首页> 外文期刊>Auditing >Opinion Shopping to Avoid a Going Concern Audit Opinion and Subsequent Audit Quality
【24h】

Opinion Shopping to Avoid a Going Concern Audit Opinion and Subsequent Audit Quality

机译:购买意见书,避免持续关注审核意见和后续审核质量

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Despite regulatory concerns over opinion shopping (OS) behavior, there exists little systematic evidence on the prevalence and consequences of OS to avoid a going concern opinion (GCO). Using Lennox's (2000) framework to identify OS, we find that distressed firms successfully engage in OS to avoid a GCO. Moreover, clients engaging in OS exhibit a higher ex post Type II error rate in audit opinions than clients that do not, and the higher Type II error rate is salient for clients switching auditors for OS but not for clients retaining auditors for OS. We continue to find this asymmetric effect of the two types of OS on audit quality measured by restatements. These results indicate that auditor switching for OS not only results in a higher likelihood of audit reporting failures but also impairs other dimensions of audit quality, while auditor retaining for OS has little adverse effect on audit quality.
机译:尽管监管机构对意见购买(OS)行为表示关注,但很少有系统的证据表明OS的流行和后果可以避免持续经营意见(GCO)。使用Lennox(2000)的框架来识别操作系统,我们发现陷入困境的公司成功地参与了操作系统以避免GCO。而且,从事OS的客户在审计意见中的II类错误率要高于未选择OS的客户,而II类错误率较高的客户对于为OS更换审计员的客户却显着,而对于为OS保留审计员的客户则不然。我们继续发现这两种类型的操作系统对通过重述衡量的审计质量的这种不对称影响。这些结果表明,针对OS的审计师切换不仅会导致审计报告失败的可能性更高,而且还会损害审计质量的其他方面,而保留OS的审计师对审计质量几乎没有不利影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号