مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد ارزیابی بازار تصمیم گیری برای حسابرسی – الزویر 2017

Among the services provided by independent certified public accountants, audit and review are two ways to provide assurance regarding the quality of a company’s financial information. In an audit engagement, auditors aim to provide positive assurance that no material misstatement has been detected based on the performed auditing procedures. In a review engagement, auditors do not render their opinions and express only limited assurance. Both substantive tests and analytical procedures are required in an audit engagement to provide positive assurance. In contrast, substantive tests are normally skipped, and only inquiries and analytical procedures are generally performed in a review engagement. As the audit procedures involved in a review engagement are less complex and extensive than those in an audit engagement, the cost of a review engagement is typically lower. To enhance the transparency of corporations’ financial reporting, listed companies having subsidiaries in Taiwan were required to disclose their consolidated semiannual reports along with their parent companies’ standalone financial reports starting in 2005. 1 Prior to 2013, the consolidated semiannual financial statements needed to be either audited or reviewed. Although the cost of a review engagement is typically lower than the cost of an audit, not every company chose to review their consolidated semiannual reports before 2013. This observation raises two interesting research questions: 1) What motivates a company to choose an audit engagement when a review engagement is acceptable? 2) Can the market detect the difference between audited and reviewed information?