A Content Analysis of the Audit (Regularity) Reports with Regards to the Turkish Court of Accounts’ Audit Findings: State Universities 2013–2018

IF 0.1 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Mahmut Demirbaş
{"title":"A Content Analysis of the Audit (Regularity) Reports with Regards to the Turkish Court of Accounts’ Audit Findings: State Universities 2013–2018","authors":"Mahmut Demirbaş","doi":"10.2399/yod.21.710476","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Turkish Court of Accounts’ regularity reports released after the audits of the public universities conducted in 2012–2018 covering 87% of them in total (103 public universities in 2012 and 129 in 2018) were examined in terms of their compliance with the international audit standards set by INTOSAI. No university name is mentioned in the report. Our goal is to understand the audit findings and draw university administrators’ attention to the findings. Although the Turkish Court of Accounts classified its audit findings as “affecting the audit opinion” and “not affecting the audit opinion”, the audit opinion did not change, which does not match the INTOSAI international audit standards. The Turkish Court of Accounts neither gave an adverse audit opinion nor issued a disclaimer of opinion. The Turkish Court of Accounts is observed to audit the public universities on a continuous basis and at a high rate. In line with the international audit standards, the audit reports were found to require a qualified opinion of 50.7% and an unqualified (positive) opinion of 49.3%. Especially in 2017, 76.2% of the institutions should have been given qualified audit reports. On average, 69.37% of the audited institutions had findings that did not affect the audit opinion, and 49.81% had findings that affected the audit opinion. Some of the audit findings fit in with the description of fraud. The findings that may fall within the scope of error and fraud are not even classified. The number of institutions with audit findings has increased over the years, which reveals that neither the findings are understood properly nor the due attention is paid to them. It was determined that the regularity audit reports do not comply with the continuity, consistency and full disclosure principles, among the fundamental principles of accounting. The fact that the Turkish Court of Accounts shares all audit reports with the public is an indicator of its transparency and impartiality. The Turkish Court of Accounts performs an important task on behalf of Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM), and it is an institution that everyone needs. The Turkish Court of Accounts should not be weakened. However, the Court must distinguish between classification, consistency, error and fraud, and to reflect its opinion accordingly. It must also follow the INTOSAI audit opinion standards.","PeriodicalId":42261,"journal":{"name":"Yuksekogretim Dergisi","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yuksekogretim Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.21.710476","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Turkish Court of Accounts’ regularity reports released after the audits of the public universities conducted in 2012–2018 covering 87% of them in total (103 public universities in 2012 and 129 in 2018) were examined in terms of their compliance with the international audit standards set by INTOSAI. No university name is mentioned in the report. Our goal is to understand the audit findings and draw university administrators’ attention to the findings. Although the Turkish Court of Accounts classified its audit findings as “affecting the audit opinion” and “not affecting the audit opinion”, the audit opinion did not change, which does not match the INTOSAI international audit standards. The Turkish Court of Accounts neither gave an adverse audit opinion nor issued a disclaimer of opinion. The Turkish Court of Accounts is observed to audit the public universities on a continuous basis and at a high rate. In line with the international audit standards, the audit reports were found to require a qualified opinion of 50.7% and an unqualified (positive) opinion of 49.3%. Especially in 2017, 76.2% of the institutions should have been given qualified audit reports. On average, 69.37% of the audited institutions had findings that did not affect the audit opinion, and 49.81% had findings that affected the audit opinion. Some of the audit findings fit in with the description of fraud. The findings that may fall within the scope of error and fraud are not even classified. The number of institutions with audit findings has increased over the years, which reveals that neither the findings are understood properly nor the due attention is paid to them. It was determined that the regularity audit reports do not comply with the continuity, consistency and full disclosure principles, among the fundamental principles of accounting. The fact that the Turkish Court of Accounts shares all audit reports with the public is an indicator of its transparency and impartiality. The Turkish Court of Accounts performs an important task on behalf of Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM), and it is an institution that everyone needs. The Turkish Court of Accounts should not be weakened. However, the Court must distinguish between classification, consistency, error and fraud, and to reflect its opinion accordingly. It must also follow the INTOSAI audit opinion standards.
关于土耳其审计法院审计结果的审计(规则)报告的内容分析:州立大学2013-2018
土耳其会计法院在2012-2018年对公立大学进行审计后发布的定期报告涵盖了87%的公立大学(2012年为103所,2018年为129所),审查了它们是否符合世界审计组织制定的国际审计标准。报告中没有提到大学名称。我们的目标是了解审计结果,并提请大学管理人员注意审计结果。尽管土耳其会计法院将其审计结果分为“影响审计意见”和“不影响审计意见“,但审计意见没有改变,这与世界审计组织的国际审计标准不符。土耳其会计法院既没有给出不利的审计意见,也没有发表意见免责声明。据观察,土耳其会计法院对公立大学进行了持续的高比率审计。根据国际审计标准,审计报告要求50.7%的保留意见和49.3%的无保留(积极)意见。特别是在2017年,76.2%的机构本应获得保留审计报告。平均而言,69.37%的被审计机构的审计结果不影响审计意见,49.81%的被审计单位的审计结果影响审计意见。一些审计结果符合对欺诈行为的描述。可能属于错误和欺诈范围的调查结果甚至没有分类。多年来,有审计结果的机构数量有所增加,这表明既没有正确理解审计结果,也没有给予应有的重视。经认定,定期审计报告不符合会计基本原则中的连续性、一致性和充分披露原则。土耳其审计法院与公众分享所有审计报告,这是其透明度和公正性的一个指标。土耳其账户法院代表土耳其大国民议会执行着一项重要任务,它是每个人都需要的机构。土耳其账户法院不应被削弱。然而,法院必须区分分类、一致性、错误和欺诈,并相应地反映其意见。它还必须遵循世界审计组织的审计意见标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Yuksekogretim Dergisi
Yuksekogretim Dergisi EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
16.70%
发文量
28
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信