Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

Title: Audit delays during the

global financial crisis


Introduction
The financial system in regard of whole world was affected during the crisis time of
financial condition at global level. The crisis developed a large number of problems at
international level. The most effected financial markets were of the United States of
America and Europe. It developed a need to study and conduction of researches in
order to identify the reason behind the financial crisis. The explanations of the
responsible factors were examined at a common view. The nature of crisis at global
level was observed as an effort at consistent international governing reactions by G20
and encouraging developments in the working structure and roles of global companies
in order to gain their targets. It is the fact that there are different types of responses
which are considered by companies and individuals, building the mission of evaluating
the probable penalties and qualities of people actions which are very difficult. Here, the
question arises is whether different opinions provided by different people can bring
changes in the financial sector of market. According to Ashton (1987), Audit delay
shows a number of days from the end of fiscal year of company to the date on which the
auditor submits the report. The past studies were focusing on the characteristics of
customers and auditors along with their effects on the audit delay. The most important
elements in this regard were the size of customers along with the tendency and size of
auditors. Some articles have presented particular procedures implemented by the
auditor for auditing purposes and those procedures may link with the delay of audit. One
of the most important factors in the research is the personnel availability. According to
the report of Knechel and Payne (2001), audit delay can occur by giving the task to
those auditors that have very little practical experience. In same way according to Behn
et al. (2006) unavailability of the resources in regard of personnel both in respect of
customers and auditor could also be the reason of delay in audit.
The most important factor which will give more focus in this research is the sufficiency
of personnel. According to the report of McGee (2005) and Gullapalli (2005) pressure of

time is identified as an important factor in efficient audit with the suggestion that the
auditors always have a fear of liability in their mind which delays the audit in some
circumstances. They in similar way believe that a deficiency of experts occurred in the
inspecting sector during their time of sample selection. Absence of work force might
constitute critical hurdles to adding more outside staff to a review. Besides, ought to the
outside reviewer adds staff to a specific engagement, such staff are unrealistic to have
as much client specific and/or industry-particular experience, in this manner upsetting
activities to assist the audit (Lambert et al. 2010).

Importance of the issue


The recent Global financial crisis (GFC) raised questions about the role and quality of
external auditing in a number of countries. When the GFC unfolded, auditors faced
increasing scrutiny in strictly regulated audit environments (Xu, Carson, Fragher, &
Jiang, 2013). In regard of financial industry the most important role is playing by the
auditors. Auditors are those people who give assurance to the stakeholders of company
about the fairness of the financial statements of company (Europeiska Kommissionen,
2010). It is the fact that during the time of crises in financial market, the auditors are
always criticized because they have direct relation with the stability of the financial
market (Jones, 2011)

Causes of Audit delay


The period which is calculated in number of days, from the time of companys reporting
date and the date of the report of the auditor is called as audit delay (for e.g., Newton
and Ashton, 1989; Carslaw and Kaplan 1991; Bamber et al. 1993). The delay in audit is
basically the duration of time period between the end date of fiscal year of company and
the end of auditor work (Kinney and McDaniel 1993, p. 135).
There are basically two important factors which can delay the audit. One is the duration
of time taken but the customers for the completion of the accounts of the company and
eventually to make draft financial statements of company on the basis of which external
audit will be performed. Second factor in this regard is the duration of time needed by
the external auditor to start their audit by taking information of accounts of draft financial

