Search results

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the hurdles, compared with that in the United States, for the implementation of Continuous Auditing in China. As a timely, cost-saving and efficient auditing method, continuous auditing is being increasingly adopted throughout the world. However, while it is increasingly applied in the USA, continuous auditing is still in its infancy in China.

This paper compares and contrasts China and the USA in three important dimensions that determine the “economic architecture” of assurance: the business environment, the audit profession and technology.

The authors find that excessive government intervention in business, the lack of competition, independence of auditors, the support from management and the continuous auditing-specific regulations, as well as the technology gap between these two countries, are the main barriers for the implementation of continuous auditing in China.

The findings of this paper provide better understanding of the drivers of continuous auditing adoption in the USA and the barriers toward doing so in China.

The term “continuous auditing” has never been formally introduced until the release of the draft of the Internal Control Audit Guide in 2011.

The paper highlights how technology by itself is not deterministic, but given the extraordinary rise in the Chinese economy in both its size and its sophistication, it has be to assumed that its “leapfrog” into parity if not outright leadership in continuous assurance is still a matter of “when” and not of “if”.

Prior studies suggest that non-timely 10-Q filings indicate higher potential risks than non-timely 10-K filings. Furthermore, larger audit firms tend to be more risk-averse and conservative about reporting. Inspired by these research streams, this paper aims to investigate the influence of non-timely 10-Q filings on audit fees and the impact of audit firm size on this association.

The cross-sectional audit fee regression model used in this study is similar to that used in prior audit fee research (Simunic, 1980; Francis et al., 2005; Hay et al., 2006; Wang et al., 2013). The model includes the following five major characteristics that would influence auditors’ fee decisions: auditee size (LNAT), complexity (REIVAT, FOREIGN, SEG), financial condition (LOSS, ROA, GROWTH, ZSCORE), special events (ICW, RESTATE, INITIAL, GC) and auditor type (BIG4). To examine the effect of non-timely 10-Q filings on audit fees, the variable NT10Q is included in the audit fee model.

The results indicate that when both non-timely 10-K and non-timely 10-Q filings are included in the regression model, only non-timely 10-Q filings are significantly associated with higher audit fees, suggesting that the presence of non-timely 10-Q filings signals more serious underlying problem than non-timely 10-K filings in the audit fees decision processes. In addition, we find that audit fees for firms audited by Big 4 auditors are 26.4 per cent higher when those firms file non-timely 10-Q reports, whereas there is no significant association between non-timely 10-Q filings and audit fees for firms audited by non-Big 4 auditors.

As no attention has been paid to the investigation of the impact of non-timely 10-Q filings on audit fees, with the aim of filling the gap of this specific research area, this study examines the association between non-timely 10-Q filings and audit fees and the influence of audit firm size on this association.

The contribution of this paper is threefold: first, it is the first study to examine the association between non-timely 10-Q filings and audit fees. The results show that non-timely 10-Q filings are a better and earlier indicator of audit risk than non-timely 10-K filings. Second, the results reveal that the relationship between non-timely 10-Q filings and audit fees is affected by audit firm size. Specifically, Big 4 auditors tend to charge higher audit fees in the presence of non-timely 10-Q filings, reflecting that they are more sensitive to audit risk than smaller audit firms are. Third, an examination of the quarterly effect of non-timely 10-Q filings on audit fees indicates a stronger effect from the first quarter’s non-timely 10-Q filings, compared to the second or third quarter.

The digital economy has significantly altered the way business is conducted and financial information is communicated. A rapidly growing number of organizations are conducting business and publishing business and financial reports online and in real-time. Real-time financial reporting is likely to necessitate continuous auditing to provide continuous assurance about the quality and credibility of the information presented. The audit process has, by necessity, evolved from a conventional manual audit to computer-based auditing and is now confronted with creating continuous electronic audits. Rapidly emerging information technology and demands for more timely communication of information to business stakeholders requires auditors to invent new ways to continuously monitor, gather, and analyze audit evidence. Continuous auditing is defined here as “a comprehensive electronic audit process that enables auditors to provide some degree of assurance on continuous information simultaneously with, or shortly after, the disclosure of the information.” This paper is based on a review of related literature, innovative continuous auditing applications, and the experiences of the authors. An approach for building continuous audit capacity is presented and audit data warehouses and data marts are described. Ever improving technology suggests that the real-time exchange of sensitive financial data will place constant pressure on auditors to update audit techniques. Most of the new techniques that will be required will involve creation of new software and audit models. Future research should focus on how continuous auditing could be constantly improved in various auditing domains including assurance, attestation, and audit services.