IDENTIFICATION OF KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS OF AUDITOR’S REPORTS: EVIDENCE FROM BORSA ISTANBUL (BIST)

Abstract

According to International Standards on Auditing (IAS) 700 –Forming an Opinion and Reporting on Financial Statements–the objectives of the auditor are to form an opinion on the financial statements based on an evaluation of the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained and to express clearly that opinion through a written report. In the final step of audit process the auditor shall form an opinion on whether the financial statements are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework. The auditor shall modify the opinion in the auditor’s report when: the audit or concludes that, based on the audit evidence obtained, the financial statements as a whole are not free from material misstatement. This study empirically examines distinctive financial indicators of qualified auditor’s reports in Turkey to see whether there is a relationship between financial indicators and qualifications of an auditor’s report. The aim of the paper is to analyze the qualified auditor’s reports of Borsa Istanbul nonfinancial companies for the year 2016 and to show the circumstances in the company’s financial position and performance that causes the qualifications by using key performance indicators (accounting ratios). 

Keywords

• Audit report,key performance indicators,Borsa Istanbul (BIST),Turkey

References

1. Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J., & Mark, B. (2012). Auditing and assurance services: an integrated approach. Boston: Prentice Hall.
2. Bell, T. B., & Tabor, R. H. (1991). Empirical analysis of audit uncertainty qualifications. Journal of Accounting Research, 29, p.350–370.
3. Caramanis, C., Spathis, C., (2006) "Auditee and audit firm characteristics as determinants of audit qualifications: Evidence from the Athens stock exchange", Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 21 Issue: 9, p.905-920
4. Chen, K. andChurch, B. (1992), “Default on debt obligations and the issuance of going concern opinions”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, p. 30-49, Fall.
5. Dopouch, N., Holthausen, R. and Leftwich, R. (1987), “Predicting audit qualifications with financial and market variables”, The Accounting Review, Vol. 62 No. 3, p. 431-54.
6. Gaganis, C., Pasiouras, F., & Doumpos, M. (2007). Probabilistic neural networks for the identification of qualified audit opinions. Expert Systems with Applications, 32, p.114–124.
7. International Standards on Auditing (IAS) 700 –Forming an Opinion and Reporting on Financial Statements
8. International Standard on Auditing (ISA) 705 Modifications To The Opinion In The Independent Auditor’s Report

9. Keasey, K., Watson, R. and Wynarzcyk, P. (1988), “The small company audit qualification: a preliminary investigation”, Accounting & Business Research, Vol. 18 No. 72, p. 323-33.
10. Laitinen, E. K., &Laitinen, T. (1998). Qualified audit reports in Finland: Evidence from large companies. European Accounting Review, 7, p. 639–653.
11. Spathis, C. (2003), “Audit qualification, firm litigation, and financial information: an empirical analysis in Greece”, International Journal of Auditing, Vol. 7 No. 1, p. 71-85.
12. Zdolšek, D., Jagrič, T., MarjanOdar,M.,(2015) . "Identification of auditor’s report qualifications: an empirical analysis for Slovenia." Ekonomskaistraživanja 28.1 , p. 994-1005.