会计师事务所规模与审计质量的实证研究
|
摘要
自改革开放以来,中国注册会计师行业已取得了长足的发展,但与全球会计行业发展水平仍有较大差距。为了满足经济发展的需求,我国会计师事务所不断扩大规模以求提高审计质量。2009年10月3日,国务院办公厅转发财政部《关于加快发展我国注册会计师行业的若干意见》,该文件提出,要力争在五年左右的时间重点扶持10家具有核心竞争力、能够跨国经营并提供综合服务的大型会计师事务所。该文件掀起了新一轮的会计师事务所合并。
然而,审计质量与会计师事务所规模之间的关系在理论界和实务界仍存在着争议。声誉理论和“深口袋”理论从不同角度论证了会计师事务所规模越大则其提供的审计服务质量越高,但这两个理论成立的前提是审计市场中的声誉机制或法律风险机制有效。在我国的审计市场中,大规模会计师事务所是否一定可以提供更高质量的审计服务,会计师事务所之间是否能够通过合并提高审计质量。本文从盈余管理程度的角度对我国会计师事务所的审计质量进行考察,研究会计师事务所规模与审计质量之间的关系。经验证据表明：在我国,“国际四大”抑制客户盈余管理的能力显著高于“国内四大”和“其他国内所”,即“国际四大”的审计质量高于“国内四大”以及“其他国内所”；“国内四大”抑制客户盈余管理的能力并不强于国内其他所,即“国内四大”的审计质量并不高于“其他国内所”；另外,会计师事务所在合并后,其审计质量在一定程度上有所提高。实证结果在一定程度上说明,会计师事务所规模扩大能够使其审计质量提高。当然,要真正实现会计师事务所的做大做强,会计师事务所还要注重合并后的整合,学习“国际四大”的成功经验：政府要不断加强相关法制建设,提高会计师事务所面临的法律风险；另外,还要加强各方力量对会计师事务所的监管。
Since the reform and opening up, significant progress has been made by the Chinese CPA profession. However, there is still a wide gap in the development between the global accountancy profession and Chinese CPA profession. In order to follow the pace of Chinese economic development and provide better support to the Chinese economic society, Chinese accounting firms are expanding their scale to enhance audit quality. On Oct 3rd.2009,General Office of the State transmitted the Proposals on Accelerating the Development of China's CPA profession, which is submitted by the Ministry of Finance. The document proposes that we should strive to cultivate 10 large international accounting firms with core competence, which can provide comprehensive services within 5 years. Then another merger fever struck the accounting profession.
The relationship between Auditor Size and Audit Quality is still in controversy. According to Reputation Theory and Deep Pocket Theory, the larger audit firms could supply a higher level of audit quality. However, only when the reputation mechanisms and legal mechanisms are effective, can these theories be valid. The questions are that could larger audit firms supply a higher level of audit quality in China; could accounting firms offer higher audit quality by acquisition or combination. The current paper examines whether the audit quality is related to auditor size in China by using earning management as a surrogate for audit quality. The analysis finds that the discretionary accrual of global Big Four clients is statistically significantly lower than that of local Big Four clients and other local firms'clients; while, discretionary accrual of local Big Four clients is not statistically significantly lower than that of other local firms'clients. The results suggest that the audit quality of the global Big Four is higher than other firms, but the audit quality of the local Big Four is not higher than other local firms. In addition, we find that local accounting firms can supply a higher level of audit quality after acquisition or combination to some extent. The empirical results suggest that accounting firms could enhance audit quality to some extent by expanding the scale. However, to become the real "big" accounting firms, Chinese accounting firms should focus on the integration of resources and management after acquisition or combination, learn the successful experience from the global Big Four; Government should improve the related legal system to increase the auditor litigation risk; what's more, social forces should be encouraged to participate in the supervision.
