THE IMPACT OF NON-AUDIT SERVICES ON INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS’ PERCEPTION OF AUDITORINDEPENDENCE: EVIDENCE FROM TURKEY

Year 2005, Volume: 6 Issue: 24, 197 - 201, 10.06.2005

M. Mehtap Aldoğan

https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.680803

Abstract

In recent years, the audit profession was confronted with different regulations, revised rules on Non-Audit Services (NAS) and on Auditor Independence. In-depth, Professional Accountancy Bodies amended their independence rules according to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. For instance, the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) in the USA, Capital Market Board (SPK) in Turkey made amendments to their independence rules on Non- Audit Services and on auditor independence in light of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether “non- audit Services (NAS)” jeopardize institutional “investors’ perception of auditor independence in Turkey”. Therefore, the questionnaire was administered to 34 institutional investors in İstanbul, Turkey. It was generally found that institutional investors’ perception of auditor independence is not impaired at the time of the joint provision of NAS and audit Services to an audit Client.

Keywords

Non-Audit Services, Auditor independence

References

• [1] Frankel, R.M., Johnson, M.F. & Nelson, K.K. (2002). Directorship. Westport, 28, 6-8.
• [2] Grusd, N. & Morris T.W. (2002). The Enron Affair From a Lender’s View. CPA Journal, 72, 8-10.
• [3] Firth, M. (1980). Perceptions of Auditor independence And Offıcial Ethical Guidelines. The Accounting Review, LV(3), 451-466.
• [4] Jenkins, J.G. & Krawezyk, K. (2001). The Influence of Non-Audit Services on Perceptions of Auditor independence. Journal of Applied Business Research, 17, 73-78.
• [5] Canning, M. & Gwilliam, D. (1999). Non-audit Services and Auditor independence: Some Evidence From Ireland. The European Accounting Review, 8(3), 401-419.
• [6] Shockley, R.A. (1981). Perceptions of Auditors’ independence: An Empirical Analysis. The Accounting Review, LVI(4), 785-800.
• [7] Beattie, V. & Fearnley, S. (2003). Auditor independence and Non-audit Services: A Literatüre Review. ICAEW Report, January, 1-75. (http://www.icaew.co.uk/ index.cfm? AUB=TB2 l_36463&tb5= 1). [21.01.2003].
• [8] Bartlett, R.W. (1993). A Scale of Perceived independence: New Evidence on an Old Concept. Accounting, Auditing, and Accountability Journal, 6(2), 52 -67.
• [9] Lowe, D.J., Geiger, M.A. & Pany, K. (2002). Appearances are important: Outsourced Internal Audit Services an the Perception of Auditor independence. The CPA Journal, 72(4), 20 -24.
• [10] Oliverio, M.E. & Newman, B.H. (2000). Use of Audit Firm for Non-audit Services: Is independence Impaired? (www.ssrn.com). [10.04.2003]
• [11] Report to the United States independence Standards Board, Research into Perceptions of Auditor independence and Objectivity. (November 1999). (www.cpaindependence.org). [03.02.2004].
• [12] Report to the United States independence Standards Board, Research into Perceptions of Auditor independence and Objectivity-Phase II. (July 2000). (www.cpaindependence.org). [03.02.2004].
• [13] Lavin D. (1976). Perceptions of independence of the Auditor. The Accounting Review, 51,41-50.
• [14] (www.spk.gov.tr/afd/Aktumadres.asp). [ 05.11.2003].