The International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) recently finalised several significant and controversial reforms of the audit reporting model. The reforms are in response to long-standing criticisms about the form and content of the existing audit report. This study critically examines the current audit report reforms and their implications. In particular, we investigate the perceptions of prominent stakeholders in respect of these reforms and then evaluate the implications of the reforms on the informational value of the audit report, audit quality and audit costs. The findings suggest that the changes to the audit report are of significant informational value to users, while the implications for audit quality are unclear. Indeed, the changes would increase audit costs and potentially the legal liability of auditors. This appraisal is timely given the efforts made by the IAASB in commissioning these reforms to enhance the relevance and informational value of the audit report.

Purpose The market for the assurance of carbon emissions disclosures is showing intensive growth. However, due to the largely voluntary nature of carbon reporting and assurance, there are currently no clear standards or guidelines and little is known about it. The purpose of this paper is to examine the reporting and assurance practices for carbon emissions disclosures. Design/methodology/approach This study provides evidence on this market, with a sample that includes 13,419 firm-year observations across 58 countries between 2010 and 2017 from the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) database. Findings The results show that the demand for carbon emissions reporting comes mainly from North America, the UK and Japan. Recently, markets such as South Africa have also shown increased demand for carbon reporting. The data also shows that more firms are seeking assurance for their carbon emissions reports. Legitimacy, stakeholder and institutional theories are used to explain the findings of this study. Research limitations/implications The results have important implications for firms that produce carbon emissions disclosures, assurance service providers, legislators, regulators and the users of the reports and there should be more specific disclosure guidelines for level and scope of reporting. Originality/value Amongst the firms that do provide assurance on their carbon emissions reports, a majority do so using specialist assurance providers, with only limited assurance being provided. The results further show that a myriad of assurance frameworks is being used to assure the carbon emissions disclosures.

This article investigates the reasons for supply of nonaudit services by the incumbent auditor. The audit and nonaudit fee data for listed companies in New Zealand and Australia is used in the study. The results suggest that the simultaneous provision of audit and nonaudit services are for efficiency reasons rather than to maximize revenue for the auditors. Hence the regulations in place to restrict the amount of nonaudit services that an auditor can provide its client may result in inefficiencies or incurrence of unnecessary costs for the client and auditor.

No abstract