然而,审计质量与会计师事务所规模之间的关系在理论界和实务界仍存在着争议。声誉理论和“深口袋”理论从不同角度论证了会计师事务所规模越大则其提供的审计服务质量越高,但这两个理论成立的前提是审计市场中的声誉机制或法律风险机制有效。在我国的审计市场中,大规模会计师事务所是否一定可以提供更高质量的审计服务,会计师事务所之间是否能够通过合并提高审计质量。本文从盈余管理程度的角度对我国会计师事务所的审计质量进行考察,研究会计师事务所规模与审计质量之间的关系。经验证据表明：在我国,“国际四大”抑制客户盈余管理的能力显著高于“国内四大”和“其他国内所”,即“国际四大”的审计质量高于“国内四大”以及“其他国内所”；“国内四大”抑制客户盈余管理的能力并不强于国内其他所,即“国内四大”的审计质量并不高于“其他国内所”；另外,会计师事务所在合并后,其审计质量在一定程度上有所提高。实证结果在一定程度上说明,会计师事务所规模扩大能够使其审计质量提高。当然,要真正实现会计师事务所的做大做强,会计师事务所还要注重合并后的整合,学习“国际四大”的成功经验：政府要不断加强相关法制建设,提高会计师事务所面临的法律风险；另外,还要加强各方力量对会计师事务所的监管。
Since the reform and opening up, significant progress has been made by the Chinese CPA profession. However, there is still a wide gap in the development between the global accountancy profession and Chinese CPA profession. In order to follow the pace of Chinese economic development and provide better support to the Chinese economic society, Chinese accounting firms are expanding their scale to enhance audit quality. On Oct 3rd.2009,General Office of the State transmitted the Proposals on Accelerating the Development of China's CPA profession, which is submitted by the Ministry of Finance. The document proposes that we should strive to cultivate 10 large international accounting firms with core competence, which can provide comprehensive services within 5 years. Then another merger fever struck the accounting profession.
The relationship between Auditor Size and Audit Quality is still in controversy. According to Reputation Theory and Deep Pocket Theory, the larger audit firms could supply a higher level of audit quality. However, only when the reputation mechanisms and legal mechanisms are effective, can these theories be valid. The questions are that could larger audit firms supply a higher level of audit quality in China; could accounting firms offer higher audit quality by acquisition or combination. The current paper examines whether the audit quality is related to auditor size in China by using earning management as a surrogate for audit quality. The analysis finds that the discretionary accrual of global Big Four clients is statistically significantly lower than that of local Big Four clients and other local firms'clients; while, discretionary accrual of local Big Four clients is not statistically significantly lower than that of other local firms'clients. The results suggest that the audit quality of the global Big Four is higher than other firms, but the audit quality of the local Big Four is not higher than other local firms. In addition, we find that local accounting firms can supply a higher level of audit quality after acquisition or combination to some extent. The empirical results suggest that accounting firms could enhance audit quality to some extent by expanding the scale. However, to become the real "big" accounting firms, Chinese accounting firms should focus on the integration of resources and management after acquisition or combination, learn the successful experience from the global Big Four; Government should improve the related legal system to increase the auditor litigation risk; what's more, social forces should be encouraged to participate in the supervision.
引文
[1]漆江娜、陈慧霖、张阳.事务所规模·品牌·价格与审计质量——国际“四大”中国审计市场收费与质量研究[J].审计研究,2004(3).
[2]武晓玲,王海东,周水龙.会计师事务所规模与审计质量之间的关系[J].山西大学学报,2005(27).
[3]蔡春、黄益建、赵莎.关于审计质量对盈余管理影响的实证研究—来自沪市制造业的经验证据[J].审计研究,2005(2).
[4]温国山.会计师事务所规模、审计质量与市场反应——来自中国证券审计市场的证据[J].审计与经济研究,2009(11).
[5]李常青、王澎.审计质量与事务所规模背离——来自审计公费实证的证据[J].中国管理科学,2003(10).
[6]原红旗、李海建.会计师事务所组织形式、规模与审计意见质量[J].审计研究,2003(1).
[7]刘峰、周福源.国际四大意味着高审计质量吗——基于会计稳健性角度的检验[J].会计研究,2007(3).
[8]刘运国、麦剑青.论四大会计师事务所的审计质量[J].中山大学学报,2006(3).
[9]周海平、吕长江.会计师事务所规模会改变投资者对审计质量的判断吗?[J].中国会计与财务研究,2007(9).
[10]李海燕、谢宁.会计师事务所规模与审计质量非正相关——基于股权代理成本与代理效率的分析[J].财会月刊,2010(3).
