Audit Quality Frameworks: A Cross-National Comparison

Abstract

This study provides an overview of the audit quality frameworks developed around the world in relation to audit quality, which has been on the agenda of both regulators and academics for more than three decades, yet there is no consensus on its definition and measurement. The starting point of this study lies in the fact that there is no initiative by the regulatory authorities in Turkey on this issue and the audit quality frameworks have not been discussed in Turkish literature. Audit quality indicators in an audit quality framework can increase transparency and comparability across audit firms. Another important potential benefit is that it can become a tangible competitive factor for those charged with governance and audit committees when accepting an audit firm. Thus, audit firms will aim to gain a competitive advantage through audit quality indicators rather than audit fees. It can be interpreted that most of the frameworks are rule-based and contain both quantitative and qualitative indicators. Among the most frequently included indicators, quantitative indicators such as audit hours, training hours, independent auditor turnover, and mixed indicators such as engagement quality review are noteworthy. Since the objective assessment of audit quality is more complex due to the requirement to understand the perspective from which it is assessed, it is essential to eliminate differences in interpretation. Therefore, it is necessary for different stakeholders in Turkey to interact and collaborate to develop a commonly accepted set of audit quality indicators.

Keywords

• Audit quality frameworks
• Audit quality
• Audit quality indicators

Denetim Kalitesi Çerçeveleri: Ülkelerarası Bir Karşılaştırma

Abstract

Bu çalışma hem düzenleyicilerin hem akademisyenlerin otuz yılı aşkın süredir gündeminde yer alan ve fakat tanımı ve ölçümü üzerinde bir uzlaşma sağlanamamış olan denetim kalitesi ile ilgili dünyanın çeşitli ülkelerinde geliştirilmekte olan denetim kalitesi çerçevelerini ortaya koyan genel bir bakış sunmaktadır. Türkiye’de bu konuda düzenleyici kurumlar tarafından başlatılan henüz bir girişim olmaması ve Türkçe literatürde çerçevelerin ele alınmamış olması bu çalışmanın çıkış noktasını oluşturmaktadır. Denetim kalitesi çerçevesinde yer alan denetim kalitesi göstergeleri, farklı denetim şirketleri arasında karşılaştırılabilirliği ve şeffaflığı artırabilmektedir. Bir diğer önemli potansiyel faydası ise, örneğin bir denetim şirketi seçerken yönetişimden sorumlu olanlar ve denetim komiteleri için, somut bir rekabet unsuru haline gelebilecek olmasıdır. Böylece denetim şirketleri bağımsız denetim ücreti yerine denetim kalitesi göstergeleri üzerinden rekabet avantajı sağlamayı hedefleyeceklerdir. Çerçevelerin birçoğunun kural bazlı olduğu ve hem nicel hem nitel göstergeler içerdiği söylenebilmektedir. En sık yer verilen göstergeler arasında denetim saati, eğitim saati, bağımsız denetçi devir hızı gibi nicel ve denetim kalitesinin gözden geçirilmesi gibi karma göstergeler dikkati çekmektedir. Denetim kalitesinin objektif olarak değerlendirilmesi, hangi perspektiften değerlendirildiğini anlama ihtiyacı nedeniyle daha karmaşık olduğundan, yorumlamada ortaya çıkacak farklılıkları ortadan kaldırmak önemlidir. Bu nedenle Türkiye’de farklı paydaşların üzerinde anlaşmaya varacakları bir denetim kalitesi göstergeleri seti geliştirmek için etkileşime girmesi ve iş birliği yapması gerekli görülmektedir.

