Are Auditors Compromised by Nonaudit Services? Assessing the Evidence
Are Auditors Compromised by Nonaudit Services? Assessing the Evidence
复制标题
审计师是否会受到非审计服务的影响？
DOI：
10.1506/4vd9-ae3k-xv7l-xt07
复制
发表时间：
2006
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Jere R. Francis
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jere R. Francis
Ruddock，Taylor，and Taylor（2006）使用盈余稳健性框架研究了非审计服务（NAS）对盈余稳健性的影响，并检验了20世纪90年代澳大利亚非审计服务是否损害了审计质量。他们发现没有证据表明，有区别的保守性条件的水平NAS支付给审计师，因此得出结论，NAS对审计质量没有不利影响。虽然这一结果可能无法外推到美国设置由于两国之间的制度差异，该研究确实增加了越来越多的实证证据，质疑是否有任何逻辑的理由限制审计师提供给他们的审计客户的服务范围。在回顾过去40年的NAS研究文献中，人们不得不得出这样的结论：没有确凿的证据将提供非审计服务与审计失败联系起来。然而，文献还发现，NAS可能会对审计师独立性的外观产生不利影响，这可能不仅仅是一个“纯粹的感知”问题，因为也有证据表明，股票价格显着较低的公司，支付他们的审计师大量费用的非审计服务。
Ruddock, Taylor, and Taylor (2006) use an earnings conservatism framework to investigate the effects of nonaudit services (NAS) on earnings conservatism, and to test whether audit quality was impaired by NAS in Australia during the 1990s. They find no evidence of differential conservatism conditional on the level of NAS fees paid to auditors, and thus conclude that NAS have no adverse effect on audit quality. While this result may not extrapolate to the U.S. setting due to institutional difference between the two countries, the study does add to a growing body of empirical evidence that questions whether there is any logical rationale for restricting the scope of the services that auditors provide to their audit clients. In reviewing the NAS research literature over the past 40 years, one has to conclude that there is no “smoking gun” evidence linking the provision of nonaudit services with audit failures. However, the literature also finds that NAS can adversely affect the appearance of auditor independence, and this may be more than a “mere perception” problem, because there is also evidence that stock prices are significantly lower for companies that pay their auditors large fees for nonaudit services.