重要性不确定性加剧的经济后果:审计视角

Ying Huang, Ningzhong Li, Jieying Zhang, Xiaolu Zhou
{"title":"重要性不确定性加剧的经济后果:审计视角","authors":"Ying Huang, Ningzhong Li, Jieying Zhang, Xiaolu Zhou","doi":"10.2308/tar-2021-0716","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Using a Supreme Court ruling that rejected the use of “bright-line” rules previously relied upon in evaluating materiality claims, this study examines how heightened materiality uncertainty impacts audit pricing. We expect the heightened uncertainty to make it more difficult for auditors and clients to assess materiality and to reach a consensus on materiality assessment, which increases audit effort and engagement risk, leading to higher audit fees. Consistent with this prediction, we find that after the ruling, audit fees increase significantly for treatment firms in the circuits using bright-line rules in the pre-ruling period, relative to control firms not affected by the ruling. This effect is stronger when auditors have lower quality or lower industry expertise, and when investors have more diverse opinions. We also find that for firms audited by low-expertise auditors, auditor turnover due to auditor-client disagreement on materiality-related issues increases significantly for treatment firms relative to control firms.\n Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.\n JEL Classifications: K2; M41; M42.","PeriodicalId":503285,"journal":{"name":"The Accounting Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Economic Consequences of Heightened Materiality Uncertainty: An Auditing Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Ying Huang, Ningzhong Li, Jieying Zhang, Xiaolu Zhou\",\"doi\":\"10.2308/tar-2021-0716\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Using a Supreme Court ruling that rejected the use of “bright-line” rules previously relied upon in evaluating materiality claims, this study examines how heightened materiality uncertainty impacts audit pricing. We expect the heightened uncertainty to make it more difficult for auditors and clients to assess materiality and to reach a consensus on materiality assessment, which increases audit effort and engagement risk, leading to higher audit fees. Consistent with this prediction, we find that after the ruling, audit fees increase significantly for treatment firms in the circuits using bright-line rules in the pre-ruling period, relative to control firms not affected by the ruling. This effect is stronger when auditors have lower quality or lower industry expertise, and when investors have more diverse opinions. We also find that for firms audited by low-expertise auditors, auditor turnover due to auditor-client disagreement on materiality-related issues increases significantly for treatment firms relative to control firms.\\n Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.\\n JEL Classifications: K2; M41; M42.\",\"PeriodicalId\":503285,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Accounting Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Accounting Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2308/tar-2021-0716\",\"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 Accounting Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2308/tar-2021-0716","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

最高法院的一项裁决否决了以往在评估重要性索赔时所依赖的 "明线 "规则,本研究利用这一裁决,探讨了重要性不确定性的增加如何影响审计定价。我们预计,不确定性的增加会使审计师和客户更难评估重要性并就重要性评估达成共识,从而增加审计工作量和业务风险,导致审计费用增加。与这一预测相一致,我们发现,在裁决之后,与未受裁决影响的对照公司相比,在裁决前使用明线规则的巡回区内的处理公司的审计费用显著增加。当审计师的素质较低或行业专业知识较少,以及投资者的意见较多元化时,这种影响会更大。我们还发现,对于由低专业知识审计师审计的公司而言,由于审计师与客户在实质性相关问题上存在分歧而导致的审计师流失率在处理公司显著高于对照公司。数据可用性:数据可从正文引用的公共来源获取。JEL 分类:K2; M41; M42。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Economic Consequences of Heightened Materiality Uncertainty: An Auditing Perspective
Using a Supreme Court ruling that rejected the use of “bright-line” rules previously relied upon in evaluating materiality claims, this study examines how heightened materiality uncertainty impacts audit pricing. We expect the heightened uncertainty to make it more difficult for auditors and clients to assess materiality and to reach a consensus on materiality assessment, which increases audit effort and engagement risk, leading to higher audit fees. Consistent with this prediction, we find that after the ruling, audit fees increase significantly for treatment firms in the circuits using bright-line rules in the pre-ruling period, relative to control firms not affected by the ruling. This effect is stronger when auditors have lower quality or lower industry expertise, and when investors have more diverse opinions. We also find that for firms audited by low-expertise auditors, auditor turnover due to auditor-client disagreement on materiality-related issues increases significantly for treatment firms relative to control firms. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: K2; M41; M42.
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