[11]耿建新、房巧玲.我国会计师事务所规模研究——基于审计市场经验数据的聚类分析[J].会计研究,2005(3).
[12]林东杰.会计师事务规模与审计质量——来自2008年中国上市公司的经验证据[J].金融经济,2009(14).
[13]夏立军.盈余管理计量模型在中国股票市场的应用研究[J].中国会计与财务研究,2003,(2).
[14]张艳.论事务所规模化与审计质量保证[J].审计与经济研究,2007(5).
[15]刘峰、许菲.风险导向型审计·法律风险·审计质量[J].会计研究,2002(2).
[16]夏立军、杨海斌.注册会计师对上市公司盈余管理的反应[J].审计研究,2002(4)
[17]陆宇建.上市公司基于配股权的盈余管理行为实证分析[J].经济学研究,2002(3).
[18]杨旭东、莫小鹏.新配股政策出台后上市公司盈余管理现象的实证研究.[J].会计研究,2006(8).
[19]徐浩萍.会计盈余管理与独立审计质量[J].会计研究,2004(1).
[20]蒋义宏.配股资格线的变迁与R O E分布的变化[J].经济管理,2003(2).
[21]夏立军.国外盈余管理计量方法述评[J].外国经济与管理.2002(10).
[22]陈信元、夏立军.审计任期与审计质量：来自中国证券市场的经验证据[J].会计研究.2006(1).
[23]刘爱松.会计师事务所规模对审计质量的影响——基于中国法制环境的考察[D].暨南大学.2008.
[24]周道君.审计质量与会计师事务所规模的实证研究[D].福州：福州大学管理学院.2006
[25]詹群.我国注册会计师法律责任与审计质量的关联性研究[D].吉林大学.
[26]顾振伟.我国上市公司盈余管理动机与方式的实证研究[D].上海交通大学.2008.
[27]喻少华.自愿审计动机与审计质量研究[D].中山大学.2007.
[28]孙坤.独立审计质量保证论[M].大连：东北财经出版社,2005.
[29]李树华.审计独立性的提高与审计市场的背离[M].上海三联出版社.2000.
[30]韩福恒.遭遇审计不实诉讼：会计师事务所仅承担补充赔偿责任[EB].http://www.zgkjb.com/epaper/uniflows/12/20091204/12_32.htm.
[31]最高人民法院.最高人民法院关于审理涉及会计师事务所在审计业务活动中民事侵权赔偿案件的若干规定.法释[2007]12号.
[32]Palmrose Z. An analysis of auditor litigation and audit service quality. The Accounting Review January,1988.
[33]Chow C W, Rices s j. Qualified audit opinions and auditor switching. The accounting review,1982.
[34]Teoh S., Wong. T. J.. Perceived auditor quality and earnings response co-efficient. The Accounting Review,1993.
[35]DeAngelo, L. E. Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics,1981.
[36]Dye R A. Auditing standards, legal liability, and auditor wealth [J] Journal of Political Economy.1993.
[37]Watts and Zimmerman. Agency problem, auditing and the theory of the firm: some evidence. Journal of Law and Economics,1983.
[38]Francis, J.R. Wang. The joint effect of investor protection and big 4 audits on earnings quality around the world. Contemporaty Accounting Research, 25(1),2008.
[39]Inder K. Khurana, K. K. Raman. Litigation Risk and the Financial Reporting Credibility of Big 4 versus Non-Big 4 Audits:Evidence from Anglo-American countries. The Accounting Review,79(2),2004.
[40]Becker C., M. Defond, J. J iambalvo and K. R. Subramanyam. The Effect of Audit Quality on Earnings Management [J]. Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol.15,1998.
[2]武晓玲,王海东,周水龙.会计师事务所规模与审计质量之间的关系[J].山西大学学报,2005(27).
[3]蔡春、黄益建、赵莎.关于审计质量对盈余管理影响的实证研究—来自沪市制造业的经验证据[J].审计研究,2005(2).
[4]温国山.会计师事务所规模、审计质量与市场反应——来自中国证券审计市场的证据[J].审计与经济研究,2009(11).
[5]李常青、王澎.审计质量与事务所规模背离——来自审计公费实证的证据[J].中国管理科学,2003(10).
[6]原红旗、李海建.会计师事务所组织形式、规模与审计意见质量[J].审计研究,2003(1).