Keywords

• Denetim kalitesi çerçeveleri
• Denetim kalitesi
• Denetim kalitesi göstergeleri

References

1. Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA). Overview of ACRA. Erişim Adresi: https://www.acra.gov.sg/who-we-are/overview-of-acra
2. ACRA (2020). Guidance to audit firms on ACRA’s audit quality indicators disclosure framework (2020 Revised). Erişim Adresi: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiuo_fk6_3tAhWExosKHV0UAmsQFjABegQIBxAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.acra.gov.sg%2Fdocs%2Fdefault-source%2Fdefault-document-library%2Fpublic-accountants%2Faudit-quality-indicators-disclosure-framework%2Fguidance-to-audit-firms-on-acra%2527s-revised-aqi-disclosure-framework.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1b6o0rY7YdEZAV-pnA834a
3. ASIC (2019). REP 649 Audit quality measures, indicators and other information: 2018–19. Erişim Adresi: https://download.asic.gov.au/media/5409270/rep649-published-12-december-2019.pdf
4. ASIC (2021). Audit inspection report: Report 709|November 2021. Erişim Adresi: https://download.asic.gov.au/media/vosb0x4p/rep709-published-30-november-2021.pdf
5. Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). Reports. Erişim Adresi: https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-649-audit-quality-measures-indicators-and-other-information-2018-19/
6. Bedard, J. C., Johnstone, K. M. ve Smith, E. F. (2010). Audit quality indicators: A status update on possible public disclosures and insights from audit practice. Current Issues in Auditing. 4(1), C12-C19. DOI: 10.2308/ciia.2010.4.1.C12
7. Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB). (2018). Audit quality indicators final report. Erişim Adresi: https://cpab-ccrc.ca/docs/default-source/thought-leadership-publications/2018-aqi-final-report-en.pdf?sfvrsn=5af68dba_12&sfvrsn=5af68dba_12
8. CAQ (2014). Approach to audit quality indicators. Erişim Adresi: https://4chrg8q086f2nb81x49f276l-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/caq-approach-to-audit-quality-indicators-april-2014.pdf adresinden 25 Aralık 2021’de alınmıştır.

