The objective of this study is to evaluate audit tenure, industry specialization, and firm size and its correlation to financial restatements. A client’s restatements suggest low audit quality because it indicates that the client’s financial statements are not in line with GAAP. I analyzed a sample of 250 firm-year restatements from public companies during 2008 to 2012. I gathered the data using COMPUSTAT and AuditAnalytics. For my results, I have found that auditor tenure has a negative correlation with financial restatement. I also found that industry expertise has a negative correlation with financial restatements. Further, it appears that firm size has no correlation with financial restatements. In conclusion, it turns out my results of auditor tenure and industry specialization are in line with my hypothesis that these two indicators correlate negatively with financial restatements. As for, firm size, there is no correlation with firm statement restatements.
Sarbanes Oxley section 404 requires companies to have independent auditors who evaluate their internal control systems and financial reports. These independent auditors must account for this in their audit report for the general public, including investors of the company. Although an audit firm can follow the General Accepted Auditing Standards and reflect the proper assurance in their audit work, there could be an instance where the client still has a financial restatement. As stated before, restatements are a sign of poor audit quality. They suggest that the reported financial statements have material errors and indicate audit failure. According to Chaney and Philipich (2002), audit failure reflects the audit firm’s poor performance and can even ...
... middle of paper ...
... perfectly explained by this model. Moreover, as expected, our constant and expertise are negative, which means that any change in the independent variables will yield a negative effect on our dependent variable. The table also shows the p-value of the regression value is 0.0294. This means the regression model has about 95% confidence level of statistics significance to represent the restatement value.
Based on this model, we expected that restatements will have a negative relationship with firm size, growth, leverage, EPS, and ROA. Because when all the three factors decrease, the restatements will decrease. The above table shows that the adjusted R-Square is 0.7569. This is our coefficient of determination and it shows a strong fit between the actual and fitted values. This means that there are 45.69% of restatements that can be perfectly explained by this model.
Arens, Alvin A., Elder, Randall J., and Beasley, Mark S. (2012). Auditing and Assurance Services:
However, circumstances changed “in cases in which an auditor fails to establish that applicable auditing standards were followed” (Zack 2011). Since WoolEx Mills’ auditors failed to properly identify the fraud risks that caused the material misstatements, they would be in breach of professional duty to shareholders. Litigation would mostly be pursued by WoolEx Mills’ shareholders, WoolEx Mills, third parties impacted by the auditors services, creditors, and other parties who rely on WoolEx Mills financial statements. Each plaintiff would have the right to sue the auditors for their negligence in performing the audit with due diligence. To prove a breach of contract, WoolEx Mills would need to provide the engagement letter as proof that the auditors did not peform the duties agreed upon. Additionally, WoolEx Mills’ auditors would be charged with either gross or ordinary negligence based on their deviation from proper auditing standards. Since the auditors failed to test the company’s internal controls, they would be found guilty of gross negligence. The auditors would be guilty of ordinary negligence if they forgot to complete a section of the vertical analysis of the Income Statement (Zack 2011) (Krishnan & Shah
The SOX act section 404 requires that the auditor assess the company’s management of internal controls and report on it. The act requires that a company include a copy of the internal controls in the year end annual report. All financial statements must be certified by a company’s management. (Coustan, 2004)
According to PCAOB Ethics and Independence Rule 3520 a registered public accounting firm and its associated persons must be independent of the firm's audit client throughout the audit and professional engagement period. Independence is required for all audit engagements. The auditor must be independent of an entity when performing an engagement according to General Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS). Independence is very significant to the audit profession, because the primary purpose of an audit is to provide financial statement users with reasonable assurance an on whether the financial statements are presented fairly. The auditor’s report gives credibility to an entity financial statement and without an auditor’s report the financial statement would be consider worthless. Reliance on management for the fair presentation of a financial statement would often result with a bias and impressive financial statements that doesn’t reflect a true picture of the entity’s financial position. An auditor’s independence should not in anyway be influenced by any relationship between their client and
It has been a decade since the Sarbanes-Oxley Act became in effect. Obviously, the SOX Act which aimed at increasing the confidence in the US capital market really has had a profound influence on public companies and public accounting firms. However, after Enron scandal which triggered the issue of SOX Act, public company lawsuits due to fraud still emerged one after another. As such, the efficacy of the 11-year-old Act has continually been questioned by professionals and public. In addition, the controversy about the cost and benefit of Sarbanes-Oxley Act has never stopped.
In 2002, Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) to strengthen corporate governance and restore investor confidence. The act’s most important provision, §404, requires management and independent auditors to evaluate annually a firm’s internal financial-reporting controls. In addition, SOX tightens disclosure rules, requires management to certify the firm’s periodic reports, strengthens boards’ independence and financial-literacy requirements, and raises auditor-independence standards.
These values are based on a number of different assumptions. See Exhibit B. The forecast is not without a level of uncertainty. Specifically, there are regulatory decisions where the outcome is not clear at this time. This could impact profit margins plus or minus seven percentage points.
The Institute of Internal Auditors. "Internal Auditing's Role In Section 302 and 404 of the U.S Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002." The Institute of Internal Auditors (2004): 1-13.
Throughout the past several years major corporate scandals have rocked the economy and hurt investor confidence. The largest bankruptcies in history have resulted from greedy executives that “cook the books” to gain the numbers they want. These scandals typically involve complex methods for misusing or misdirecting funds, overstating revenues, understating expenses, overstating the value of assets or underreporting of liabilities, sometimes with the cooperation of officials in other corporations (Medura 1-3). In response to the increasing number of scandals the US government amended the Sarbanes Oxley act of 2002 to mitigate these problems. Sarbanes Oxley has extensive regulations that hold the CEO and top executives responsible for the numbers they report but problems still occur. To ensure proper accounting standards have been used Sarbanes Oxley also requires that public companies be audited by accounting firms (Livingstone). The problem is that the accounting firms are also public companies that also have to look after their bottom line while still remaining objective with the corporations they audit. When an accounting firm is hired the company that hired them has the power in the relationship. When the company has the power they can bully the firm into doing what they tell them to do. The accounting firm then loses its objectivity and independence making their job ineffective and not accomplishing their goal of honest accounting (Gerard). Their have been 379 convictions of fraud to date, and 3 to 6 new cases opening per month. The problem has clearly not been solved (Ulinski).
With every business activity come opportunities for fraudulent behavior which leads to a greater demand for auditors with unscathed ethics. Nowadays, auditors are faced with a multitude of ethical issues, and it is even more problematic when the auditors fail to adhere to the standards of professional conducts as prescribed by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). The objective of this paper is to analyze the auditors’ compliance with the code of professional conduct in the way it relates to the effectiveness of their audits.
The ratio of 1.7 for the last two years indicates consistency, although a lower number is preferred. As a company produces high value product, this could be a satisfactory ratio. By comparing it to 2011 when a ratio was 2.9, in the last two years a ratio improved
...e financial reports and statements are correct. This auditing will be conducted by auditing department of the organization, even may be done by an independent auditor who is not part of the organization, and sometimes public officials are elected. In case of unmatched consequences the organization need to give explanation on the misrepresentation of wrong statements. Auditors purpose is then to ensure that the misrepresentations are corrected, then maintain accurate, reliable financial documents and statements.
Audit Risk is the risk that an auditor has stated an incorrect audit opinion on the financial statements. It may cause the auditors fail to alter the opinion when the financial statements contain material misstatement. The auditor should perform the audit to lower the audit risk to a sufficiently low level. In the auditor’s professional judgement, the auditor should appropriately state a correct opinion on the financial statement
The evolution of auditing is a complicated history that has always been changing through historical events. Auditing always changed to meet the needs of the business environment of that day. Auditing has been around since the beginning of human civilization, focusing mainly, at first, on finding efraud. As the United States grew, the business world grew, and auditing began to play more important roles. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, people began to invest money into large corporations. The Stock Market crash of 1929 and various scandals made auditors realize that their roles in society were very important. Scandals and stock market crashes made auditors aware of deficiencies in auditing, and the auditing community was always quick to fix those deficiencies. The auditors’ job became more difficult as the accounting principles changed, and became easier with the use of internal controls. These controls introduced the need for testing; not an in-depth detailed audit. Auditing jobs would have to change to meet the changing business world. The invention of computers impacted the auditors’ world by making their job at times easier and at times making their job more difficult. Finally, the auditors’ job of certifying and testing companies’ financial statements is the backbone of the business world.
...pendence, whether pro forma or substantially, the quality of professional assurance service of professional accountants will be doubted by public and that will probably lead to serious results. The factors affecting independence of external auditors are multiple. Market competition among external auditors and the imperfection of laws regulated the external auditing industry are tow of most important factors. In order to maintain and guarantee the independence of external auditors and try to avoid the scandals like Arthur Andersen, some research on how to improve and maintain the independence of external auditors are necessary. It is possible for researchers to put emphasis on how to control the market competition among auditing organizations and enhance the ability of accounting regulators to supervise and manage the professional accounting industry in the future.