扩大审计报告中的审计师重要性:越多(披露)越少

IF 3.1 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Karen-Ann M. Dwyer, Niamh M. Brennan, Collette E. Kirwan
{"title":"扩大审计报告中的审计师重要性:越多(披露)越少","authors":"Karen-Ann M. Dwyer,&nbsp;Niamh M. Brennan,&nbsp;Collette E. Kirwan","doi":"10.1111/auar.12392","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The United Kingdom (UK) Financial Reporting Council (FRC) introduced expanded audit reports to improve audit report disclosures and render audits more transparent to financial statement users. This study examines audit materiality threshold disclosures, providing descriptive evidence of how auditors disclose materiality information in UK audit reports. This research uses manual content analysis (i) to assess auditors’ benchmarks and the percentages auditors apply to those benchmarks. The analysis examines (ii) auditors’ use of non-GAAP benchmarks, including non-recurring and recurring item exclusions and (iii) auditors’ rationales for their benchmark choices. The research finds that auditors choose a wide variety of benchmarks and apply a wide range of percentages to the chosen benchmarks. Non-GAAP adjustments are pervasive. Auditors’ rationales for benchmark choices include that the benchmark is a financial statement performance measure, and the benchmark eliminates volatility. The authors question whether the FRC's expanded disclosures have met its transparency objectives and concludes that ‘more (disclosure) is less’.</p>","PeriodicalId":51552,"journal":{"name":"Australian Accounting Review","volume":"33 1","pages":"31-45"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/auar.12392","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Auditor Materiality in Expanded Audit Reports: More (Disclosure) is Less\",\"authors\":\"Karen-Ann M. Dwyer,&nbsp;Niamh M. Brennan,&nbsp;Collette E. Kirwan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/auar.12392\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The United Kingdom (UK) Financial Reporting Council (FRC) introduced expanded audit reports to improve audit report disclosures and render audits more transparent to financial statement users. This study examines audit materiality threshold disclosures, providing descriptive evidence of how auditors disclose materiality information in UK audit reports. This research uses manual content analysis (i) to assess auditors’ benchmarks and the percentages auditors apply to those benchmarks. The analysis examines (ii) auditors’ use of non-GAAP benchmarks, including non-recurring and recurring item exclusions and (iii) auditors’ rationales for their benchmark choices. The research finds that auditors choose a wide variety of benchmarks and apply a wide range of percentages to the chosen benchmarks. Non-GAAP adjustments are pervasive. Auditors’ rationales for benchmark choices include that the benchmark is a financial statement performance measure, and the benchmark eliminates volatility. The authors question whether the FRC's expanded disclosures have met its transparency objectives and concludes that ‘more (disclosure) is less’.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51552,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Accounting Review\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"31-45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/auar.12392\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Accounting Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/auar.12392\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Accounting Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/auar.12392","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

英国财务报告委员会(FRC)推出了扩展审计报告,以改善审计报告披露,并使审计对财务报表使用者更加透明。本研究考察了审计重要性阈值披露,提供了审计师如何在英国审计报告中披露重要性信息的描述性证据。本研究使用手动内容分析(i)来评估审计员的基准和审计员应用于这些基准的百分比。该分析检查了(ii)审计师使用非公认会计准则基准,包括非经常性和经常性项目排除,以及(iii)审计师选择基准的理由。研究发现,审计人员选择了各种各样的基准,并对所选基准应用了各种各样的百分比。非公认会计准则调整无处不在。审计人员选择基准的理由包括基准是一种财务报表绩效度量,并且基准消除了波动性。作者质疑FRC扩大的披露是否达到了其透明度目标,并得出结论“更多(披露)更少”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Auditor Materiality in Expanded Audit Reports: More (Disclosure) is Less

The United Kingdom (UK) Financial Reporting Council (FRC) introduced expanded audit reports to improve audit report disclosures and render audits more transparent to financial statement users. This study examines audit materiality threshold disclosures, providing descriptive evidence of how auditors disclose materiality information in UK audit reports. This research uses manual content analysis (i) to assess auditors’ benchmarks and the percentages auditors apply to those benchmarks. The analysis examines (ii) auditors’ use of non-GAAP benchmarks, including non-recurring and recurring item exclusions and (iii) auditors’ rationales for their benchmark choices. The research finds that auditors choose a wide variety of benchmarks and apply a wide range of percentages to the chosen benchmarks. Non-GAAP adjustments are pervasive. Auditors’ rationales for benchmark choices include that the benchmark is a financial statement performance measure, and the benchmark eliminates volatility. The authors question whether the FRC's expanded disclosures have met its transparency objectives and concludes that ‘more (disclosure) is less’.

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
Australian Accounting Review
Australian Accounting Review BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
17.60%
发文量
31
×
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