9. CAQ (2016). Audit quality indicators the journey and path ahead. Erişim Adresi: https://4chrg8q086f2nb81x49f276l-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/auditqualityindicators_journeyandpath2016-2.pdf
10. CAQ (2019). Audit quality disclosure framework. Erişim Adresi: https://www.thecaq.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/caq_audit_quality_ disclosure_framework_2019-01.pdf
11. CAQ. About the CAQ. Erişim Adresi: https://www.thecaq.org/news/caq-framework-aims-assist-accounting-firms-enhance-disclosures-about-audit-quality/
12. Christensen, B.E., Glover, S.M., Omer, T.C. ve Shelley, M.K. (2016). Understanding audit quality: ınsights from audit professionals and investors. Contemporary Accounting Research, 33(4), 1648-1684. doi:10.1111/1911-3846.12212
13. CMVM. CMVM publishes an English version of the guide for the application of audit quality indicators. Erişim Adresi: https://www.cmvm.pt/en/Comunicados/Comunicados/Pages/20200306.aspx
14. Comissão do Mercado de Valores Mobiliários (CMVM) (2021). Guia de aplicação de indicadores de qualidade da auditoria. Erişim Adresi: https://www.cmvm.pt/pt/SDI/Auditores/Documents/GUIA%20DE%20APLICA%C3%87%C3%83O%20AQI-2021.pdf
15. FAOA (2009). Activity report. Erişim Adresi: https://www.rab-asr.ch/#/page/127
16. FAOA (2011). Activity report. Erişim Adresi: https://www.rab-asr.ch/#/page/127
17. FAOA (2014). Activity report. Erişim Adresi: https://www.rab-asr.ch/#/page/127
18. FAOA (2021). Annual report. Erişim Adresi: https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/66683265/annual-report-2021
19. FAOA. The FAOA in brief. Erişim Adresi: https://www.rab-asr.ch/#/page/116
20. Federal Audit Oversight Authority (FAOA). Entstehung. Erişim Adresi: https://www.rab-asr.ch/#/page/119?lang=de
21. Federation of European Accountants (FEE). (2015). FEE comments on the PCAOB Concept Release on Audit Quality Indicators. Erişim Adresi: https://www.accountancyeurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/FEE_Comments_on_PCAOB_Audit_Quality_Indicators_final.pdf
22. FEE (2016). Overview of audit quality indicators initiatives update to December 2015 edition. Erişim Adresi: https://www.accountancyeurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/1607_Update_of_Overview_of_AQIs.pdf
23. Financial Reporting Council (FRC) (2006). Discussion paper promoting audit quality. Londra. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/87498b3e-0aec-417c-b804-8b0c4611 74c8/Discussion-Paper-Promoting-Audit-Quality-Nov-2006.pdf
24. FRC (2008). The audit quality framework. Londra. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/46582304-32b1-43bb-b614-90318b295f28/ The-Audit-Quality-Framework-Feb-2008.pdf
25. FRC (2014). The FRC and its regulatory approach. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/de950642-4c6d-4909-b965-5707108fc55a/The FRCanditsRegulatoryApproach.pdf
26. FRC (2017). FRC Roles and responsibilities: Schedule of functions and powers. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/67835f0e-e4c2-4d2a-9aeb-e57feed885be/FRC-Roles-Responsibilities-Schedule-of-Functions-Powers-June-2017.pdf
27. FRC (2019). Developments in audit 2019. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/getattach ment/5d176788-3330-4b62-b18e-276c678d3d2c/Developments-in-Audit-Final-Screen.pdf
28. FRC (2019). Transparency reporting AQR thematic review. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/3c124043-70b7-428a-af03-9359b32652e2/Transpa rency-Reporting-Final.pdf
29. FRC (2020). Audit quality indicators: AQR thematic review. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/f116f7d7-94d8-4c82-94b2-ba24e3b195eb/AQTR_AQI_Final.pdf
30. FRC (2022a). FRC consultation document: Firm-level audit quality indicators. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/a2080b36-f3f6-4fa3-85b1-beeba16ef0d7/FRC-Consultation-Document-Firm-level-Audit-Quality-Indicators_2022.pdf
31. FRC (2022b). Feedback statement: Firm-level audit quality indicators consultation. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/afbf3bc4-cf15-468a-85da-afb8e5af222a/Feedback-Statement_-2022.pdf
32. FRC (22 Temmuz 2022). FRC continues significant growth on road to becoming new regulator ARGA. Erişim Adresi: https://www.frc.org.uk/news/july-2022/frc-continues-significant-growth-on-road-to-becomi
33. IDW (07.12.2021). IDW veröffentlicht positionspapier zur kommunikation über prüfungsqualitä. Erişim Adresi: https://www.idw.de/idw/idw-aktuell/idw-veroeffentlicht-positionspapier-zur-kommunikation-ueber-pruefungsqualitaet/133792
34. IDW (2021). Kommunikation von prüfungsqualität. Erişim Adresi: https://www.idw.de/blob/133786/9a50ccbed68f9c8207bea20c64ab9de8/down-positionspapier-komm-pruefungsqualitaet-data.pdf
35. IFAC. Royal Nederlandse Beroepsorganisatie van Accountants. Erişim Adresi: https://www.ifac.org/about-ifac/membership/members/royal-nederlandse-beroeps organisatie-van-accountants
