Search results

This study aims to examine the timing of corporate disclosure in the context of Georgia, an emerging market where a recent reform of corporate financial transparency mandated about 80,000 private sector entities to publicly disclose their annual financial statements.

The main analysis covers more than 4,000 large, medium, small and micro private sector entities, for which the data is obtained from the Ministry of Finance of Georgia. This paper builds an empirical model of logit/probit regression, with industry fixed and random effects to investigate the drivers of the corporate disclosure timing.

Findings suggest that the mean reporting time lag is 279 days after the fiscal year-end, that is nine days after the statutory deadline. Almost one-third (30%) of the entities miss the nine-month statutory deadline, while the timely filers almost unexceptionally file immediately before the deadline. Multivariate tests reveal that voluntarily filing entities completed the process significantly faster than those mandated to do so; audited financial statements take more time to be filed, whereas those with unqualified audit opinion or audited by large/international audit firms are filed faster than their counterparts. The author concludes that despite the overall high filing rates, the timing of corporate disclosure is not (yet) efficiently enforced in practice (but is progressing over time), whereas regulatory incentives prevail over market incentives among the timely filers.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first study that explores corporate disclosure timing incentives in the context of Georgia. This study extends prior literature on the timing of financial information from an emerging country’s private sector perspective, with juxtaposed market and regulatory incentives.

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 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.

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.

Following recent high-profile audit failures, concern has been expressed that auditors are not demonstrating sufficient skepticism when exercising professional judgment. In particular, client assumptions and estimations relating to hypothetical valuations in financial reporting are not being challenged. This paper seeks to address the issue by advancing a decision-making framework aimed at guiding auditors beyond regulatory reductionist thinking towards an enhanced understanding of the cognitive processes which shape professional judgment in forming a reliable audit opinion.

Drawing on the normative philosophical and theological teachings of Bernard Lonergan, the authors' decision-making framework embodies reflective thinking and the data of consciousness to highlight the central role played by enquiry in the dynamics of understanding, judgment and decision-making. Such enquiry elicits challenge of the management bias inherent in hypothetical valuations.

Auditing through a Lonerganian lens allows auditors to reflect on their approach to objective decision-making by offering a set of cognitive tools to enhance the enquiry essential for nurturing professional skepticism.

This paper contributes to the literature by developing the somewhat neglected discourse on the cognitive processes essential for professional skepticism and audit judgment. The authors demonstrate how Lonerganian self-appropriation intensifies an awareness of the recursive cognitive activities pertinent to objective judgment and decision-making. This awakened consciousness has the potential not only to change how auditors question evidence to make informed judgments and decisions, but also to normalize the practice of challenge.

This study aims to examine the strategies that auditors in Bangladesh follow in identifying and reporting key audit matters (KAMs). The study also examines the factors affecting auditors’ strategies in the identification and disclosures of KAMs.

The authors have conducted interviews with audit partners, chief financial officers (CFOs) and regulators involved in KAMs reporting and monitoring. The authors have used the lens of institutional theory of coercive, mimetic and normative isomorphism and the concept of decoupling.

Auditors have used a decoupling strategy by identifying and reporting greater number of industry-generic KAMs than that of other countries in an effort to minimize risks and avoid regulatory scrutiny, although they disclose remote risks as KAMs and mask severe problem areas of the client. Because of the principle-based approach of International Standards on Auditing (ISA) 701 and because of the pressure and misunderstanding from the audit committee, auditors report industry-generic items and generic descriptions of KAMs.

The findings have important implications for the standard setters and local and global audit firms for the diffusion of new auditing standards in different jurisdictions. Without the development of audit firm-level capability and the corporate governance environment, changes in standards may not be effective in achieving the objectives of the standards.

Although auditors consider that the KAMs reporting requirements provide with opportunities to enhance audit profession’s legitimacy and public trusts, the actual KAMs reporting practices are driven by the market logic, an urge to maintain the status quo with clients and eventual rationalization of the impairment of professional independence.

Given the dearth of prior research on the implementation and diffusion patterns of ISA 701 KAMs reporting, this study fills the gap in the literature. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first known study to examine auditors’ strategic responses to balance among conflicting priorities in reporting KAMs.

This study aims to examine the moderating effect of media exposure and media legitimacy on the environmental audit committee (EAC) regarding environmental disclosure quality as measured by voluntary and timely disclosure.

This paper was based on a sample of 81 French nonfinancial companies listed on the SBF 120 index and covered a six-year period; from 2014 to 2019. To test the hypotheses, a feasible generalized least squares regression was applied. Moreover, the authors checked the results using an additional analysis and the generalized method of moment model for endogeneity problems.

The results obtained show that for 482 French firm-year observations during the period 2014–2019, the media exposure does not play a moderating role between the EAC and the voluntary environmental disclosure; However, it plays a moderating role between the EAC and the timely environmental disclosure. The results also show that media legitimacy plays a moderating role between the EAC and the quality of environmental information. After testing for endogeneity problems, the findings remain unchanged.

The findings of this study may be of interest to academic researchers, practitioners and regulators who are interested in determining the quality of environmental disclosure by considering the role of the EAC while giving a role to media exposure and media legitimacy in the French context. Considering the EAC as a powerful source of effective corporate governance to improve the quality of environmental disclosure for decision-making, the research provides valuable insights for policymakers and managers on the importance of this mechanism and the importance of the environmental media and its tone in making environmental reporting useful and relevant.

The originality of the work lies in the fact that it is one of the first works that deal with the moderating effect of media exposure on the relationship between the EAC and the quality of environmental information disclosure measured by voluntary and timely disclosure. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no previous empirical studies have been conducted on this relationship in the French context or in other contexts.

This study aims to examine the mediating effects of corporate governance mechanisms like the board of directors on the association between disruptive technology adoption by audit clients and the risk of material misstatements, including inherent risk and control risk. In particular, the authors study the mediating effects of board characteristics such as board size, independence and gender diversity.

Based on a sample of 100 audit clients listed on the FTSE 100 from 2015 to 2021, this study uses structural equation modelling to test the research objectives.

The findings indicate a significant and negative association between disruptive technology adoption by audit clients and inherent risk. However, there is no significant evidence observed for control risk. The utilisation of disruptive technology by the audit client has a significant impact on the board characteristics, resulting in an increase in board size, greater independence and gender diversity. The authors also find strong evidence that board independence mediates the association between disruptive technology usage and both inherent risk and control risk. In addition, board size and gender exhibit distinct and differential mediating effects on the association and across the two types of risks.

The study reveals that the significant role of using disruptive technology by audit clients in reducing the risk of material misstatements is closely associated with the board of directors, which makes audit clients place greater emphasis on the construction of effective corporate governance.

This study offers essential primary evidence that can assist policymakers and standard setters in formulating guidance and recommendations for board size, independence and gender quotas, ensuring the enhancement of effective governance and supporting the future of audit within the next generation of digital services.

With respect to relevant stakeholders, it is imperative for audit clients to recognise that corporate governance represents a fundamental means of addressing the ramifications of applying disruptive technology, particularly as they pertain to inherent and control risks within the audit client.

This study contributes to the existing literature by investigating the joint impact of corporate governance and the utilisation of disruptive technology by audit clients on inherent risk and control risk, which has not been investigated by previous research.

This paper aims to shed light on the relationship between audit committee attributes and integrated reporting quality (IRQ).

Data on a sample of 360 European firms selected from the STOXX Europe 600 index between 2010 and 2021 were used to test the model based on multiple regression for panel data to analyze the effect of audit committee attributes on IRQ. This paper considers generalized least squares (GLS) estimation for panel data models.

The findings of this study confirm expectations concerning the impact of audit committee attributes on the IRQ. Indeed, audit committee independence and meetings have a significant positive impact on IRQ. However, no significant association is found between financial expertise and IRQ.

The findings of this paper have significant implications for policymakers, who, through proper legislation, should encourage the formation of larger audit committees and ones with a higher percentage of independent members. They should also establish a minimum number of audit committee meetings per year. These regulations, which aim to increase the efficacy of audit committees’ supervisory and monitoring tasks, would promote corporate transparency and improve IRQ.

This study supports the existing literature. First, it expands the scientific debate on IRQ. Second, unlike previous studies, which used more subjective methods to measure the degree of integrated reporting (IR), this study relied on the CGVS variable from the DataStream ASSET 4 Database. Third, the research is novel because it indicates the crucial role of internal assurance mechanisms in wide managerial reporting practices in European companies. The sample consisted of European firms only, whereas previous studies used a global sample. Finally, this study is based on recent data (2010–2021), while other studies covered the period between 2008 and 2013.

The authors examine the association between two important audit partner characteristics and the readability of key audit matters (KAMs) disclosed in the audit reports. Specifically, the authors examine how the readability of KAMs is associated with audit partner tenure and workload.

The authors conduct the study in the audit context of Norway and applied the Flesch reading ease scale to measure the readability levels of reported KAMs in the audit reports of companies listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange. Panel data estimation techniques are applied in estimating how partner tenure and workload are associated with the readability of KAMs. In addition, several robustness tests including different measures of KAMs readability and subsample analyses are performed.

The authors find that audit partner tenure and workload have significant associations with the level of KAMs readability. Specifically, the results show that the reported KAMs become more readable as the audit partner tenure increases but are less readable for partners with more workload. These results appear stronger in subsamples of KAMs typically noted to be more complex and associated with higher risks.

As KAMs represent the most significant issues in financial statements audit, these results provide important insights to stakeholders on the potential impact of audit partner tenure and workload on KAMs readability. Less readable KAMs could derail stakeholders' desire to bridge the information gap between auditors and users of the audit report. The uniqueness of this study lies in its focus on audit partner characteristics as opposed to the audit firm.

Excessive audit partner workload impairs KAMs readability.

As KAMs represent the most significant issues in financial statements audit, these results provide important insights to stakeholders on the potential impact of audit partner tenure and workload on KAMs readability. Less readable KAMs could derail stakeholders' desire to bridge the information gap between auditors and users of the audit report. The uniqueness of this study lies in its focus on audit partner characteristics as opposed to the audit firm.