دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی تاثیر تعدیل مالی بر تغییرات حسابرسان - امرالد 2017

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to examine the effect of financial restatement on changing the auditor in the following years. Design/methodology/approach – The study uses data of 105 companies (735 company-years) listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange collected during the period 2008-2014. Logistic regression is used to test the hypotheses. Findings – The results of hypotheses present that restatement does not cause auditor changes and that as the severity of a restatement increases, the auditor change in the following year of restatement also does not increase. Restating companies having strong governance do not go for auditor changes as compared with other companies. In addition, in companies that are restating, non-big auditor changes are not more likely than a big auditor. Also, in companies restating simultaneous with a CEO turnover, there is no possibility of auditor change. Furthermore, multinomial logistic regression showed that the adjustments resulting from the correction of errors and changes in procedures and the amount of adjustments do not cause auditor change in the following year. So, the results have shown that the restatement is not an important factor in changing auditor the next year. Originality/value – The current study analyses the impact of financial restatement on auditor changes in a deep manner in a developing country like Iran.

6. Conclusion

In this study, the effect of financial restatement following on a year after an auditor change has been discussed. If the restatement is due to mistakes that are considered an audit failure, the client is expected to change their auditor after the financial restatements. The results of the hypotheses present that restatements do not lead to auditor changes, and as the severity of a restatement increases, an auditor change in the year following restatement also does not increase. In financial restating companies with strong corporate governance, the auditor change does not happen more than it does in other firms. In addition, in companies that are restating, non-big auditor changes are no more likely than big auditor changes. Companies restating simultaneously with CEO turnover do not offer a possibility of auditor change. Furthermore, multinomial logistic regression showed that the adjustments resulting from the correction of errors and changes in procedures and the amount of adjustments do not cause auditor change in the following year. As such, the results have shown that the restatement is not an important factor in changing auditors in subsequent years.

Hypothesis test results correspond with the findings of Agrawal and Cooper (2007) in that no evidence has been found that the restatement companies are more likely to change their auditors. Findings do not match the research results of Hennes et al. (2012) and Mande and Son (2013). One of the reasons for non-compliance can be related to the costs and benefits associated with the change of the auditor. A replacement auditor may be useful to help restore the reputation capital (Agrawal and Cooper, 2007), but the higher the costs of replacing an auditor may outweigh the reasons for changing the auditor. Among other reasons, the possibility of the auditor failing increases during the first year due to inadequate training provided to the audit staff or because of low prices for new work.