非审计服务和审计质量:来自澳大利亚的最新证据

Ashkan Mirzay Fashami
{"title":"非审计服务和审计质量:来自澳大利亚的最新证据","authors":"Ashkan Mirzay Fashami","doi":"10.1353/jda.2022.0058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:Most prior studies on non-audit services (NAS) and audit quality in Australia predated the Corporate Law Economic Reform Program Act 2004 (CLERP 9). Australia enacted CLERP 9 to improve corporate governance through the improvement of transparency, accountability, and rights of shareholders. No regulatory changes after CLERP 9 exist that can directly affect the relationship between NAS and audit quality in Australia. Hence, this study examines the effects of NAS on audit quality in Australia. Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) Listing Rules mandate ASX 300 companies to establish an audit committee and provide a summary of their audit committee charters. The Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) prepares standards that govern audits under the Australian Corporations Act. The AUASB auditing standards, under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, took effect from July 2006. Therefore, this study examines NAS data of ASX 300 companies from 2006 to 2016-10 years-to obtain sufficient data. This study has recourse to other databases such as Connect 4, Morningstar, and the companies' annual reports to gather other relevant data. Three widely accepted measures of audit quality are used, namely going-concern audit opinions, Big Four auditors, and discretionary accruals, to measure the effects of NAS on audit quality. This study excludes initial audit engagements to alleviate the effects of the timing of auditor switches on fees. This research results suggest that NAS do not impair (or even improve) audit quality. This study contributes to the current debate regarding the relationship between NAS and audit quality. Our findings are important to regulators and standard setters, such as the AUASB. Findings inform these bodies that the current regulatory environment safeguards audit quality in Australia. Thus, proposals to ban NAS are not necessary, because NAS do not deteriorate audit quality. Further, this study supports the knowledge spillover hypothesis: it shows that economic and social bonding of NAS does not encourage auditors to sacrifice their independence and reduce their audit quality. Thus, this study suggests that audit firms should continue to provide NAS to their audit clients in Australia. Future research could extend this study by analyzing the effects of different types of NAS on audit quality.","PeriodicalId":286315,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Developing Areas","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Non-Audit Services and Audit Quality: Recent Evidence from Australia\",\"authors\":\"Ashkan Mirzay Fashami\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/jda.2022.0058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT:Most prior studies on non-audit services (NAS) and audit quality in Australia predated the Corporate Law Economic Reform Program Act 2004 (CLERP 9). Australia enacted CLERP 9 to improve corporate governance through the improvement of transparency, accountability, and rights of shareholders. No regulatory changes after CLERP 9 exist that can directly affect the relationship between NAS and audit quality in Australia. Hence, this study examines the effects of NAS on audit quality in Australia. Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) Listing Rules mandate ASX 300 companies to establish an audit committee and provide a summary of their audit committee charters. The Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) prepares standards that govern audits under the Australian Corporations Act. The AUASB auditing standards, under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, took effect from July 2006. Therefore, this study examines NAS data of ASX 300 companies from 2006 to 2016-10 years-to obtain sufficient data. This study has recourse to other databases such as Connect 4, Morningstar, and the companies' annual reports to gather other relevant data. Three widely accepted measures of audit quality are used, namely going-concern audit opinions, Big Four auditors, and discretionary accruals, to measure the effects of NAS on audit quality. This study excludes initial audit engagements to alleviate the effects of the timing of auditor switches on fees. This research results suggest that NAS do not impair (or even improve) audit quality. This study contributes