36. Independent Regulatory Board for Auditors (IRBA). IRBA launches Audit quality indicators: Evaluating audit quality and promoting transparency of audit firms. Erişim Adresi: https://www.irba.co.za/news-headlines/press-releases/irba-launches-audit-quality-indicators:-evaluating-audit-quality-and-promoting-transparency-of-audit-firms
37. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) (2021). Audit quality maturity model. Erişim Adresi: https://resource.cdn.icai.org/65383caq-aqmm-v1.pdf
38. Institute of Public Auditors in Germany (IDW). About the IDW. Erişim Adresi: https://www.idw.de/the-idw
39. International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) (8 Şubat 2017). Supporting international standards: significant differences in audit quality indicators developments. Erişim Adresi: https://www.ifac.org/knowledge-gateway/supporting-international-standards/discussion/significant-differences-audit.
40. IRBA (2019). Feedback report: Audit quality indicators. Erişim Adresi: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjnq_Lr-drtAhUriIsKHaI2C90QFjAMegQIExAC&url=https%3A %2F%2Fwww.irba.co.za%2Fupload%2FIRBA%2520AQI%2520Feedback%2520report%2520-%25202019.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2TOQTahWFjZn4Jhri7bHLM
41. IRBA (2020). 2020 Survey report: Audit quality indicators. Erişim Adresi: https://www.irba.co.za/upload/IRBA%20AQI%20Survey%20report%202020.PDF
42. Japanese Institute of Certified Public Accountants (JICPA) (2019). Annual report 2019. Erişim Adresi: https://jicpa.or.jp/english/files/2019AnnualReport.pdf
43. Knechel, R. W. ve Shefchik, L. B. (2014). Audit quality. (D. K. W. R. and W. M. Hay, Ed.), The Routledge companion to auditing (1. Baskı). New York: Taylor ve Francis Book. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203094921
44. Knechel, W. R., Krishnan, G. V., Pevzner, M., Shefchik, L. B. ve Velury, U. K. (2013). Audit quality: Insights from the academic literature. Auditing: A Journal of Practice ve Theory. 32 (Special Issue), 385–421.
45. Ministerie van Financiën (Şubat 2022). Aanbiedingsbrief derde voortgangsrapportage Kwartiermakers toekomst accountancysector. Erişim Adresi: https://open.overheid.nl/repository/ronl-6618599e476ece147289a87624ee65a8adf07456/1/pdf/aanbieding-derde-voortgangsrapportage-kwartiermakers-toekomst-accountancysector.pdf
46. NBA (2016). NBA Practice Note 1135 – Disclosure of Audit Quality Factors. Erişim Adresi: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad= rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiS4YbR8tntAhXC6aQKHQBgC1QQFjAAegQIAxAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nba.nl%2Fglobalassets%2Fwet--en-regelgeving%2Fnba-handreikingen%2Fnba_practice_note_1135disclosure_of_audit_quality_factors.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2knTXU7F862XdRWY_PFwKB
47. Nederlandse Beroepsorganisatie van Accountants (NBA). (2014). In the public interest: Measures to improve the quality and independence of the audit in the Netherlands. Erişim Adresi: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source= web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwid--CC8dntAhUQHewKHYxYCjsQFjAAegQIARAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nba.nl%2Fglobalassets%2Fprojecten%2Fin-het-publiek-belang%2Fin-the-public-interest-measures-to-improve-quality.pdf&usg= AOvVaw36TlFlSuIpFz8zG6shziZb
48. PCAOB (Aralık 2015). Audit quality indicators: Summary of SAG breakout discussions, Erişim Adresi: https://pcaob-assets.azureedge.net/pcaob-dev/docs/default-source/news/events/documents/11-12-2015-sag-meeting/sag-aqi-breakout-summary-slides.pdf?sfvrsn=1865f830_0
49. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) (2015). Concept release on audit quality indicators. PCAOB Release No. 2015-005. Erişim Adresi: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Docket%20041/Release_2015_005 .pdf
50. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) (2015). Concept Release on Audit Quality Indicators. PCAOB Release No. 2015-005. Erişim Adresi: http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Docket%20041/Release_2015_005 .pdf
51. The International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR). Audit committees and audit quality: Trends and possible areas for further consideration, Erişim Adresi: https://www.ifiar.org/?wpdmdl=6632
52. U.S. Department of The Treasury. Press Releases: Treasury Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession Adopts Final Report. Erişim Adresi: https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/hp1159
53. Yükçü, S. ve Koçakoğlu, Ö. (2016). Halka Açık Şirketler Muhasebe Gözetim Kurulu (Public Company Accounting Oversight Board- PCAOB) denetim kalitesi göstergeleri. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 18 (Özel Sayı-1), 265-293.