statement prepared by management of company, the auditor complete all these task
before the issuance of auditor report on the base of his finding. The report given by the
auditor is then presented to the shareholders of company.it is the fact that completion of
time for audit is depend on the decision and procedures taken by the auditor for the
completion of audit(Almosa & Alabbas 2008, Wermert et al. 2000, and Bamber (1993).
According to the report of the Newton and Ashton (1989) there is a need of deep
analysis for productive assessment in order to identify the reasons for delaying the
audit. The delay in audit can be different for different organizations. Bamber et al. (1993)
suggested that there are basically two types of organizations, one is known as financial
organizations and other is non-financial organizations.
They struggled that financial segment signifies a fewer compound auditee and so
should practice smaller audit delay. It is also well known that financial companies are
subject to dissimilar rule and actions and are observed carefully by the officials. Audit
delay looks to be negatively affected by the growth of accounting reporting rules such
as the introduction of SOX (Lambert et al. 2010; Ettredge et al. 2006), therefore, it is
essential to advance an sympathetic of the issues that affect audit delay (Abbott et al.
2012).
Kinney and McDaniel (1993) note that audit delay may be produced by accounting
errors, the presence of which would require a growth of the external audit opportunity to
achieve assurance and would increase the time spent on auditor-client negotiations
regarding these errors. Audit delays seem to also be affected by the operating capacity
of the audit firm. As an audit firm operates at or above full capacity, audit delays seem
to ensue (Masli et al. 2010; Lambert et al. 2010; Gullapalli 2005).
Internal audit functions in firms have a significant role to play in a companys controls
system. Internal auditors help in the design and strengthening of firms systems of
internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR). Strong ICFR systems help external
auditors by providing a good degree of confidence that reduces exhaustive time
consuming substantive testing (Pizzini et al., 2015). Thus the work required for an
external audit is significantly affected by internal controls (Givoly and Palmon, 1982;
Ashton, Graul and Newton, 1989; Newton and Ashton, 1989; Bamber et al., 1993).
Internal auditors could also help external auditors in the external audit procedures

(AICPA, 1991 -322.24-27; PCAOB 2004, 2007a); this provides external auditors with a
larger audit team, a step that enhances the efficiency and effectiveness of external
audits (Schneider, 2009; PCAOB 2005, 2007b), and this would, in its turn, allow for
shorter audits (IIA, 2004, 2011; Pizzini et al., 2015).

Ettredge et al. (2006) note

significantly shorter audit delays for firms with strong ICFR than for firms that report
material weaknesses.

Audit delays before the Global financial Crisis (GFC)


According to Ashton, Graul and Newton (1989), the delay in audit is linked with the
industry type. It is observed that there is small delay of audit in the companies of
financial market in comparison to the non-financial companies. This research further
explains the idea of Ashton et al. (1987). Ashton et al. (1989) that the delay in audits by
the auditors can affect the profitability which could be costly. According to the Ashton et
al. (1989), more efficient reports can be produced by auditors by delay of audit because
in this way auditor can understand all aspects of company in order to identify the missstatements in financial statements of company.

Audit Delays during the GFC


During the time of crises in financial market in 2008, different researches were
conducted in order to evaluate the reasons of audit delay but the results of researches
have not yet develop any sufficient ways to identify the issues and problems. Other than
the very much announced $700 billion affirmed by Congress, the Federal Reserve has
endeavored to rescue establishments and markets with about $1.3 trillion in interests in
different dangerous resources, including credits to generally bankrupt organizations and
collateralized obligation commitments like those sponsored by subprime contracts that
are defaulting at fast rates (Morris, 2008). A further $900 billion is being proposed in
loaning to expansive partnerships (Aversa, 2008), making a sum of about $3 trillion in
bailout cash in this way, without checking the enormous total of corporate obligations
ensured by the U.S. government in the most recent year. An investigation of the
essential reasons for this "huge disappointment" that has put "the whole monetary
framework at danger" (Woellert and Kopecki, 2008) is justified keeping in mind the

end goal to both take care of the issue and maintain a strategic distance from such
occasions later.

