BAĞIMSIZ DENETİMİN GÖZETİMİ: ÜLKELERARASI KAMU GÖZETİM KURUMLARININ İNCELEME RAPORLARINDAKİ BULGULARININ İHLAL EDİLEN BDS’LER AÇISINDAN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Abstract

Enron ile patlak veren ve Sarbanes Oxley Kanunu (SOX) ile şekillenen sürecin ardından başta ABD olmak üzere pek çok ülkede kamu gözetim sistemleri kurulmuştur. Bu çalışmada, Uluslararası Bağımsız Denetim Düzenleyicileri Forumu (IFIAR)’na üye olan 9 ülkenin inceleme raporları ihlal edilen BDS’ler açısından incelenmiştir. Bağımsız Denetimin Belgelendirilmesi (BDS 230), Finansal Tabloların Bağımsız Denetiminde Bağımsız Denetçinin Hileye İlişkin Sorumlulukları (BDS 240), İşletme ve Çevresini Tanımak Suretiyle Önemli Yanlışlık Risklerinin Belirlenmesi ve Değerlendirilmesi (BDS 315) ve Bağımsız Denetim Kanıtları (BDS 500) Standartlarının yaygın olarak ihlal edildiği tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

• İnceleme Raporları
• Gözetim Bulguları
• İhlal Edilen Bağımsız Denetim Standartları

THE INSPECTION OF AUDIT FIRMS: COMPARISON OF COUNTRIES’ PUBLIC OVERSIGHT AUTHORITIES’ FINDINGS IN INSPECTION REPORTS IN TERMS OF VIOLATED AUDITING STANDARDS

Abstract

Following the process that erupted with Enron and shaped with Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), public oversight authotiries were established in many countries, especially in the USA. In this study, the inspection reports of public oversight authorities from 9 countries that are members of The International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR) were examined in terms of violated auditing standards. As a result, Audit Documentation (TSA 230) , The Auditor’s Responsibilities Relating to Fraud in an Audit of Financial Statements (TSA 240), Identifying and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement through Understanding the Entity and Its Enviroment (TSA 315) and Audit Evidence (TSA 500) Standards were found to be most widely violated standards.

Keywords

• Inspection Reports
• Inspection Findings
• Violated Auditing Standards

References

1. Accountancy Europe. 2018. Organization of the Public Oversight of the Audit Profession in Europe, State of Affairs after the implementation of the 2014 Audit Reform Survey, Audit&Assurance March.
2. Accountancy Europe. 2020. Organization of the Public Oversight of the Audit Profession in 30 European Countries, State of Affairs after the implementation of the 2014 EU Audit Reform Survey Results, Audit & Assurance, July.
3. ASIC (Australian Securities and Investments Commission). <(https://asic.gov.au/> (Erişim Tarihi: 22.03.2020).
4. Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE). 2004. Report To The Nation On Occupational Fraud & Abuse, https://www.acfe.com/uploadedfiles/acfe_website/content /documents/2004rttn.pdf. (Erişim Tarihi: 01.10.2018).
5. Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). ASIC Audit Inspection Report 2017-18. January 2019. Report: 607 https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-607-audit-inspection-program-report-for-2017-18/ (Erişim Tarihi: 23.03.2020).
6. Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). Audit Inspection Report 2018-19. December 2019. Report: 648. https://download.asic.gov.au/media/5409276/rep648-published-12-december-2019. pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 23.03.2020).
7. Azibi, J., Grima, C. ve Tonduer, H. 2019. “An Examination of Audit Fees for Initial Audit Engagements After The H3C Inspection in French Context”, International Journal of Economics and Finance, 11(12), 41-49.
8. Benston, G.J. 2003. “The Regulation of Accountants and Public Accounting Before and After Enron”, Emory Law Journal, 52, 1325-1352.

