Regulators worldwide are considering expanding current audit reporting model to include key audit matters (KAM). Proponents argue that current audit reports are standardized and uninformative to financial statement users. Auditors in current reporting regime can choose to add explanatory notes in audit reports, however, few current studies have investigated the information content of these explanatory notes. This thesis conducts a textual analysis of explanatory notes in auditor reports and examines the predictability of auditors’ explanatory notes consisting of both unqualified and qualified opinions in determining the incidence of subsequent restatements. I hand collect material accounting restatements disclosed by the public companies in China from 2003 to 2017 and obtain modified audit reports from the CSMAR database during the period between 2003 and 2015. Based on a sample of 22,850 firm-years from 2003 to 2015 in China, I find that modified audit opinions, in general, can communicate financial misstatement risks, and the probability of such risks increases when the type of audit opinion is more severe. I also find that compared with unmodified audit opinion, modified ones containing explanatory notes have a higher possibility of subsequently being restated. Further, the predictive power is not the same across different types of explanatory notes. I have shown that explanatory notes including notes emphasizing contingencies and uncertainties and those relating to audit scope limitations have greater predictive power in explaining subsequent accounting restatements. My findings are robust with a set of additional tests. The findings of this thesis indicate that auditors do communicate financial misstatement risks in modified audit opinions (MAOs). Moreover, the findings are consistent with and provide evidence to support policy changes in developing new enhanced auditor reports introduced by the standard setters in China.

This paper examines the occurrence and outcome of auditor litigation related to financial statement misstatements and the effect of auditor misstatement-based litigation on subsequent auditor behavior. The study is motivated by recent calls to limit auditor legal liability and the need to examine the ability of litigation to deter non-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) financial reporting. I find that misstatement severity is the primary driver of auditor litigation. Specifically, I find that auditor misstatement-based litigation is more likely when the misstatement is associated with fraud, a regulatory investigation, a larger stock price decline, and/or a greater number of accounting application [i.e., Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)/GAAP) failures. In addition, I find that auditor misstatement-based litigation is more likely to occur when the misstatement is associated with engagement fees that consist of a greater magnitude or a greater proportion of non-audit service fees. Further, I find that misstatement severity and the size of the plaintiffs? claims are the primary drivers of auditor settlements resulting from misstatement-based litigation. Specifically, I find that an auditor settlement resulting from misstatement-based litigation is more likely to occur when the misstatement is associated with fraud, a greater amount of alleged income or equity inflation over the class action time period, and/or a larger alleged percentage drop in share price over the class action time period. With respect to subsequent auditor behavior, I find evidence that auditor litigation results in more conservative subsequent auditor behavior across a litigated auditor?s office-wide client portfolio (that excludes the litigated client). Specifically, in the year following auditor litigation, I find evidence that litigation results in increased auditor constraint of client-reported positive and signed discretionary accruals, as well as longer audit report lags.

Se analiza, en primer lugar, las características, metodología, contenido y fases del proceso auditor hasta llegar a su conclusión o producto final: el informe de auditoría. Posteriormente se revisan desde el punto de vista técnico los informes de auditoría depositados en el R.Mercantil de Murcia durante el periodo 1995-1998 para determinar en que medidad se adaptan a lo establecido en la normativa correspondiente, tanto desde el punto de vista formal como desde las perspectiva de su contenido.

