audit fees and audit quality and a significant positive relationship between audit quality and firm value. Furthermore, the authors found that the positive relationship between audit fees and audit quality is less pronounced for higher audit tenure firms. Finally, the authors also found that the positive relationship between audit quality and firm value is stronger for lower audit tenure firms.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to bring evidence from an emerging African market about the joint association between audit tenure, audit fees, audit quality and firm value. It provides beneficial insights to regulators regarding the possibility and the benefits of improving audit quality, which is critically needed in contexts with weak governance systems.

This study aims to investigate the link between audit quality and in-court debt restructuring. The aim is to understand whether the confirmation of debt restructuring plans is affected by audit quality, which, in the light of agency theory, reduces information asymmetries between outsiders (creditors and the court) and insiders (shareholders and managers) of the debtor company.

A logistic regression is performed to test whether higher audit quality is associated with an increased probability of successfully completing a debt restructuring proceeding (RP). Consistent with the literature, audit quality is assessed ex ante based on auditor size, which is used as a proxy for independence. The analysis considers private Italian companies.

Audit quality positively affects debt restructuring. Among financially distressed companies, those audited by an audit company are more likely to succeed in RPs than those audited by a single practitioner. There is no evidence of a Big N effect.

This study fills a gap in literature as, in contrast to other financial and governance characteristics, audit quality has never been studied before as a determinant of efficient restructuring. It contributes to the literature on auditing and governance by highlighting the importance of audit quality in complex situations such as RPs, and it expands on debt restructuring literature by considering the importance of the information exchanged during RPs.

The various factors influencing audit fees are still unclear, which may undermine the possibility of attaining fair audit pricing. Against this concern, this study aims to investigate the relationship between the auditee’s corporate characteristics and audit fees. In addition, it reveals if accounting comparability, as a proxy for financial reporting quality, mediates such a relationship by bringing evidence from an emerging market.

This study depends on data from nonfinancial companies listed on the Egyptian stock exchange from 2016 to 2019. It adopts multiple regression models to test the impact of corporate characteristics and accounting comparability on audit fees and uses path analysis to test the indirect effect of the audit clients’ characteristics on audit fees through accounting comparability.

The authors found a significant positive (negative) effect of firm profitability on audit fees (accounting comparability). Further, accounting comparability has a significant negative effect on audit fees. The authors also found that accounting comparability partially mediates the significant relationship between profitability and audit fees. However, the authors found no significant association between leverage and audit fees. Finally, the authors found that accounting comparability does not mediate the relationship between leverage and audit fees.

This study’s findings can benefit audit practitioners in Egypt by showing the main factors affecting audit fees, especially audit clients’ attributes. The current findings also guide professional bodies responsible for issuing accounting and audit standards regarding the importance of financial reporting quality for audit pricing decisions.

This study contributes to the literature by examining the mediating effect of accounting comparability concerning the corporate characteristics-audit fees relationship in developing African countries such as Egypt. This study’s findings can benefit audit practitioners in Egypt by showing the main factors affecting audit fees, especially audit clients’ attributes. The current findings also guide professional bodies responsible for issuing accounting and audit standards regarding the importance of financial reporting quality for audit pricing decisions.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the association between three corporate governance (CG) idiosyncrasies, namely audit committee characteristics, external audit quality (AQ), board diversity and firm performance (FP) in the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) nations.

The study used a sample of 200 listed nonfinancial firms in the SAARC nations from 2012 to 2021. The System Generalized Method of Moment model was applied to the data consisting of 2000 firm-year observations. The Generalized Estimating Equation population-averaged model was also employed for added robustness. The study employed Tobin's Q as the measure of FP.

The findings revealed that amongst the CG variables tested, external AQ exhibited a significantly positive relationship with Tobin's Q. Significant negative influences on FP have been demonstrated by the variables of audit committee meeting and board's independence. Furthermore, gender diversity, CEO duality, audit committee strength and independence failed to record any significant association.

This study is one of the first to investigate the association between CG idiosyncrasies and FP in the SAARC nations. The study findings have important implications for policymakers and regulators in the region.

This research investigates whether focal firms employ strategic supply chain information disclosure, focusing on the concealment of supplier and customer identities, as part of their supply chain environmental risk management strategies (supplier sustainability risk and customer loss risk, respectively).

Using a panel dataset of Chinese listed firms from 2009 to 2019 and utilizing the suppliers’ environmental punishment of peer firms (peer events) as an exogenous shock and employing ordinary least squares (OLS) estimation, this study conducts a regression analysis to test how focal firms disclose the identities of their suppliers and customers.

Our results indicate that focal firms prefer to hide the identities of their suppliers and customers following the environmental punishment of peer firms’ suppliers. In addition, supplier concentration weakens the effect of withholding supplier identities, whereas customer concentration strengthens the effect of hiding customer identities. Mechanism analysis shows that firms hide supplier identities to avoid their reputation being affected and hide customer identities to prevent the deterioration of customers’ reputations and thus impact their market share.

Our study reveals that reputation spillover is another crucial factor in supply chain transparency. It is also pioneering in applying the anonymity theory to explain focal firms’ information disclosure strategy in supply chains.