Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide a meta‐analysis of the effect of: auditor and audit‐related variables; and firm‐specific variables on auditors' propensity to issue modified audit opinions. Auditor and audit‐related variables include Big N affiliation, audit firm industry specialization, audit firm and audit partner tenure, provision of non audit services and audit report lag. Some of the important firm‐specific variables include firm size, leverage, and profitability.

The Stouffer combined test is employed as the meta‐analysis technique for this paper. The test produces a z‐statistic that can be used to test the direction and significance of the effect of the hypothesized variables on the propensity of auditors to issue modified audit opinions. A total of 73 published studies are aggregated from 1982 to 2011.

Meta‐analysis result reveals that the effect of audit and auditor‐related variables on audit opinion decisions is far from conclusive. Big N affiliation and audit report lag variables are found to be positively related while the association between non‐audit fees and modified audit opinion decisions is negative. However, the significant effect of non‐audit fee variable is found only in non US studies. Evidence on the effect of firm‐specific variables on auditors' propensity to issue modified audit opinions is broadly consistent with hypotheses formulated in the published studies.

Meta‐analysis statistically aggregates results across individual studies and corrects for statistical artefacts like sampling and measurement error and, thereby, provides much greater precision with respect to the findings, compared with narrative reviews. The findings should be relevant for the current project on audit reporting initiated by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB).

Audit opinion formulation is a complex procedure that culminates in the issuance of appropriate audit opinions. This paper adds value to the strand of audit opinion formulation research by documenting that some of the variables are more significant in explaining auditors' modified audit opinion decisions compared to other variables.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of company characteristics such as the level of financial distress, client size and type of auditor on the propensity to issue modified audit opinions and to assess comparative differences in audit opinions during two significant economic crises in Turkey.

Logistic regression model is used to test the incremental contribution of each company characteristic on issuing the type of audit opinion for crisis periods. Additionally, to understand the reasons for differences in audit opinions between two types of crisis periods, the authors adopt Francis and Krishnan’s (2002) approach in which an auditor’s propensity to issue modified opinion may be jointly based on changes in client characteristics and auditor reporting strategies in that period.

The results indicate that there is a positive relationship between financial distress and the likelihood of receiving modified opinions in both crisis periods. Additionally, client size affects audit opinions negatively in both periods significantly. Auditors show higher propensity to issue a modified opinion during the domestic than the global financial crisis period, which could be explained by the changes in client characteristics more than their reporting strategy.

This study provides supportive evidence that the company characteristics including the financial distress can be very useful predictors for the auditors’ decisions while issuing their opinions.

The findings of different auditor behaviors during crises periods and possible reasons are the main contributions of this study for international and domestic regulators, investors, audit firms, academics and standard setters in emerging economies.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the association between audit opinion and earnings persistence of listed companies in Thailand from 2004 to 2008.

We use archival data and hand collected data in regression analysis. Content analysis was used to perform decomposition analysis of audit modifications.

Firms receiving modified opinions have lower earnings persistence than firms receiving unqualified opinions, and the degree of earnings persistence varies among types of modifications. We find that firms with a qualified opinion or a disclaimer have lower earnings persistence than firms receiving an unqualified opinion with an emphasis of matter (UEM). However, we find no difference in earnings persistence between firms receiving a qualification and a disclaimer. Content analysis reveals that there is information in certain types of modified opinions with respect to earnings quality. Firms receiving a scope limitation qualification and a going concern disclaimer have lower earnings persistence than firms receiving an UEM due to going concern issues.

Audit modifications reflect different degrees of problematic issues in clients’ firms, resulting in different impacts on earnings persistence. Thus, policymakers and regulators should emphasize the importance of using auditors’ reports. Strengthened enforcement by regulators makes individual auditors more aware of reputation risk and more likely to express appropriate audit opinions.

We examine a broader set of modified audit opinions than those used in prior research. Our study offers the opportunity to examine the association between earnings persistence and different types of modified opinions, especially a disclaimer, which has been rarely found in prior research.

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether audit opinions matter in China after the introduction of several key regulatory changes, specifically aimed at strengthening the confidence of investors in the audit function.

The question is addressed by examining the market response to modified audit opinions of companies listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange.

In contrast to earlier research, this paper does not find evidence that modified audit opinions have significant information value to Chinese investors, despite the regulatory changes. However, when partitioning the sample by year, there is weak evidence of a stock price response to modified audit opinions in 2003. Examination of the impact of different types of audit opinions shows no consistent results.

The results reported in this paper must be considered in light of the limitations inherent in empirical analyses. That is, the relationships identified in this paper are indicative of potential earnings management or audit opinion shopping, however, the paper cannot provide the actual reasons for these empirical results.

The results suggest the Chinese market is beginning to value audit opinions in the same fashion way as more developed markets.

The paper refines market reaction models used in earlier studies through the introduction of additional explanatory variables, together with an improved methodology.

Accounting literature is replete with quantitative models that use financial ratios to identify the probability of a going concern qualification. These studies, however, ignore qualitative cues that auditors use to identify going concern problems and mitigating factors (sound financial plans etc.) that auditors take into account in their choice of report. Tests whether, in the presence of financial distress, non‐financial cues play an important role in auditors’ choice. Results indicate that non‐financial variables can be used to discriminate between the auditor’s decision to issue the going concern qualified versus the clean report. Helps company management understand how auditors evaluate their clients and the importance of the qualitative criteria used in their evaluation. Can be used to predict the most probable outcome prior to the external audit. Second, facilitates understanding of the non‐financial red flags that could trigger the going concern report. Third, can be used to analyze potential acquisition targets, and, if the acquisition target is still otherwise desirable, be used in pricing negotiations. Fourth, can be applied to aspects of the firm’s own division’s operations in order to enable the internal audit department to better allocate its own investigational and problem‐solving resources. Finally, the fact that qualitative factors have power in predicting the going concern modified report suggests that company decision makers can evaluate others even if the auditor for political or other reasons has chosen not to render a modified report.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the association between individual auditor characteristics (gender, experience and sector expertise) and audit opinions in Belgian non-profit organizations (NPOs). The purpose is to identify auditor characteristics that imply a better assurance of financial statement (FS) quality. FS quality is essential to enhance financial accountability toward the resource providers of NPOs and the public at large.

Multinomial regressions are conducted on a data set of Belgian NPOs. Propensity score matching is used to control for potential self-selection bias.

Auditors with sector expertise are found to provide better assurance than their non-sector-expert counterparts. The former are more likely to disclose FS errors and uncertainties in their audit report.

This study contributes to the auditing literature by focusing on an understudied audit market, namely, the non-profit audit market. The number of non-profit studies that investigate determinant of audit quality is very scarce, and none of them explores the determinants of audit opinions. Moreover, these studies ignore individual auditor characteristics as determinants of audit quality. The findings of this study provide meaningful information for several actors in the NP field and for audit firms.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a model for assessing the audit evidence of the going-concern (GC) assumptions underlying the preparation of financial statements.

This research analyses 678 audit opinions of Italian listed firms from 2007 to 2016 and uses a multiple linear discriminant analysis to create a GC score, which includes variables suggested by the international standards on auditing (ISA) 570 and by literature on GC.

The model provides three cut-off scores which can orient auditors towards issuing the most appropriate GC audit opinions (unmodified opinion, unmodified opinion, which includes emphases of matter, qualified opinion or disclaimer of opinion).

The development of the model is mainly based on public data and does not assess confidential information that is not disclosed in audit opinions.

This model can enable auditors to identify the most appropriate GC opinion and align auditor’s opinions in similar circumstances, thereby reducing their reliance on discretion and increasing the reliability of their judgement with a higher degree of accuracy. Moreover, this research lists additional events or conditions that may individually or collectively cast significant doubt on GC assumptions.

This study goes beyond the traditional decision-making process, apparently binary in nature, between “continuity” and “failure” or between “unmodified” and “modified” opinions. It is conceived to detect the different degrees of uncertainty that affect GC evaluations to orient auditors’ professional judgements.

Type of audit opinion is important for all stakeholders. Firm-specific characteristics have a direct impact on the type of audit opinion. The purpose of this study is to examine the association between accounting comparability (as a micro level characteristic), financial reporting quality (as a macro level characteristic) and audit opinions.

This study uses a multivariate regression analysis to tests it hypotheses to a sample of firms listed in Tehran Stock Exchange during 2015–2019. To measure accounting comparability, the authors use De Franco et al. (2011) model, and Hutton et al. (2009) model to measure financial reporting quality. The authors use type of audit opinion, and auditor's remarks (explanatory notes) as the measure for audit opinions.

The authors find a negative association between accounting comparability, and the proxies for audit opinion. The authors also find that a negative association between financial reporting quality and audit opinions. These results suggest that higher accounting comparability, and higher financial reporting quality (proxied by earnings quality) increases auditor tendency to issue unmodified audit opinion.

To the authors' best knowledge, this is the first study that empirically examines the association between accounting comparability, financial reporting quality and audit opinion. This study provides empirical support for the theoretical views on the association between financial reporting quality and audit opinion. The results could be of interest of both auditors and managers, especially in emerging capital markets, who seek to improve financial reporting quality.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the influence of financial variables and especially profitability, loss in current year, loss in previous year, leverage and liquidity in predicting audit report qualifications (qualified audit opinion) and audit report modifications (qualified opinion or unqualified but with an explanatory paragraph).

The authors used hand-collected data from financial statements and from auditors’ general reports of 76 non-financial publicly traded companies over a period of 11 years (2005-2015). A total of 545 audit reports were analyzed.

The results of panel logistic regression reported a positive relationship between liquidity, loss in the current year, loss in the previous year and a qualified audit report. A positive relationship was found between leverage and audit report modification. Also, the findings show that the Tunisian revolution did not affect the qualification or the modification of the audit report but qualifications decreased significantly during the period of the financial crisis.

The research has practical implications and can help auditors in identifying factors motivating audit report qualification or audit report modification, mainly in periods of instability.

This study contributes to auditing research, since the authors know very little about the determinants of audit opinion in emerging and African markets. It constitutes an addition to previous knowledge about audit opinion in the context of Tunisia during two important periods: the financial crisis and revolution. This research is one of the rare studies analyzing qualifications and audit report modifications by considering both qualifications and explanatory paragraphs.

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.