Search results

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.

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.

This paper aims to investigate the impact of qualified audit opinions on the returns of stocks listed at Amman Stock Exchange (ASE) after the introduction of the recent amendments by the International Auditing and Assurance Standard Board (IAASB) on audits reporting and conclusions. It further investigates if results differ between first time qualified and sequenced qualifications, and between plain qualified opinion and qualifications with going concern.

Audit opinions’ announcements and stock returns data are collected from companies’ annual reports for the fiscal years 2016 to 2019 while stock returns are computed from stock closing prices published at ASE website. The authors apply the event study approach and use the market model to calculate normal returns. Cumulative abnormal returns (CARs) and average abnormal returns (AARs) are computed for all qualified audit opinions’ announcements.

The empirical evidence suggests that investors at ASE do not react to qualified audit opinions announcements. That is, the authors find an insignificant impact of qualified audit opinion announcements on stock returns using both CAR and AAR estimates. The results are robust to first time and sequenced qualifications, and for qualifications with going concern. Results are also robust to the use of risk adjusted market model.

The insignificant impact of qualified audit opinions on stock returns have two potential conflicting research implications. First, the new amendments introduced to auditors’ report made them more informative and reduce the negative signals contained in the qualified opinions. That is, investors are now aware of the real causes of qualifications and not overreacting to the qualified opinion. Second, the documented insignificant impact confirms that ASE is not a semi-strong form efficient.

The apparent excessive use of qualifications should ring the bell on whether auditors misuse their power or companies are really in trouble. Hence, the Jordanian regulatory bodies need to warn auditors against the excessive use of qualifications on the one hand, and to raise the awareness of investors on the implications of auditors’ opinions on the other hand.

This study is innovative in twofold. First, it explores the impact of qualified audit opinions on stock returns after the introduction of new amendments by IAASB at ASE. In addition, it uses event study approach and distinguishes between first time qualified and sequenced qualifications, and between plain qualified opinion and qualifications with going concern. The results are consistent with efficient market theory and behavioral finance explanations.

This paper aims to examine the communicative value of assurance reports by investigating whether the impact on information asymmetries is contingent on the length of the contractual relationship between clients and assurance providers, which can compromise the provider’s independence.

Using a firm-level data set of publicly listed international firms from 2007 to 2016, the authors estimate several regression models for panel data by using the generalized method of moments estimator to address the endogeneity issue.

Results find that the greater the communicative value in assurance statements, the lower the information asymmetries. However, this effect is constrained when the assurance provider’s independence is compromised due to an excessively long-term contractual relationship. In other words, assurance statements with more informative value enhance the firm’s transparency and increase users’ confidence in the sustainability information provided. However, the loss of independence linked to longer tenure jeopardizes the communicative value of the assurance report and contributes to reducing information asymmetries.

The study makes at least three clear contributions to current literature. First, the authors contribute to the limited existing research about the communicative value attributed to assurance statements by stakeholders. Second, the authors indirectly contribute to the literature that analyses whether stakeholders understand the assurance report, a complex statement in a growing market. Addressing the communicative value of assurance is certainly a difficult task, as it is a novel and complex activity. Third, the main contribution is providing initial empirical evidence about the moderating effect that assurance provider tenure has in the relationship between the informational content of the assurance report and the level of information asymmetries. To date, there is no empirical evidence regarding the moderating effect of long assuror’s tenure as an important feature of the assurance market, and beyond that, regarding its impact on the communicative value assigned by stakeholders to assurance statements.

The new audit regulation for disclosure of key audit matters (KAMs) in financial reporting has been introduced in both developed and developing countries. This study investigates the influence of three distinctive sets of variables, namely industry features, firm characteristics and auditor attributes, on the extent, pattern and level of disclosure of KAMs by companies listed in Bangladesh, an emerging economy.

The study uses qualitative and quantitative research approaches to investigate the pattern of disclosure of KAMs and their determinants. With a sample of 447 firm-year observations from companies listed on the Dhaka Stock Exchange over 2018–2020, the study reveals industry-level, firm-level and auditor-specific characteristics that affect KAMs' communication in the new audit reporting model.

The findings suggest that significant differences exist between firms in the number and types of KAMs reported and the extent of their disclosure. The study findings also observed variations both within and across different industry sectors. Highly regulated firms disclose a greater number of KAMs, while environmentally sensitive firms are found to provide a greater detail of the issues presented as KAMs. Further, both firm size and age positively impact the number of KAMs disclosed and the extent of the disclosure provided. Big-4-affiliated auditors do not issue a significantly higher number of KAMs but deliver extensive details to their KAMs description, compared to non-Big-4 auditors. In addition, while auditors, in general, tend to issue boilerplate KAMs, Big-4 associates are found to disclose more new KAMs. However, audit fees and auditor rotation do not influence KAMs disclosure.

