首页> 外文OA文献 >Do the auditors bear the consequences of corporate failures? The case of failed New Zealand finance companies
【2h】

Do the auditors bear the consequences of corporate failures? The case of failed New Zealand finance companies

机译:审计师是否承担了企业倒闭的后果?新西兰金融公司失败的案例

摘要

This paper examines whether auditors bear any negative consequence of the failures of finance companies in New Zealand. More than 60 finance companies failed since 2006 and these failures imposed massive financial loss on the investors. There is a wide perception of audit failure in the case of these failed finance companies. Therefore, it is important to examine whether there is evidence of poor audit quality in the case of failed finance companies. It is also important to investigate, from the perspective of audit theory and public policy, whether the auditors of these failed finance companies were punished after the failures. The study examines two consequences for the auditors – disciplinary actions against the auditors by Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand and client loss. The paper also examines whether the auditor has been sued after the failure of any finance company.The sample is comprised of 37 failed finance companies for which annual reports were available on the website of Companies Office New Zealand. The study finds that auditors who gave unmodified audit opinions are not more likely to face disciplinary actions than those who gave unmodified audit opinions with going concern explanation paragraphs and modified audit opinions. Furthermore, the study utilizes auditor turnover of public listed companies in New Zealand to test another consequence of finance company failures for the auditors – client loss. While there is no significant relationship between disciplinary actions and auditor turnover, a statistically significant relationship is observed between finance company failure and auditor turnover. The study also analyses litigation effect on auditors who involved with finance company failures. Under the primary liability rule – joint and several liability – in New Zealand, auditor is held liable for the loss of the client.The results of this study will be of interest to practitioners, standard setters and law makers, and will fill the literature gap on the impacts of corporate failures on auditors.
机译:本文研究了审计师是否对新西兰金融公司的失败承担任何负面后果。自2006年以来,已有60多家金融公司倒闭,这些倒闭给投资者造成了巨大的财务损失。对于这些失败的财务公司,人们普遍认为审计失败。因此,重要的是要检查在金融公司倒闭的情况下是否有证据表明审计质量较差。从审计理论和公共政策的角度调查这些失败的财务公司的审计师是否在破产后受到惩罚也很重要。该研究考察了对审计师的两种后果-澳大利亚和新西兰特许会计师对审计师的纪律处分和客户流失。本文还研究了在任何一家金融公司倒闭后是否对审计师提起诉讼。该样本由37家倒闭的金融公司组成,这些公司的年度报告可在新西兰公司办公室的网站上找到。研究发现,给出未修改审计意见的审计师比那些给出持续修改说明和修改后审计意见的未修改审计意见的审计师面临纪律处分的可能性更大。此外,该研究利用新西兰上市公司的审计师更替来测试财务公司倒闭给审计师带来的另一种后果-客户损失。尽管纪律处分与审计师流动之间没有显着关系,但财务公司的失败与审计师流动之间却存在统计学上的显着关系。该研究还分析了诉讼对涉及金融公司倒闭的审计师的影响。根据新西兰的主要责任规则(连带责任),审计师应对客户的损失承担责任。本研究的结果将对从业人员,标准制定者和立法者感兴趣,并将填补文献空白公司倒闭对审计师的影响。

著录项

  • 作者

    Su Li;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2015
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

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