《新审计报告准则分析研究》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《新审计报告准则分析研究（17页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、摘要为强化注册会计师责任、提高审计质量，财政部于2016年12月发布了中国注册会计师审计报告准则第1504号在审计报告中沟通关键审计事项等12项中国注册会计师审计报告准则（新审计报告准则）。此次新审计报告准则采用分批逐步实施的方式，首先于2017年1月1日在A+H股公司的审计业务中实施，接着于2018年1月1日，在沪深交易所交易的其他上市公司中实施。其中，最为核心的1项规定是：在上市公司的审计报告中增设关键审计事项（Key Audit Matter，简称KAM），要求注册会计师说明关键审计事项的确认原因和应对措施。该项规定一方面对审计报告信息披露提出更高的要求，另一方面，强化了注册会计师的责任
2、，体现了我国审计报告准则同国际准则的不断趋同。截至目前，A+H股公司和纯A股公司都已先后实施了新审计报告准则，新审计报告准则的实施效果如何？增加关键审计事项的披露能否有效提高上市公司的审计质量？新审计报告准则在中国大陆和香港不同制度环境下的实施效果是否存在差异？是目前实务界和学术界都十分关注的问题。本文以2012至2017年间我国所有实施了新审计报告准则并公布了年报的A+H股公司和纯A股公司为初始研究样本，通过多元回归分析和稳健性检验等实证研究方法，检验了新审计报告准则的实施对审计质量的影响。本文同时考虑了在大陆和香港不同制度环境下，新审计报告准则的实施效果差异。此外，进一步分析了新审计报告准
3、则在不同规模事务所中的实施效果差异。研究结果显示：（1）新审计报告准则的实施，通过增加关键审计事项的披露，显著提高了上市公司的审计质量；（2）新审计报告准则实施后，相对于纯A股公司，A+H股公司审计质量的提高更为显著；（3）新审计报告准则实施后，聘用国际四大和国内十大的上市公司，其审计质量显著提高；聘用国内小所的上市公司，其审计质量没有显著变化。本文的实证研究结果检验了新审计报告准则在不同制度环境下对审计质量的影响。在综合分析香港和大陆地区现阶段实施新审计报告所产生的实际效果发现，可能因上市公司聘用事务所规模的不同而存在差异。本文研究结果，丰富了有关审计准则实施效果的实证研究。其次，本文为理解
4、制度环境差异下审计质量的研究提供了补充证据。为我国新审计报告准则的修订与实施提出了政策建议和经验支持，以促进我国审计报告准则同国际准则的不断趋同。关键词：新审计报告准则；审计质量；制度环境差异；事务所规模AbstractIn order to strengthen the responsibility of CPA and improve audit quality, the Ministry of Finance issued 12 Chinese CPA auditing standards in December 2016 including No.1504 Chinese CPA Au
5、diting Standards：communicating key audit matters.The new audit guidelines were first implemented in the audit business of A+H-share in January 1, 2017, and then implemented in other listed companies on Shanghai and Shenzhen exchanges in January 1, 2018.Among them, the most important part is the prov
6、ision of Key Audit Matter (KAM) in the audit report of a listed company, requiring CPA to explain the reasons for the confirmation of key audit items and countermeasures. On the one hand, the regulation puts forward higher requirements for information disclosure of audit reports, on the other hand,
7、it strengthens the responsibility of CPAs, reflecting the continuous convergence of Chinas auditing standards and international norms. Up to now, both A+H and pure A shares have implemented new audit reporting standards. So, what is the effect of the implementation of the new audit reporting standar
8、ds? Can the disclosure of KAM be increased effectively to improve the audit quality of listed companies? Is there a difference in the effectiveness of the implementation of the new audit reporting standards under different institutional environments? It is a matter of great concern to both the pract
9、ical and academic circles at present.In this paper, we use empirical research method, from 2012 to 2017, all the new auditing reporting standards implemented by non-financial industry and the annual A+H-share companies and pure A share companies as the initial research samples, we examine the impact
10、 of the implementation of new auditing standards on audit quality. The results show that: (1) the implementation of the new audit reporting standards, by increasing the disclosure of KAM, can significantly improve the audit quality of listed companies.(2) After the implementation of the new auditing
11、 standards, compared to pure A shares, A+H shares of the company to improve the quality of audit is more significant; (3) After the implementation of the new auditing standards, if the company employed Big4 and Big10, the audit quality is significantly improved; if employed small audit company, the
12、audit quality has not changed. The empirical results of this paper test the impact of the new audit reporting standards on audit quality under different institutional environments. Through comparing the different institutional environments between Mainland and Hongkong, we find that the implementati
13、on effect of new auditing standards may be different due to the different scale of firms employed by listed companies. The results of this paper enrich the empirical study on the implementation effect of audit standards. Secondly, this paper provides additional evidence for the understanding of the
14、audit quality under the institutional environment difference. This paper puts forward policy recommendations and experience support for the revision and implementation of Chinas new auditing standards, so as to promote the continuous convergence of Chinas auditing standards and international standar
15、ds.Key words: New audit reporting standards；Audit quality；Institutional differences；目录1.引言11.1选题背景11.2研究意义21.2.1理论意义21.2.2实践意义31.3研究方法31.4研究框架41.5研究创新点42.文献综述52.1审计报告准则实施效果研究52.1.1审计报告准则实施的综合效果研究52.1.2审计报告准则实施对审计质量的影响研究62.1.3审计报告准则实施市场反应的影响研究72.2制度环境与审计报告准则的研究82.2.1国外研究82.2.2国内研究92.3文献述评103.理论分析与假设提
16、出103.1制度背景103.1.1中国内地与香港市场制度环境103.1.2新审计报告准则体系123.1.3新审计报告准则实施效果理论分析133.3研究假设163.3.1 新审计报告准则的实施对审计质量的影响163.3.2 内地和香港市场差异对新审计报告准则实施的影响173.3.3 会计师事务所特征对新审计报告准则实施的影响184.研究设计204.1样本选取与数据来源204.2变量定义224.2.1被解释变量224.2.2解释变量234.2.3控制变量234.3模型设计235.实证结果及分析255.1描述性统计255.2相关性分析265.3多元回归分析275.3.1 假设1的实证检验结果275.3.2 假设2的实证检验结果295.3.3 假设3的实证检验结果3