Banker är enligt lag tvungna att göra en bedömning av företags återbetalningsförmåga vid kreditgivning. Redovisningsinformation är en viktig bedömningsgrund vid kreditgivning och kvalitén på informationen är avgörande för beslut gällande utlåning. Det är revisorns uppgift att genom granskning kvalitetssäkra ett företags redovisning och förvaltning och resultatet av detta lämnas i en revisionsberättelse. Revisionsberättelsen är den enda offentliga rapport som revisorn lämnar och därmed den som intressenterna kan ta del av. Syftet med denna studie är att undersöka vilken betydelse revisionsberättelsen har för bankerna vid kreditgivning till företag. För att kunna besvara syftet i denna studie har vi använt oss av en kvalitativ metod. Detta för att vi ville få en djupare och mer fullständig förståelse för ämnet. Vi har intervjuat fyra banker i Västmanland för att undvika en enskild banks synsätt och för att kunna se om det föreligger skillnader mellan de enskilda bankernas kontor. Studien visade att revisionsberättelsen ingår i samtliga bankers kreditprocess, men till olika grad. Bankerna anser att en ren revisionsberättelse är positivt och vice versa. I bankernas kreditgivningsbedömning är revisionsberättelsen enbart en parameter och är därmed ej ensamt avgörande vid ett kreditbeslut. Två av bankerna anser att andra faktorer kan väga upp en oren revisionsberättelse. Det bör dock poängteras att ett företag med en ren revisionsberättelse inte endast på grund av detta kan anses som kreditvärdigt. Tvärtom kan inte ett företag som har en oren revisionsberättelse anses som icke kreditvärdigt. / By law, banks are obliged to make an assessment of the company’s ability to repay the credit. Accounting information is an important criterion when granting loans and the quality of this information is crucial for decisions about lending. The auditor´s task is to review and ensure the quality of a company´s accounting and management. This review is compiled in the audit report which is the only public report by the auditor. The purpose of this study is to investigate the significance of the audit report when granting loans to companies. To be able to answer the purpose of this study we have used a qualitative approach to get a deeper and more complete understanding of the subject. We have interviewed four banks to avoid an individual perspective of one bank, and also to investigate if there are differences between different offices. All banks were located in the same province. The audit report is contained in the credit process of every bank but with different importance. If the report does not contain remarks it is positive for the bank and vice verse. The audit report is one of several parameters in the credit process and does not by itself determine the credit decision. Two of the banks think that other factors can replace an audit report which contains remarks. It is crucial though, that a company with an audit report that does not contain remarks can be looked upon as creditworthy, but this cannot be the only deciding factor. On the contrary a company that has remarks in their audit report cannot be considered as non-creditworthy.

This paper examines the occurrence and outcome of auditor litigation related to financial statement misstatements and the effect of auditor misstatement-based litigation on subsequent auditor behavior. The study is motivated by recent calls to limit auditor legal liability and the need to examine the ability of litigation to deter non-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) financial reporting. I find that misstatement severity is the primary driver of auditor litigation. Specifically, I find that auditor misstatement-based litigation is more likely when the misstatement is associated with fraud, a regulatory investigation, a larger stock price decline, and/or a greater number of accounting application [i.e., Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)/GAAP) failures. In addition, I find that auditor misstatement-based litigation is more likely to occur when the misstatement is associated with engagement fees that consist of a greater magnitude or a greater proportion of non-audit service fees. Further, I find that misstatement severity and the size of the plaintiffs? claims are the primary drivers of auditor settlements resulting from misstatement-based litigation. Specifically, I find that an auditor settlement resulting from misstatement-based litigation is more likely to occur when the misstatement is associated with fraud, a greater amount of alleged income or equity inflation over the class action time period, and/or a larger alleged percentage drop in share price over the class action time period. With respect to subsequent auditor behavior, I find evidence that auditor litigation results in more conservative subsequent auditor behavior across a litigated auditor?s office-wide client portfolio (that excludes the litigated client). Specifically, in the year following auditor litigation, I find evidence that litigation results in increased auditor constraint of client-reported positive and signed discretionary accruals, as well as longer audit report lags.