[7]刘峰、周福源.国际四大意味着高审计质量吗——基于会计稳健性角度的检验[J].会计研究,2007(3).
[8]刘运国、麦剑青.论四大会计师事务所的审计质量[J].中山大学学报,2006(3).
[9]周海平、吕长江.会计师事务所规模会改变投资者对审计质量的判断吗?[J].中国会计与财务研究,2007(9).
[10]李海燕、谢宁.会计师事务所规模与审计质量非正相关——基于股权代理成本与代理效率的分析[J].财会月刊,2010(3).
[11]耿建新、房巧玲.我国会计师事务所规模研究——基于审计市场经验数据的聚类分析[J].会计研究,2005(3).
[12]林东杰.会计师事务规模与审计质量——来自2008年中国上市公司的经验证据[J].金融经济,2009(14).
[13]夏立军.盈余管理计量模型在中国股票市场的应用研究[J].中国会计与财务研究,2003,(2).
[14]张艳.论事务所规模化与审计质量保证[J].审计与经济研究,2007(5).
[15]刘峰、许菲.风险导向型审计·法律风险·审计质量[J].会计研究,2002(2).
[16]夏立军、杨海斌.注册会计师对上市公司盈余管理的反应[J].审计研究,2002(4)
[17]陆宇建.上市公司基于配股权的盈余管理行为实证分析[J].经济学研究,2002(3).
[18]杨旭东、莫小鹏.新配股政策出台后上市公司盈余管理现象的实证研究.[J].会计研究,2006(8).
[19]徐浩萍.会计盈余管理与独立审计质量[J].会计研究,2004(1).
[20]蒋义宏.配股资格线的变迁与R O E分布的变化[J].经济管理,2003(2).
[21]夏立军.国外盈余管理计量方法述评[J].外国经济与管理.2002(10).
[22]陈信元、夏立军.审计任期与审计质量：来自中国证券市场的经验证据[J].会计研究.2006(1).
[23]刘爱松.会计师事务所规模对审计质量的影响——基于中国法制环境的考察[D].暨南大学.2008.
[24]周道君.审计质量与会计师事务所规模的实证研究[D].福州：福州大学管理学院.2006
[25]詹群.我国注册会计师法律责任与审计质量的关联性研究[D].吉林大学.
[26]顾振伟.我国上市公司盈余管理动机与方式的实证研究[D].上海交通大学.2008.
[27]喻少华.自愿审计动机与审计质量研究[D].中山大学.2007.
[28]孙坤.独立审计质量保证论[M].大连：东北财经出版社,2005.
[29]李树华.审计独立性的提高与审计市场的背离[M].上海三联出版社.2000.
[30]韩福恒.遭遇审计不实诉讼：会计师事务所仅承担补充赔偿责任[EB].http://www.zgkjb.com/epaper/uniflows/12/20091204/12_32.htm.
[31]最高人民法院.最高人民法院关于审理涉及会计师事务所在审计业务活动中民事侵权赔偿案件的若干规定.法释[2007]12号.
[32]Palmrose Z. An analysis of auditor litigation and audit service quality. The Accounting Review January,1988.
[33]Chow C W, Rices s j. Qualified audit opinions and auditor switching. The accounting review,1982.
[34]Teoh S., Wong. T. J.. Perceived auditor quality and earnings response co-efficient. The Accounting Review,1993.
[35]DeAngelo, L. E. Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics,1981.
[36]Dye R A. Auditing standards, legal liability, and auditor wealth [J] Journal of Political Economy.1993.
[37]Watts and Zimmerman. Agency problem, auditing and the theory of the firm: some evidence. Journal of Law and Economics,1983.
[38]Francis, J.R. Wang. The joint effect of investor protection and big 4 audits on earnings quality around the world. Contemporaty Accounting Research, 25(1),2008.
[39]Inder K. Khurana, K. K. Raman. Litigation Risk and the Financial Reporting Credibility of Big 4 versus Non-Big 4 Audits:Evidence from Anglo-American countries. The Accounting Review,79(2),2004.
[40]Becker C., M. Defond, J. J iambalvo and K. R. Subramanyam. The Effect of Audit Quality on Earnings Management [J]. Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol.15,1998.