scholarly journals External Auditors and Corporate Corruption: Implications for External Audit Regulators

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. P1-P10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rasha Kassem ◽  
Andrew W. Higson

SUMMARY The purpose of the current study is to examine the responsibility of external auditors in relation to corporate corruption and to highlight the implications of this for external audit regulators. The current study is based on a critical review of prior academic literature as well as a thorough examination of both the International and American Auditing Standards relating to fraud and illegal acts. External auditors have a responsibility for assessing corruption risks but their role was not clearly defined by external audit regulators. The current study was the first to clarify the responsibility of external auditors with regards to corporate corruption, and to shed light on current limitations in the audit standards related to this area. The current study also offers recommendations to audit regulators, external auditors, audit firms, and researchers on such controversial area.

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. A29-A39
Author(s):  
Rasha Kassem

SUMMARY Recent corporate scandals have raised concerns about the quality and value of the audit profession and have generated demands for improving auditors' evaluation of management integrity. The literature lacks evidence regarding methods of assessing management integrity, while audit standards provide little if any guidance on this matter. This raises questions about how external auditors can comply with the audit standards in this area and what best practices and deficiencies exist in the assessment of management integrity. This study examines methods of assessing management integrity by providing insights from the Big 4 auditors in Egypt. The findings of this study will benefit audit firms in their professional audit training programs, as well as auditors conducting fraud risk assessments.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-47
Author(s):  
Carlo Regoliosi ◽  
Davide Martino

This paper shows the results of a research study whose main objectives have been to understand the way and the extent of dependence and consideration which the directors of internal audit departments and the partners in external audit firms have of each other. We relied on the exploratory research methods that examine the level of operative co-operation and activity co-ordination between Internal audit functions and auditing firms through questionnaires and interviews. The findings suggest that mutual collaboration increases the reliability of controls and that, at least in part, avoids duplication of work, although there is no full agreement on the usefulness of the internal audit outcome for the external auditor activities. These findings are particularly relevant given the growing emphasis on the role of Internal Audit as an important corporate governance mechanism and on the new challenges faced by external auditors in the form of greater audit requirements. Overall, our findings have practical implications for both (i) external auditors who are evaluating the role of internal audit functions and its usefulness and (ii) CAEs who could on their turn increase the efficiency and effectiveness of internal audit functions. This article also provides a contribution to the literature examining public companies internal and external audit interrelationships as well as the literature on audit effectiveness and performance.


2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. C1-C4 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Bierstaker ◽  
Lawrence Abbott ◽  
Susan Parker

SUMMARY: Recently, the Institute of Internal Auditor’s (IIA) Internal Audit Standards Board (IASB) conducted a comprehensive review of the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards). The IIA proposed changes to some of the Standards and also recommended new Standards. The IIA provided for a 90-day exposure period (from February 15, 2010, to May 14, 2010) for interested parties to examine and provide comments on the proposed changes and new Standards. The Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association provided the comments in the letter below to the IIA on the 2010 International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing exposure draft.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Yu Hin Lam ◽  
Sujay Sabnis ◽  
Maria Migueliz Valcarlos ◽  
Jennifer R. Wolgemuth

Author(s):  
Carl W. Hollingsworth ◽  
James H. Irving

This study examines the PCAOB’s Division of Enforcement from 2005 to 2017, a time period when it expanded from a $5 million to a $22 million program area.  We find that a pronounced increase in disciplinary orders issued during the latter years of the sample period is attributable to serious audit deficiencies and misconduct by triennially inspected audit firms, non-U.S. audit firms, and firms auditing brokers and dealers.  We also find that more than two-thirds of the violations of PCAOB auditing standards described in these disciplinary orders pertain to failures in general audit principles and responsibilities, obtaining audit evidence, and review and communication.  Finally, we find that the PCAOB levies punitive sanctions on an overwhelming majority of audit personnel and audit firms cited in these disciplinary orders.  Overall, our results indicate that the PCAOB’s enforcement function has actively disciplined audit personnel and audit firms that breached their professional obligations.


2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 350-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miklos A. Vasarhelyi ◽  
Silvia Romero

Purpose – The audit of corporations is now dependent on the examination of corporate computer systems. Although tools and techniques have been available for decades, there are major limitations on the audits of corporate systems by external auditors. This paper aims to examine external auditor usage of technology benefiting from a unique opportunity of reviewing a large CPA firm's audit work papers and interviewing their audit staff to examine the following questions: are auditors using the available technological tools? What are the difficulties they face in using these tools? Are there mediators to enhance usability? Why and what circumstances surround their absence? Design/methodology/approach – The authors use a cross-sectional, case-based field study comparing four engagements in a major audit firm. Findings – This paper concludes that the characteristics of the audit team largely determine the levels of technology utilization. Furthermore, the integration of technology support teams and auditors may improve usability, and, consequently, increase technology adoption. Research limitations/implications – The paper includes information about four audit engagements. Given that audit firms have different cultures, practices and employee competencies, and hence emphasize the use of technology to varying degrees, it would be desirable to expand this study to reflect these variations. Practical implications – The paper presents a discussion of the reasons why auditors do not fully use technology and provide tools to increase its usability. Originality/value – The paper benefits from a unique opportunity of interviewing audit teams of a large firm, as well as through reviewing their work papers.


Author(s):  
Brant E. Christensen ◽  
Nathan G. Lundstrom ◽  
Nathan J. Newton

We examine whether PCAOB inspection reports increase auditors' litigation risk. We find that inspection reports with audit deficiencies are positively associated with the number of lawsuits subsequently filed against the inspected auditor. These results are strongest when client-level lawsuit triggering events have already occurred and when PCAOB inspection content is arguably more persuasive. Importantly, these results pertain exclusively to triennially inspected audit firms for which the set of other publicly available signals of audit quality is limited. Furthermore, we do not argue that inspection reports in isolation trigger lawsuits. Instead, once events such as restatement announcements or bankruptcies create the potential for legal action against the auditor, inspection reports provide a public signal about past noncompliance with auditing standards. This signal likely increases lawyers' perceived strength of case against the auditor before the lawsuit is filed and before lawyers have access to the audit workpapers.


2020 ◽  
Vol 86 (3) ◽  
pp. 157-172
Author(s):  
Gerhard Haszprunar ◽  
Martin Brückner ◽  
Bernhard Ruthensteiner

ABSTRACT The genus Lodderena Iredale, 1924 has been classified in the Skeneidae by most recent authors. However, this family, originally characterized by their minute size, lack of nacre in the teleoconch and a rhipidoglossate radula, is currently considered to be polyphyletic assemblage, and preliminary molecular systematic data suggest exclusion of Lodderena from Skeneidae. In order to shed light on the systematic position of this genus, we provide a detailed description of the anatomy and histology of the type species, Lodderena minima (Tenison-Woods, 1878), and of L. ornata (Olsson & McGinty, 1958). The anatomical data confirm the vetigastropod-trochoid nature of Lodderena but exclude the genus from Skeneidae. Skeneidae are mainly characterized by a propodial penis, a hermaphroditic condition with separated testis and ovary, and a large receptaculum in the mantle roof. In contrast, Lodderena species lack both a copulatory organ and receptaculum, and have a true ovotestis. We also provide a critical review of nominal species in the genus. Based on molecular and morphological evidence, we exclude Lodderena from Skeneidae, instead treating it as a genus incertae sedis within Trochoidea. We discuss the implications of small size for functional morphology and reproduction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document