9. CADB (Companies Auditors Disiplinary Board). (Erişim Tarihi: 24.03.2020).
10. Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB). Annual Report 2017. https://cpab-ccrc.ca/docs/default-source/annual-reports/2017-annual-report-en.pdf?sfvrsn= 88cf3947_10 (Erişim Tarihi: 20.03.2020).
11. Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB). Annual Inspection Report 2017. https://cpab-ccrc.ca/docs/default-source/inspections-reports/2017-annual-inspections-report-en.pdf?sfvrsn=3ff186f0_10 (Erişim Tarihi: 21.03.2020).
12. Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB). Annual Report 2018. https://cpab-ccrc.ca/docs/defaultsource/annualreports/cpab_2018_annual_report_ar_en_20190301.pdf?sfvrsn=c2b6ce7d_10 (Erişim Tarihi: 20.03.2020).
13. Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB). Annual Report 2019. https://cpab-ccrc.ca/docs/default-source/annual-reports/2019-annual-report-en.pdf?sfvrsn=dc4b1e23_13 (Erişim Tarihi: 20.03.2020).
14. Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB). Rules. https://cpab-ccrc.ca/docs/default-source/governance/ cpab-rules-en.pdf?sfvrsn=98510e76_8 (Erişim Tarihi: 21.03.2020).
15. Carcello, J.V., Hollingsworth, C. ve Mastrolia, S.A. 2011. “The Effect of PCAOB Inspections on Big 4 Audit Quality”, Research in Accounting Regulation, 23, 85-96.
16. Carson, E., Simnett, R. ve Vanstraelen, A. 2013. Auditing the Auditors: An International Analysis of the Effectiveness of National Inspection Regimes on Audit Quality. http://www.hec.unil.ch/documents/seminars/dcc/1237.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 01.03.2020).
17. Certified Public Accountants and Auditing Oversight Board (CPAAOB). 2019. Annual Report, May. https://www.fsa.go.jp/cpaaob/english /reports/30.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
18. Certified Public Accountants and Auditing Oversight Board (CPAAOB). 2019. Case Report from Audit Firm Inspections Results, July. https://www.fsa.go.jp/cpaaob/english/oversight /20191129/2019 _jireisyu.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
19. Certified Public Accountants and Auditing Oversight Board (CPAAOB., 2019. Fiscal Edition. https://www.fsa.go.jp/cpaaob/english/pamphlet_f.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
20. Certified Public Accountants and Auditing Oversight Board (CPAAOB). 2019. Monitoring Report. https://www.fsa.go.jp/cpaaob/english/oversight/20191220/2019_monitoring_report.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 13.03.2020).
21. Coates, J.C. 2007. “The Goals and Promise of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(1), 91-116.
22. DeFond, M.L. 2010) “How Should The Auditors Be Audited? Comparing the PCAOB Inspection with the AICPA Peer Reviews”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 49,104-108.
23. DeFond, M.L. ve Lennox, C.S. 2017. “Do PCAOB Inspections Improve the Quality of Internal Control Audits?”, Journal of Accounting Research, 55, 591-627.
24. Die WPK. 2018. (Erişim Tarihi: 08.03.2020).
25. FEE Survey, Organisation of the Public Oversight of the Audit Profession in 23 European Countries, https://www.accountancyeurope.eu/wpcontent/uploads/1506_Public_Oversight_Survey_third_publication.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 01.02.2021).
26. Financial Reporting Council (FRC). 2015. Audit Quality Inspections Annual Report 2014/15, 29 May. https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/d83b5d16-de6f-4fb0-b230-f5de62989daf/AQR-2014-15-Annual-Report-final.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2020).
27. Financial Reporting Council (FRC). 2019. Annual Enforcement Review, July. https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/b8622ccd-5264-41d680539986fba531c0/2353_AnnualEnfor cement-Review-v6-1-Final-Web.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2020).
