This paper extends the traditional view of audit failures related to the going-concern (GC) assumption to two circumstances scarcely analyzed in the audit literature: the earnings overstatement that characterizes firms without a going-concern uncertainty (GCU) in their audit reports and the wording used by auditors in the GC qualifications. We find significant differences between the discretionary accruals of Spanish GC and non-GC companies. After discounting their effect, the client's financial condition loses its significance in the multivariate explanation of the GCU and auditor size is the variable that better explains the qualifications. We also find that a large percentage of GCUs are written ambiguously and with an overuse of conditional language, but no client or auditor attributes significantly explain differences in the GCU wording. Our results support the need to strengthen the enforcement mechanisms, as a GC audit Standard is not, by itself, enough to efficiently control auditor behaviour.
The aim of this study is to determine whether accruals have information value beyond that provided by isolated current cash flows for the prediction of future cash flows. Using a sample of 4,397 Spanish companies (mostly privately held), we estimate in-sample regressions of future cash flows on isolated current cash flows and on accrual-based earnings. We then find that the out-of-sample prediction errors provided by the accrual-based earnings model are significantly lower than those obtained with the cash flows model. We also regress the decrease in prediction errors brought about by the addition of accruals on a set of firm-specific circumstances where accounting manipulation is expected. In all cases the decrease in prediction errors is significantly affected in the hypothesized direction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.