to the current debate regarding the relationship between NAS and audit quality. Our findings are important to regulators and standard setters, such as the AUASB. Findings inform these bodies that the current regulatory environment safeguards audit quality in Australia. Thus, proposals to ban NAS are not necessary, because NAS do not deteriorate audit quality. Further, this study supports the knowledge spillover hypothesis: it shows that economic and social bonding of NAS does not encourage auditors to sacrifice their independence and reduce their audit quality. Thus, this study suggests that audit firms should continue to provide NAS to their audit clients in Australia. Future research could extend this study by analyzing the effects of different types of NAS on audit quality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":286315,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Developing Areas\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Developing Areas\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.2022.0058\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Developing Areas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.2022.0058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:澳大利亚对非审计服务(NAS)和审计质量的研究大多早于2004年公司法经济改革计划法案(CLERP 9)。澳大利亚颁布CLERP 9是为了通过提高透明度、问责制和股东权利来改善公司治理。在CLERP 9之后,澳大利亚没有直接影响NAS与审计质量关系的监管变化。因此,本研究考察了NAS对澳大利亚审计质量的影响。澳大利亚证券交易所(ASX)上市规则要求ASX 300公司建立审计委员会,并提供审计委员会章程摘要。审计和鉴证标准委员会(AUASB)根据《澳大利亚公司法》制定管理审计的标准。根据《2003年立法文书法》,美国会计准则委员会的审计准则自2006年7月起生效。因此,本研究对ASX 300公司2006年至2016-10年的NAS数据进行了分析,以获得足够的数据。本研究还借助Connect 4、晨星(Morningstar)等其他数据库和公司的年报来收集其他相关数据。采用了三种广为接受的审计质量衡量标准,即持续经营审计意见、四大审计师和可自由支配的应计利润,来衡量审计审计结果对审计质量的影响。本研究排除了初始审计业务,以减轻审计师转换时间对费用的影响。本研究结果表明,NAS不会损害(甚至提高)审计质量。本研究有助于当前关于NAS与审计质量之间关系的争论。我们的研究结果对美国会计准则委员会(AUASB)等监管机构和标准制定者很重要。调查结果告诉这些机构,目前的监管环境保障了澳大利亚的审计质量。因此,没有必要提出禁止NAS的建议,因为NAS不会降低审计质量。此外,本研究支持知识溢出假设:NAS的经济和社会联系并不鼓励审计师牺牲独立性和降低审计质量。因此,本研究建议审计事务所应继续向其在澳大利亚的审计客户提供NAS。未来的研究可以通过分析不同类型的NAS对审计质量的影响来扩展本研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Non-Audit Services and Audit Quality: Recent Evidence from Australia
ABSTRACT:Most prior studies on non-audit services (NAS) and audit quality in Australia predated the Corporate Law Economic Reform Program Act 2004 (CLERP 9). Australia enacted CLERP 9 to improve corporate governance through the improvement of transparency, accountability, and rights of shareholders. No regulatory changes after CLERP 9 exist that can directly affect the relationship between NAS and audit quality in Australia. Hence, this study examines the effects of NAS on audit quality in Australia. Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) Listing Rules mandate ASX 300 companies to establish an audit committee and provide a summary of their audit committee charters. The Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) prepares standards that govern audits under the Australian Corporations Act. The AUASB auditing standards, under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, took effect from July 2006. Therefore, this study examines NAS data of ASX 300 companies from 2006 to 2016-10 years-to obtain sufficient data. This study has recourse to other databases such as Connect 4, Morningstar, and the companies' annual reports to gather other relevant data. Three widely accepted measures of audit quality are used, namely going-concern audit opinions, Big Four auditors, and discretionary accruals, to measure the effects of NAS on audit quality. This study excludes initial audit engagements to alleviate the effects of the timing of auditor switches on fees. This research results suggest that NAS do not impair (or even improve) audit quality. This study contributes to the current debate regarding the relationship between NAS and audit quality. Our findings are important to regulators and standard setters, such as the AUASB. Findings inform these bodies that the current regulatory environment safeguards audit quality in Australia. Thus, proposals to ban NAS are not necessary, because NAS do not deteriorate audit quality. Further, this study supports the knowledge spillover hypothesis: it shows that economic and social bonding of NAS does not encourage auditors to sacrifice their independence and reduce their audit quality. Thus, this study suggests that audit firms should continue to provide NAS to their audit clients in Australia. Future research could extend this study by analyzing the effects of different types of NAS on audit quality.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信