Background: The audit has not always been as it is today. The first law requiring auditing was legislated in the Companies Act 1895. Many events have taken place in the audit history; among them was the Krueger crash, which affected the auditing profession hard in Sweden. This led to new recommendations and laws that would save the profession. Because of the events in the past, there are many who question the audit profession and discussions have been held regarding the auditor's independence and objectivity. Nov. 1, 2010 abolished the audit requirement for certain companies. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze the role of the auditor - the independence and objectivity, by perusing the number of qualified / unqualified audit reports, before and after removal of the audit requirement. Methodology: To answer the study's purpose, a quantitative study was conducted in which 400 annual reports from Stockholm and 200 annual reports outside of Stockholm, has been selected to be examined, to see how the number of qualified / unqualified audit reports has changed during the years 2008-2011. Theoretical Framework: The theories that have been applied in the study are the auditor's role, Independence & Objectivity and Profession. Framework: To complement the theoretical framework the audit significance, audit procedure, audit report and previous studies have been applied. Empirism: The data collected for this study is illustrated in diagrams showing that 2010 was a defining year where most unqualified audit reports were reported, while the remaining years showed non or few unqualified audit reports. Conclusion: Based on the empirical evidence presented, auditor's independence and objectivity has been questioned. Clear indications that the audit requirement has influenced the audit profession is illustrated in the diagrams from empirical data, however, it is too early to say if it has a positive or negative impact on profession.

Background: The audit report has for a long time been the subject of discussion with basis in the financial scandals that resulted in reduced confidence in the audit. Earlier changes have taken place over the years without standard setters succeeding in satisfying users' need for information. This has resulted in a decision from the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board to implement changes which include more entity-specific information. These changes are intended to make it easier for users, but since standard setters have previously overridden users' needs, it is appropriate to question whether the changes this time will have a significant impact on users’ decision making. Furthermore, research about the changes has been contradictory if they are of significance to users. The users this study is focused on is creditors. Purpose: The purpose of the study is to understand how the changes in the current audit report are perceived by the users and the underlying factors to these perceptions. Method: For the empirical basis, a qualitative approach has been used in which semi-structured interviews have been conducted with 10 respondents from the corporate sector at bank. The respondents are business advisors, credit analysts, managers and customer managers. Conclusion: The study’s result show that the changes in their entirety have not affected respondents’ decision making to a great extent. Although the entity-specific information has been shown to facilitate the users needs and reduced the information gap, the changes in general have had a slight practical impact. It is explained by the fact that most respondents do not work with listed companies and therefore are not affected by key audit matters. These respondents wish a similar section for the companies they are responsible for. Regarding remaining changes, more standardized text has been added, which means there is still information the users lack. Information the users lack is mainly entity-specific information regarding these changes, as well as specific information about the audit. It is therefore necessary to refrain from standardized language also in the other sections of the audit report. The standard setters are moving in the right direction in providing users with entity-specific information but have not effectively managed to reduce the information gap so far. The study also shows that the changes have not had any significant impact on the respondents’ confidence in the audit.