Audit Delays after the GFC


The determinants of AD have been the subject of several previous studies. The majority
of these studies have been carried out in the context of developed countries (for e.g.,
Lai and Cheuk 2005, Knechel and Payne 2001, Schwartz and Soo 1996, Ashton, Graul,
and Newton 1989, Ashton, Willingham and Elliot 1987, Newton and Ashton 1989,
Carslaw and Kaplan 1991, Davies and Whittred 1980, and Dyer and McHugh 1975)
while a few have been carried out using developing and emerging country data (for e.g.,
Karim, Ahmed and Islam 2006, Leventis, Weetman and Caramanis 2005, Ahmed 2003
and Owusu-Ansah 2000, Jaggi and Tsui 1999, Ng and Tai 1994). There are also a few
emerging country studies specifically utilizing Malaysian data (for e.g., Ahmad and
Kamarudin 2003, Naimi, Rohami and Zulkurnai (2006), Johari and Syed-Ahmad 2007
and Che-Ahmad and Abidin 2008).
The provision of audit services embodies the client-auditor relationship. Not surprisingly,
these studies reveal that AD is potentially influenced by various client-related attributes
(for e.g., Ashton et al. 1989, Newton and Ashton 1989, Bamber et al. 1993, Ettredge,
Simon, Smith and Stone 2000, Jaggi and Tsui 1999, Carslaw and Kaplan 1991, Kinney
and McDaniel 1993, Courtis 1976, Dyer and McHugh 1975) and auditor-related
attributes (for e.g., Lai and Cheuk 2005, Schwartz and Soo 1996, Ashton et al. 1987,
Knechel and Payne 2001, Williams and Dirsmith 1988). Therefore, to facilitate the rest
of this review, the relationship between AD and client attributes and between AD and
auditor attributes are considered in turn.

Hypothesis development
It is the fact that if interim audit is performs more effetely then the audit on financial
statements by taking help from report of interim audit can reduce the level of audit
delay.

References:

Ashton, R. H. & Wright, A. (1989), Identifying audit adjustments with attention-

directing procedures, The Accounting Review, Vol. 64, No. 4, pp. 71029.
Ashton, R. H., Willingham, J. J. & Elliot, R. K. (1987), An empirical analysis of

audit delay, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 275303.
Beekes, W., Pope, P. & Young, S. (2004), The link between earnings timeliness,
earnings conservatism and board composition: Evidence from the UK,

Corporate Governance: An International Review, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.4759.


Blankley, A. I., Hurtt, D. N. & MacGregor, J. E. (2014), The relationship between
audit report lags and future restatements, Auditing: A Journal of Practice &

Theory, Vol.33, No. 2, pp. 2757.


Carslaw, C. A. & Kaplan, S. E. (1991), An examination of audit delay: Further
evidence from New Zealand, Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 22, No.
85, pp. 2133.

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.


Davies, B. & Whittred, G. P. (1980), The association between selected corporate
attributes and timeliness of corporate reporting: Further analysis, Abacus, Vol.

16, No. 1, pp. 4859.


DeZoort, F. T., Hermanson, D. R. & Houston, R. W. (2003), Audit committee
support for auditors: The effects of materiality justification and accounting

precision, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 17599.
Dyer, J. C. & McHugh, A. J. (1975), The timeliness of the Australian annual

report, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 20419.


Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. & Black, W. C. (1995), Multivariate

Data Analysis, 4th edn. Englewood


Hakansson, N. H. (1977), Interim disclosures and public forecasts: An economic
analysis and a framework for choice, The Accounting Review, Vol. 52, No. 2, pp.

396428.
Haw, I. G., Park, K., Qi, D. & Wu, W. (2003), Audit qualification and timing of
earnings announcements: Evidence from China, Auditing: A Journal of Practice

& Theory, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 12135.


Hentschel, L. & Kothari, S. P. (2001), Are corporations reducing or taking risks
with derivatives?, Journal of Finance and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 36, No. 1,

pp. 93118.
Hillman, A. J. & Dalziel, T. (2003), Boards of directors and firm performance:
Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives, Academy of

Management Review, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 38396.


Knechel, W. R. & Payne, J. L. (2001), Additional evidence on audit report lag,

Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 13747.
Lai, K. W. & Cheuk, L. C. (2005), Audit report lag, audit partner rotation and audit
firm rotation: Evidence from Australia. Working paper. Hong Kong: City University

of Hong Kong.
McDaniel, L., Marint, R. & Maines, L. A. (2002), evaluating financial report
quality: The effects of financial expertise vs. financial literacy, The Accounting

Review, Vol. 77, Supplement, pp. 13967.


Schwartz, K. B. & Soo, B. S. (1996), The association between auditor changes
and reporting lags, Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 353
70.

Wooldridge, J. M. (2010), Econometric Analysis of Cross Selection and Panel


Data, 2nd edn. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.