This study is based on two years of publicly available data. However, future studies could consider in-depth interviews to explore the motivation behind KAMs' disclosure in Bangladesh and other developing countries with similar cultural and contextual values.

These findings have substantial policy considerations for improving firms' audit quality and, thus, their financial reporting quality, with implications for national and international standard-setters, regulators and other stakeholders.

This study is one of the earliest endeavours to investigate KAMs in a context of an emerging country, such as Bangladesh, which adopted KAMs' disclosure in 2018.

The current study uses an advanced machine learning method and aims to investigate whether auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based as less risky. More specifically, this study aims to explore the association between principles-based accounting standards and audit pricing and between principles-based accounting standards and the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion.

The study uses an advanced machine-learning method to understand the role of principles-based accounting standards in predicting audit fees and going concern opinion. The study also uses multiple regression models defining audit fees and the probability of receiving going concern opinion. The analyses are complemented by additional tests such as economic significance, firm fixed effects, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, change analysis, yearly regression results and controlling for managerial risk-taking incentives and governance variables.

The paper provides empirical evidence that auditors charge less audit fees to clients whose financial statements are more principles-based. The finding suggests that auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based less risky. The study also provides evidence that the probability of receiving a going-concern opinion reduces as firms rely more on principles-based standards. The finding further suggests that auditors discount the financial numbers supplied by the managers using rules-based standards. The study also reveals that the degree of reliance by a US firm on principles-based accounting standards has a negative impact on accounting conservatism, the risk of financial statement misstatement, accruals and the difficulty in predicting future earnings. This suggests potential mechanisms through which principles-based accounting standards influence auditors’ risk assessments.

The authors recognize the limitation of this study regarding the sample period. Prior studies compare rules vs principles-based standards by focusing on the differences between US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and international financial reporting standards (IFRS) or pre- and post-IFRS adoption, which raises questions about differences in cross-country settings and institutional environment and other confounding factors such as transition costs. This study addresses these issues by comparing rules vs principles-based standards within the US GAAP setting. However, this limits the sample period to the year 2006 because the measure of the relative extent to which a US firm is reliant upon principles-based standards is available until 2006.

The study has major public policy suggestions as it responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks such as climate change.

The study has major public policy suggestions because it demonstrates the value of principles-based standards. The study responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US SEC, to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information as business transactions and investor needs continue to evolve globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the IASB Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks like climate change. The study fills the gap in the literature that auditors perceive principles-based financial statements as less risky and further expands the literature by providing empirical evidence that the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion is increasing in the degree of rules-based standards.

Audit rotation (AR) is a key policy initiative implemented in global jurisdictions to deal with concerns about audit quality. Auditing financial reports involves communicating attested value-relevant company information to investors, and hence audit quality plays a role in the quality of financial reporting information. This paper aims to investigate whether AR affects the degree of information asymmetry (IS) between investors. It further aims to examine whether voluntary AR results in less asymmetric information compared to mandatory AR. Additionally, it examines whether political connections moderate the association between AR and IS.

The authors use data from publicly traded banks across the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) for the period 2010–2018. The authors include several variables to control for corporate governance and other firm-specific characteristics by using country-year fixed-effects regression model.

The authors find higher IS for banks that periodically rotate auditor, while banks voluntarily choose to rotate auditors obtain high-quality audits, which results in higher trading volume and lower stock return volatility, hence lower IS. The results suggest that when banks voluntarily choose to rotate auditors, investors perceive these banks as more committed to obtaining high-quality audits relative to mandatory AR. Providing higher quality audits enhances the credibility of reported information and thus reduce the level of IS. Moreover, IS following AR is higher for politically connected banks than for similar but politically unconnected banks. Finally, investors perceive voluntary AR as a disciplining tool, which mitigates IS. This mitigating role is not affected by bank political connectedness.

This study has limitations as the definition of AR could be interpreted as binary or too narrow, and hence it may not be appropriate to generalize findings to different contexts. Nonetheless, this study casts light on a new perspective to reconcile the existing mixed evidence on the influence of AR on IS and the moderating role of political connections. A further limitation is that because of data unavailability, the authors were unable to use other proxies (e.g. bid-ask spreads and analyst forecast dispersion) of IS.

The present findings provide insight to regulators, policymakers and standard setters on the potential adverse effect of political connections on the role of AR in mitigating IS. The results underscore the importance of voluntary AR, and suggest that regulators, policymakers and standard setters encourage firms to rotate their auditors periodically.

This study provides evidence in a setting that is unique at the economic, social and regulatory levels. Prior literature is lacking and has been centered on developed countries or focusing on single-country specifications. The data set of this study is unique and allows us to examine the interplay between political influence that arises through ownership and management roles of influential members of state.

This study aims to examine the correlation between the readability of financial statements and the likelihood of future stock price crashes in nonfinancial companies listed on the Egyptian Stock Exchange. It further explores the possible moderating effect of audit quality on this relationship.

The study uses ordinary least squares regression, generalized least squares estimation and two-stage least squares methodology to examine and validate the research hypotheses. The sample comprises 107 nonfinancial companies registered on the Egyptian Stock Exchange from 2016 to 2019.

The results reveal a significant negative association between the readability of financial statements and stock price crash risk. This suggests that companies with more complex financial statements tend to experience higher future crash risks. Additionally, the study identifies audit quality as a significant moderating factor. Higher audit quality, often indicated by engagements with Big-4 audit firms, strengthens the influence of financial statements readability on stock price crash risk. This implies that while high audit quality enhances investor confidence and market stability, it also accentuates the negative consequences of complex financial statements.

The findings of this paper have significant implications for regulators and standard-setting bodies in Egypt. They should consider refining and revising existing standards to emphasize the importance of enhancing the readability of financial reports. Additionally, auditing firms should actively engage in efforts to ensure clearer and more transparent financial reporting. These actions are vital for boosting investor confidence, strengthening Egypt’s capital market and mitigating potential risks associated with information opacity and complexity.

This study represents a pioneering endeavor within the Arab and Egyptian financial environments. To the best of the author’s knowledge, it is the first examination of the association between the readability of financial statements and stock price crash risk in these contexts. Furthermore, it explores factors such as audit quality that may influence this connection.

This study aims to explore the use, effectiveness, motives and obstacles of analytical procedures (APs) used by auditors in Palestine, a context characterised by a pool of small and medium enterprises (SMEs), a limited skill set, poor quality of data, political uncertainty and a community-based business culture.

The study considers the audit market in Palestine using a sequential mixed-methods approach combining a questionnaire survey and a series of in-depth interviews. A total of 129 Big-4 and non-Big-4 auditors were surveyed.

The use of APs is driven by the auditor size (Big-4 vs non-Big-4) and the client size (large vs SMEs). Even though the use of APs has increased over the past decade, audit objectives, know-how, and personal, family and social connections among auditors and clients influence the quality of the audit process.

Small firms take advantage of the lack of audit governance in Palestine. Our findings suggest that the regulators should help bridge the knowledge-sharing programmes between the small and large audit firms to help improve audit quality.

Studies on audit quality, particularly using APs, in the context of politically unstable cases such as Palestine are limited. The study has implications for the use of APs in the case of SMEs to prepare for the technological revolution that will modernise audit procedures and quality soon.

The purpose of this study is to analyse historical events to argue the improbable prospect of radical accounting reform in corporate financial reporting (CFR) due to the absence of abstract accounting knowledge as part of accountancy professionalisation (AP).

A historical database of CFR and AP events in the UK is categorised and analysed to observe the evolution of accounting in CFR from the perspective of the sociology of professions relating to abstract knowledge in professionalisation.

CFR has always been a statutory function in the UK dependent on arbitrary accounting rules rather than expert measurements based on abstract accounting knowledge. Accounting rules have evolved as part of AP and currently form part of the statutory regulation of CFR. The accountancy profession has eschewed abstract accounting knowledge in a mutually beneficial and uncompetitive relationship with the law profession in CFR.

The study is limited to the history of CFR and AP in the UK and its findings are contrary to the sociology of professions regarding abstract knowledge, consistent with the accountancy profession’s 19th-century experience of court-related services, and indicative of normative accounting research’s redundancy.

Regarding CFR and AP in the UK, the accountancy profession is an expert subordinate branch of the law profession and has no incentive to alter the status quo of statutory accounting rule compliance prevailing over abstract accounting knowledge-based expertise in CFR.

The study questions the optimism of prior research of accounting in CFR that suggests the possibility of radical reform using abstract knowledge.