Advertisement

Audit Reporting for Going Concern Uncertainty: Literature Insights, Italian Evidence and Future Research Approaches and Pathways

Chapter
  • 507 Downloads
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Accounting book series (BRIEFSACCOUNTING)

Abstract

This chapter provides the main findings reached from the journey through Audit Reporting for GCU. First of all, it résumés the main insights retrieved from the narrative literature review performed in Chap.  2; secondly, it contextualizes the results achieved in the empirical study (Chap.  3) conducted regarding the consequences on investors in Italy, also in Chap.  3; lastly, it outlines future trajectories for: scholars, suggesting future pathways of research and stressing the importance to “glocalize” results achieved, especially in archival studies; regulators, asking for a fine tuning action of current standards in accordance with the evidence provided throughout this study; auditors, calling for fair opinions more than in the past in the light of new standard requirements and to prevent other financial crises and/or scandals; investors, demanding a higher awareness about the deep meaning of a GCO, especially after novelties occurred that have rendered a GCO close to being mandatory, as seen in Chap.  1.

References

  1. Amin K, Harris EE (2017) Nonprofit stakeholder response to going-concern audit opinions. 1303 J Account Audit Finan 32(3):329–349Google Scholar
  2. Barontini R, Bozzi S (2011) Board compensation and ownership structure: empirical evidence for Italian listed companies. J Manag Gov 15:59–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carson E, Fargher NL, Geiger MA, Lennox CS, Raghunandan K, Willekens M (2013) Audit reporting for going-concern uncertainty: a research synthesis. Audit J Pract Theory 32(1):353–384.  https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2000496 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Core JE, Guay WR, Rusticus TO (2006) Does weak governance cause weak stock returns? An examination of firm operating performance and investors’ expectations. J Finance 61(2):655–687.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2006.00851.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cremers M, Nair V (2005) Governance mechanisms and equity prices. J Finance 60(6):2859–2894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Di Pietra R, Grambovas C, Raonic V, Riccaboni A (2008) The effects of board size and ‘busy’ directors on the market value of Italian companies. J Manag Gov 12(1):73–91.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-008-9044-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fama EF, Jensen MC (1983) Separation of ownership and control. J Law Econ 26(2):301–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hatfield HR (1911) Some variations in accounting practice in England, France, Germany and the United States. J Account Res 4(2):169–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ianniello G (2015) The effects of board and auditor independence on earnings quality: evidence from Italy. J Manag Gov 19:229–253.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-013-9285-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jones MJ (2011) Creative accounting, fraud and international accounting scandals. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  11. Kvaal E, Nobes CW (2010) international differences in IFRS policy choice: a research note. Account Bus Res 40(2):173–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kvaal E, Nobes CW (2012) IFRS policy changes and the continuation of national patterns of ifrs practice. Eur Account Rev 21(2):343–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lev B, Gu F (2016) The end of accounting and the path forward for investors and managers. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nobes C (1998) Towards a general model of the reasons for international differences in financial reporting. ABACUS 34(2):162–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nobes C (2006) The survival of international differences under IFRS: towards a research agenda. Account Bus Res 36(3):233–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pott C, Tebben T, Watrin C (2014) The effect of outside directors’ and auditors’ incentives on managers’ ability to manage cash bonuses. J Manag Gov 18(3):505–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sercu P, Vander Bauwhede H, Willekens M (2006) Post-Enron implicit audit reporting standards: sifting through the evidence. Economist 154(3):389–403.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10645-006-9016-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ye K (2014) Independent director cash compensation and earning management. J Account Public Policy 33:391–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Management and LawUniversity of Rome Tor VergataRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations