umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Harmonisation of Audit Practice: Empirical Evidence from Going-Concern Reporting in the Nordic Countries
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration. University of Vaasa.
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration. Department of Accounting, Auditing and Law, BI Norwegian Business School.
2013 (English)In: International Journal of Auditing, ISSN 1090-6738, E-ISSN 1099-1123, Vol. 17, no 3, 308-326 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The study uses a sample of 2,941 bankrupt firms from Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden in the period 2007 to 2011, and investigates the harmonisation of audit behaviour in terms of going-concern reporting. Even though the Nordic countries have similar legal systems and, for all practical purposes, identical audit requirements regarding going-concern reporting, the study findings show significant differences in going-concern reporting before bankruptcy between the Nordic countries. One key result is that Danish and Norwegian companies get a going-concern opinion prior to bankruptcy more frequently than companies in Sweden and Finland. Although, this is an interesting finding, it should be interpreted with caution, particularly as it has not been possible to empirically test the reasons behind this variation. Potential reasons are discussed, such as differences in when the going-concern standard was introduced and implemented in each country. Alternatively, the formal requirement for becoming an authorised or approved auditor, the demand for continuing education and the risk of disciplinary sanctions could all drive national variance in reporting quality in favour of a higher quality in Denmark and Norway compared to Sweden and Finland. Finally, the study findings also indicate that differences in audit reporting behaviour are moderated by international audit firm networks.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Wiley-Blackwell, 2013. Vol. 17, no 3, 308-326 p.
Keyword [en]
going-concern opinion, international auditing standards, auditing practices, harmonisation, Nordic countries
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-67681DOI: 10.1111/ijau.12007OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-67681DiVA: diva2:613301
Available from: 2013-03-27 Created: 2013-03-27 Last updated: 2017-12-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sundgren, StefanSvanström, Tobias
By organisation
Business Administration
In the same journal
International Journal of Auditing
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 62 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf