Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on the IESBA ED Release (August 14, 2014), Proposed Changes to Certain Provisions of the Code Addressing the Long Association of Personnel with an Audit or Assurance Client

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. C18-C22
Author(s):  
Willie E. Gist ◽  
Urton L. Anderson ◽  
Diane J. Janvrin ◽  
Marshall K. Pitman
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Extended Period ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
International Ethics ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Auditing Standards

SUMMARY On August 14, 2014 the International Ethics Standard Board for Accountants (IESBA) requested public comments to its Exposure Draft (ED) (IFAC 2014a) on proposed changes to the 2014 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants (IFAC 2014b). The proposal aims to enhance the independence provisions of the Code to respond to threats that may be created by using the same audit firm personnel for audit or assurance engagements over an extended period of time. Among other things, the amendments would require (1) strengthened general provisions for all audits threatened by a long association of firm personnel, and (2) an increase in the mandatory “cooling-off” period, from two to five years, for the engagement partner on the audit of a public interest entity. The comment period ended November 12, 2014. This commentary summarizes the contributors' views on selected proposals in the ED. Data Availability: The Exposure Draft and related request for specific comments are available at: http://www.ethicsboard.org. Paragraph referencing in the ED is extracted from the Code, set out in the 2014 Handbook of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants, available at: https://www.ifac.org/ethics/iesba-code/.

scholarly journals Comments of the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on IESBA Consultation Paper: Improving the Structure of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. C12-C17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory B. Gaynor ◽  
Diane J. Janvrin ◽  
Marshall K. Pittman ◽  
Mikhail B. Pevzner ◽  
Lourdes Ferreira White
Keyword(s):  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
International Ethics ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Consultation Paper ◽  
Structure Code

SUMMARY Recently, the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants (IESBA) solicited public comments on its Consultation Paper, Improving the Structure of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants. This commentary summarizes the contributors' views on the various questions asked in the IESBA Consultation Paper. Our comments submitted to IESBA appear below. Data Availability: The invitation to comment (which invited comments through February 4, 2015), with links to the consultation paper, is available at: http://www.ifac.org/publications-resources/improving-structure-code-ethics-professional-accountants/.

scholarly journals Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on the International Monitoring Group Consultation, Strengthening the Governance and Oversight of the International Audit-Related Standard-Setting Boards in the Public Interest

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. C1-C10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise Dickins ◽  
Marcus M. Doxey ◽  
Marshall A. Geiger ◽  
Christine Nolder ◽  
Pamela B. Roush
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Accounting Education ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
International Accounting ◽  
International Ethics ◽  
The Public ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Monitoring Group ◽  
International Audit

SUMMARY On November 9, 2017, the Monitoring Group (MG) overseeing international auditing standards issued a request for comment on its consultation paper (CP), Strengthening the Governance and Oversight of the International Audit-Related Standard-Setting Boards in the Public Interest. The CP presents a broad array of proposals to reform and restructure the three current auditing standard-setting groups it oversees (International Accounting and Assurance Standards Board [IAASB], International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants [IESBA], and International Accounting Education Standards Board [IAESB]). The CP suggests combining the three boards into a single board, and solicited public comment on the following areas: (1) key areas of overall concern, (2) guiding principles, (3) options for reform of the standard-setting boards, (4) options for the Public Interest Oversight Board (PIOB), (5) role of the monitoring group, (6) administration, including Standard-Setting Board staff, (7) process considerations, and (8) funding. The comment period ended on February 9, 2018. This commentary summarizes the participating committee members' views on selected questions for respondents posed by the MG. Data Availability: The concept release, including questions for respondents, is available at: https://www.iosco.org/library/pubdocs/pdf/IOSCOPD586.pdf

scholarly journals Auditor Style and Financial Statement Comparability

2013 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 605-633 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jere R. Francis ◽  
Matthew L. Pinnuck ◽  
Olena Watanabe
Keyword(s):  
Data Availability ◽  
Financial Statement ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Internal Working ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Reported Earnings ◽  
Working Rules

ABSTRACT The term “audit style” is used to characterize the unique set of internal working rules of each Big 4 audit firm for the implementation of auditing standards and the enforcement of GAAP within their clienteles. Audit style implies that two companies audited by the same Big 4 auditor, subject to the same audit style, are more likely to have comparable earnings than two firms audited by two different Big 4 firms with different styles. By comparable we mean that two firms in the same industry and year will have a more similar accruals and earnings structure. For a sample of U.S. companies for the period 1987 to 2011, we find evidence consistent with audit style increasing the comparability of reported earnings within a Big 4 auditor's clientele. Data Availability: All data are publicly available from the sources identified in the text.

Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on the IESBA Proposal, Responding to a Suspected Illegal Act

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. C21-C29
Author(s):  
Mary B. Curtis ◽  
Kurt J. Pany ◽  
Mikhail Pevzner ◽  
Jesse C. Robertson ◽  
Jian Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
International Ethics ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Illegal Acts

SUMMARY Recently, the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants (IESBA) solicited public comments on their proposal to revise their standard of reporting on suspected illegal acts. This commentary summarizes the contributors' views on the various alternatives proposed in the IESBA proposal entitled, Responding to a Suspected Illegal Act. The exposure draft (which invited comments through December 15, 2012) can be found at http://www.ifac.org/sites/default/files/publications/files/IESBA-Code-of-Ethics-Illegal-Acts-Exposure-Draft.pdf. Our comments submitted to the IESBA appear below.

scholarly journals Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 37: PCAOB Release No. 2011-006, Concept Release on Auditor Independence and Audit Firm Rotation

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. C15-C27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith L. Jones ◽  
Jagadison K. Aier ◽  
Duane M. Brandon ◽  
Tina D. Carpenter ◽  
Lisa M. Gaynor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Exposure Period ◽  
Auditor Independence ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Professional Skepticism ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Comment ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation

SUMMARY In August 2011, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB or Board) issued a concept release to solicit public comment on the potential direction of a proposed standard-setting project on means to enhance auditor independence, objectivity, and professional skepticism. The Concept Release sought comments on and explores in detail the possibility of mandatory audit firm rotation. The PCAOB provided for a 121-day exposure period (from August 16 to December 14, 2011) for interested parties to examine and provide comments on the concept release. The Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association provided the comments in the letter below (dated December 13, 2011) to the PCAOB on PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 37: PCAOB Release No. 2011-006, Concept Release on Auditor Independence and Audit Firm Rotation. Data Availability: Information about and access to the release are available at: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Docket037/Release_2011-006.pdf

scholarly journals Comments of the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board Exposure Draft, Proposed International Standard on Auditing 220 (Revised): Quality Management for an Audit of Financial Statements

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. C10-C19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veena L. Brown ◽  
Sean Dennis ◽  
Denise Dickins ◽  
Julia L. Higgs ◽  
Tammie J. Schaefer
Keyword(s):  
Quality Management ◽  
Financial Statements ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Firm Level ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
International Standard ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Draft International Standard

SUMMARY In February 2019, the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (the Board or IAASB) issued a request for comment on its Exposure Draft, Proposed International Standard on Auditing 220 (Revised): Quality Management for an Audit of Financial Statements (ED-220). ED-220 explicitly requires the engagement partner to demonstrate sufficient and appropriate involvement in all phases of the audit, it describes certain activities that must be performed by the audit engagement partner, and it explicitly acknowledges the role of audit firm-level policies and procedures and the changing complexity of audit engagement teams. The comment period ended on July 1, 2019. This commentary summarizes the participating committee members' views on selected questions posed by the IAASB. Data Availability: ED-220, including questions for respondents, is available at: https://www.ifac.org/publications-resources/exposure-draft-international-standard-auditing-220-revised-quality-management.

scholarly journals The Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association's Response to the International Auditing and Assurance Standard's Board's Invitation to Comment: Enhancing Audit Quality in the Public Interest

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. C1-C25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine E. Earley ◽  
Karen L. Hooks ◽  
Jenifer R. Joe ◽  
Paul W. Polinski ◽  
Zabihollah Rezaee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Professional Skepticism ◽  
The Public ◽  
Auditing Standards

SUMMARY: On December 17, 2015, the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) issued an Invitation to Comment entitled Enhancing Audit Quality in the Public Interest: A Focus on Professional Skepticism, Quality Control and Group Audits (hereafter, the ITC). The ITC highlights the IAASB's discussions regarding the three separate, but related, topics: professional skepticism, quality control, and group audits, in order to solicit feedback on these topics from various stakeholders. The ITC also discusses potential standard-setting activities the IAASB could participate in to enhance audit quality. The comment period ended on May 16, 2016. This commentary summarizes the contributors' views on selected questions posed in the ITC. Data Availability: The invitation to comment (as of May 23, 2016) is available at: https://www.ifac.org/system/files/publications/files/IAASB-Invitation-to-Comment-Enhancing-Audit-Quality.pdf

The Impact of Client and Misstatement Characteristics on the Disposition of Proposed Audit Adjustments

2011 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Joe ◽  
Arnold Wright, and ◽  
Sally Wright
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Internal Controls ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Confidentiality Agreement ◽  
Financial Scandals ◽  
The Impact

SUMMARY We present evidence on the resolution of proposed audit adjustments during a unique time period, immediately following several U.S. financial scandals and surrounding calls for reforms in auditing and financial reporting, which culminated in the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). During this period, auditors and their clients faced increased scrutiny from investors and regulators. In addition, auditors had to contend with changed incentives, a new external regulator (i.e., the PCAOB), and upcoming annual PCAOB inspections. We extend prior studies by considering a broader range of factors potentially impacting the resolution of proposed adjustments, including the effect of client tenure, strength of internal controls, and repeat adjustments. Data on 458 proposed adjustments are obtained from the working papers of a sample of 163 audit engagements conducted during 2002 by a Big 4 firm. We find that 24.2 percent of proposed adjustments were subsequently waived. The results indicate audit adjustments are more likely to be waived for clients with whom the audit firm has had a longer relationship, although the pattern does not reflect favoring such clients. We also find that adjustments are more likely to be waived for repeat adjustments. Data Availability: Due to a confidentiality agreement with the participating audit firm the data are proprietary.

scholarly journals Comments of the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board Exposure Draft, Proposed International Standard on Auditing 315 (Revised): Identifying and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement and Proposed Consequential and Conforming Amendments to Other ISAs

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. C1-C9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veena Looknanan Brown ◽  
Paul J. Coram ◽  
Sean A. Dennis ◽  
Denise Dickins ◽  
Christine E. Earley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Professional Skepticism ◽  
International Standard ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Explicit Recognition ◽  
Automated Tools ◽  
Tools And Techniques

SUMMARY On July 16, 2018, the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (the Board or IAASB) issued a request for comment on its Exposure Draft, Proposed International Standard on Auditing 315 (Revised): Identifying and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement and Proposed Consequential and Conforming Amendments to Other ISAs (ED-315). Major enhancements proposed include explicit recognition of the auditor's use of automated tools and techniques, requiring an understanding of an auditee's use of information technology relevant to financial reporting, acknowledging the influence of an entity's complexity on the audit plan, and increasing the emphasis on the need for professional skepticism. The comment period ended on November 2, 2018. This commentary summarizes the participating committee members' views on selected questions posed by the IAASB. Data Availability: ED-315, including questions for respondents, is available at: https://www.ifac.org/publications-resources/exposure-draft-isa-315-revised-identifying-and-assessing-risks-material.

scholarly journals PENERAPAN KODE ETIK NOTARIS DALAM PEMBUATAN AKTA PEMBAGIAN WARIS NO 31 MENURUT UUJN NO 2 TAHUN 2014

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1859
Author(s):  
Yoki Kurniawan ◽  
Hanafi Tanawijaya
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Supervisory Board ◽  
The State ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Law ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Notary is a position or ordinary we call as general officials appointed by the State and work to serve the public interest. Not only that, a notary also in carrying out its duties and authority must comply fully with the prevailing laws and regulations in Indonesia. Each position certainly has an ethics in the profession which is called a code of ethics, as well as a notary who has a code of ethics in his profession. But out there masi no notaries who violate the code of ethics as mentioned in the law, In accordance with the title of the author of the adopted method of research used is the normative research method supported by interviews that are expected to help answer the problems of this study. The authors conducted interviews with the supervisory board, notaries, and legal experts. In this case the notary has been declared guilty by the Regional Supervisory Board (MPD) and will proceed the case to the level of sanction by the Regional Supervisory Board (MPW) and after receiving the sanction it will proceed to the next level of Central Assembly (MPP) to be sanctioned which has been granted by the level of the Regional Supervisory Board (MPW).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document