A presente pesquisa objetiva analisar as teorias acerca do processo de auditoria e sua relação com a opinião expressa no relatório de auditoria. A associação estudada se diferencia de outros estudos no arcabouço teórico de auditoria, tanto no cenário nacional, quanto no cenário internacional, ao detectar a opinião esperada frente à qualidade da contabilidade da empresa e à qualidade vinculada à firma de auditoria, em métricas ex ante ao relatório da auditoria. O arcabouço teórico, base para esta pesquisa, é a teoria dos custos contratuais. O estudo detectou e explorou nos principais periódicos internacionais fatores determinantes a qualidade da auditoria ex ante, sendo detectado: (I) a reputação/competência do auditor, (II) a especialização do auditor, (III) o atraso na emissão do relatório de auditoria e (IV) o tamanho da firma de auditoria. O método estatístico identificado para averiguação e detecção do objetivo da pesquisa é a regressão logística binária. Procurando identificar anomalias do modelo, as técnicas de análise de clusters e análise multidimensional foram utilizadas para identificar possíveis relações entre os setores. As análises exploratórias demonstraram a separação dos setores em três clusters categorizados pelo acerto do modelo e, após, foram identificadas semelhanças dentre os setores nos grupos formados. O primeiro, dentre os clusters, possui mais setores e comportamento equivalente ao conjunto de empresas abertas brasileiras. Outro cluster, contendo companhias nos setores de Agro e Pesca, Química, Energia Elétrica, Mineração, Minerais não Metalúrgicos e Petróleo e Gás, possui particularidades à opinião do auditor independente, no comparativo à amostra. Neste grupo da amostra o modelo proposto não possui assertividade aos pareceres com modificação de opinião. O terceiro conjunto de setores é composto de empresas com alta quantidade de pareceres sem modificação de opinião, não havendo correlação à amostra estudada. A relação entre a qualidade da auditoria ex ante e a opinião do auditor independente também foi testada, a fim de se detectar os principais motivos de anomalia no modelo e a separação da amostra em subgrupos. Como resultado, identificou-se uma associação atemporal entre a opinião da auditoria e as métricas de qualidade da contabilidade e de qualidade da auditoria para as empresas abertas do Brasil. / The present research aims to analyze the theories of the audit process and its relation to the expressed opinion in the audit report. The studied association differs from other audit theoretical frameworks, both on the national and international scenarios, as detects the expected audit opinion against the quality of the entity accounting and the quality linked to the audit firm, in metrics ex ante to the audit report. The basis for this research is the theory of contract costs. The study discovered and explored in major international models determinants the quality of ex ante audit, being detected: (I) the reputation / auditor competence, (II) the specialization of the auditor, (III) the delay in the issuance of the audit report and (IV) the size of the audit firm. The statistical method identified for investigation and detection of the goal in the research is the binary logistic regression. Seeking to identify anomalies in the proposed model, the techniques of multidimensional analysis and cluster analysis were used to identify possible relationships between sectors. Exploratory analyzes showed the separation of sectors into three clusters categorized by accuracy of the proposed model and, after that, similarities were identified among the sectors in the formed groups. The first, between the clusters, has more sectors and has equivalent behavior to the group of Brazilian public-listed companies. Another cluster, including companies from different industries like Agro, Fishing, Chemical, Energy, Minerals not Metallurgical and oil and gas, hold particularities in the external audit opinion, in comparison to the sample. On this the group the proposed model does not hold assertiveness regarding reports with modified opinions. The third set of sectors comprises companies in which the audit reports without modified opinions, and has no correlation to the others. The relationship between ex ante audit quality and the auditor opinion was also tested, in order to detect the model unconformity and the segregation of the sample into subgroups. As a result, it was identified that there is association between the auditors\' opinion and the accounting quality metrics and quality regarding the public-listed companies in Brazil.

The previous audit report gained a lot of criticism since it contained to much standard text that failed to convey valuable information for users. This lead to IAASB implementing a new standard, called ISA 701-KAM, which was implemented by all listed companies in the end of 2016. The purpose of KAM is to make the audit report less standardized and instead provide transparent and entity-specific information. However, there are those who believe that the confidentiality duty, which is prerequisite to be able to perform an audit, can stand in contrast to the new standard.  In order to investigate this issue, we have interviewed auditors to get their view of how they have implemented and applied KAM in the audit report. Our results show that auditors are skeptical in regards to the audit report being as entity-specific and transparent as IAASB expect it to be, since there exist an underlying fear of overstepping TCD.

I investigate how nonprofessional investors’ confidence in the financial statements and the audit report is influenced by the firm specific details of a critical audit matter (CAM) disclosure in conjunction with the description of the audit procedures engaged to address the CAM in the audit report. Using participants recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk as a proxy for nonprofessional investors in a 2x2 +1 (control) between-participants experiment manipulating CAM disclosure detail (Detailed/Generic) and the description of the audit procedures engaged to address the CAM (Detail/Generic) I find that greater detail in the description of the CAM results in higher confidence in the accuracy and reliability of the financial statements than a generic description of the CAM, consistent with boundary condition of Support Theory. Further, I find that greater detail in the description of the related audit procedures engaged to address the CAM increases nonprofessional investors’ perceptions of audit quality. Evidence of an effect of CAM and audit procedure disclosure language on investment judgments is also presented. These results have implications for researchers, practitioners, and regulators to carefully consider the language used to disclose CAMs in the auditor’s report.