28. Financial Reporting Council (FRC), (2019). Annual Enforcement Review, July. https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/b8622ccd-5264-41d6-8053-9986fba531c0/2353_Annual-Enforcement-Review-v6-1-Final-Web.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2020).
29. Financial Services Agency (FSA). CPA Firm Inspection. 2018. General Inspection Report, May 2019, Taiwan. https://www.sfb.gov.tw/en/home.jsp?id=232&parentpath =0,117,228 (Erişim Tarihi: 02.04.2020).
30. Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC). Annual Report 2018-2019. https://history.fsc.gov.tw/Uploads/Books/Files/CDBE9599-EFD4-4DB5-9891-F5E1A6C475CA/2/ (Erişim Tarihi: 01.04.2020).
31. Francis, J.R. 2004. “What Do We Know About Audit Quality?”, The British Accounting Review, 36(4), 345-368. https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/abs/ pii/S0890838904000769 (Erişim Tarihi: 04.02.2017).
32. FSC, Financial Supervisory Commission. (Erişim Tarihi: 01.04.2020).
33. FSC, Financial Supervisory Commission. (Erişim Tarihi: 01.04.2020).
34. Gunny, K.A. ve Zhang, T.C. 2013. “PCAOB Inspection Reports and Audit Quality”, J.Account, Public Policy, 32, 136-160.
35. Haut Conseil du Commissariat aux Comptes (H3C). Strategic Plan (2012-2014). http://www.h3c.org/textes/H3C%20Strategic%20plan.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 09.03.2020).
36. Haut Conseil du Commissariat aux Comptes (H3C). Annuel Rapport, (2018). http://www.h3c.org/textes/H3C_ra2018_Complet.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 09.03.2020).
37. H3C, Haut Conseil du Commissariat aux Comptes. Fransız Ticaret Kanunu, https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000032258452&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000005634379&dateTexte=20160617 (Erişim Tarihi: 09.03.2020).
38. H3C, Haut Conseil du Commissariat aux Comptes. https://doc.cncc.fr/normes-exercice-professionnel (Erişim Tarihi: 09.03.2020).
39. IFIAR, the International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators. https://www.ifiar.org/about/#key-objectives (Erişim Tarihi: 01.02.2021).
40. JICPA, Japanese Institute of Certified Public Accountants. (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
41. Kamu Gözetim Muhasebe ve Denetim Standartları Kurumu (KGK). 2016. Yıllık İnceleme Raporu, (Erişim Tarihi: 20.06.2017).
42. Kamu Gözetim Muhasebe ve Denetim Standartları Kurumu (KGK). 2017. Yıllık İnceleme Raporu, (Erişim Tarihi: 01.11.2018).
43. Kamu Gözetim Muhasebe ve Denetim Standartları Kurumu (KGK). 2018. Yıllık İnceleme Raporu, (Erişim Tarihi: 30.10.2019).
44. Kamu Gözetim Muhasebe ve Denetim Standartları Kurumu (KGK). 2019. Yıllık İnceleme Raporu, (Erişim Tarihi: 20.12.2020).
45. KGK, Kamu Gözetim Muhasebe ve Denetim Standartları Kurumu.. (Erişim Tarihi: 31.08.2020).
46. Kesimli, İ.G. ve Çalıyurt, K.T. 2018. Kamu Gözetimi Denetimleri ve Yaptırımları: Türkiye-ABD Karşılaştırması, Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, Özel Sayı, 636-660.
47. Murase, H., Numata, S. ve Takeda, F. 2011. “Reputation of Low-Quality Big 4 and Non-Big 4 Auditors: Evidence From Auditor Switches of Former ChuoAoyama Clients”, Journal of Governance and Regulation, 2(1), 1-35. Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1532207 (Erişim Tarihi: 03.04.2020).
48. Palmrose, Z. 1988. “1987 Competitive Manuscript Co-Winner: An Analysis of Auditor Litigation and Audit Service Quality”, The Accounting Review, 63(1), 55-73.
49. PCAOB, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. (Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2020).
50. PCAOB, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. (Erişim Tarihi: 09.03.2020).
51. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2017. Staff Inspection Brief 2017, Vol:2017/3, August..https://pcaobus.org/Inspections/Documents/inspection-brief-2017-3-issuer-scope.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 10.08.2019).
52. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2018. Annual Report. https://pcaobus.org/About/Administration/ Documents/Annual %20Reports/2018-PCAOB-Annual-Report.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 10.08.2019).
53. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2018. Staff Preview of 2018 Inspection Observations, 2018. https://pcaobus.org/Inspections/Documents/Staff-Preview-2018-Inspection-Observations.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 01.10.2019).
54. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2019. Inspection Outlook for 2019. https://pcaobus.org/Inspections/Documents/Inspections-Outlook-for-2019.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
55. Reinstein, A. ve McMillan J.J. 2004. “The Enron Debacle: More Than A Perfect Storm”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 15(6-7), 955-970.
56. Report on 2017 Inspection of BDO USA, LLP, PCAOB Release No: 104-2019-085, Issued by the PCAOB, June 20, 2019. https://pcaobus.org/Inspections/Reports /Documents/104-2019-085-BDO-USA-LLP.PDF (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
57. Report on 2017 Inspection of Deloitte & Touche LLP, PCAOB Release No: 104-2019-001, Issued by the PCAOB, December 20, 2018. https://pcaobus.org/Inspections/
58. Reports/Documents/104-2019-001-Deloitte-Touche-LLP.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
59. Report on 2017 Inspection of Ernst & Young LLP, PCAOB Release No:104-2019-122, Issued by the PCAOB, September 12, 2019. https://pcaobus.org/Inspections/
60. Reports/Documents/104-2019-122-2017-Ernst-Young-LLP.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
61. Report on 2017 Inspection of Grant Thornton LLP, PCAOB Release No:104-2019-043, Issued by the PCAOB, March 21, 2019. https://pcaobus.org/Inspections/Reports /Documents/104-2019-043-Grant-Thornton-LLP.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
62. Report on 2017 Inspection of KPMG LLP, PCAOB Release No:104-2019-002, Issued by the PCAOB, January 24, 2019. https://pcaobus.org/Inspections/Reports /Documents/104-2019-002-KPMG-LLP-2017.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
63. Report on 2017 Inspection of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, PCAOB Release No:104-2019-044, Issued by the PCAOB, February 28, 2019. https://pcaobus.org /Inspections/Reports/Documents/104-2019-044-PricewaterhouseCoopers-LLP.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2020).
64. Sakin, T. 2019. “KGK İnceleme Raporları Çerçevesinde Türkiye’de Denetim Kalitesi”, Muhasebe Enstitü Dergisi, Journal of Accounting Institute, 61, 25-33.
65. Sayar, A.R.Z. 2013. Bağımsız Denetimin Kamu Gözetiminde Dünya Uygulamaları ve Türkiye Örneği, Genişletilmiş II. Baskı, TÜRMOB Yayınları, Yayın No: 451, Yayıncı: MU- DEN A.Ş., Ankara.
66. The International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR). 2019 Member Profile – AOB. https://www.ifiar.org/?wpdmdl=9781 (Erişim Tarihi: 15.03.2020).
67. The International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR). 2019 Member Profile – H3C. https://www.ifiar.org/?wpdmdl=9779 (Erişim Tarihi: 15.03.2020).
68. The International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR). 2019 Member Profile – FSC. https://www.ifiar.org/?wpdmdl=9773 (Erişim Tarihi: 15.03.2020).
69. Türkiye Serbest Muhasebeci Mali Müşavirler ve Yeminli Mali Müşavirler Odaları Birliği, TÜRMOB, 23 Avrupa Ülkesinde Muhasebe Denetim Mesleğinin Kamu Gözetiminin Organizasyon Yapısı, FEE Araştırması, 2015, Eylül. https://www.turmob.org.tr › download (Erişim Tarihi: 01.02.2020).
70. Verfahrensordnung der Abschlussprüferaufsichtsstelle, (2016). APAS. https://www.apasbafa.bund.de /APAS/DE/Die_APAS/Einrichtung_und_Aufgaben/einrichtung_und_aufbau_node.html> (Erişim Tarihi: 08.03.2020).
71. Yazar, B.B. ve Yalçın, Z. 2019. “Bağımsız Denetimde Kamu Gözetim Kurumları: Gelişmiş Ülke Uygulamaları”, İnönü Üniversitesi Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, İnönü University International Journal of Social Sciences, 8(1), 260-277.
72. WPK, Wirtschaftsprüferkammer. (Erişim Tarihi: 08.03.2020).