问询函质疑上市公司审计意见购买，评论前建议下载学习三篇顶刊文献！

2021华人财会金融博士找工作群开放申请！

建 议 星 标 ☆ 联 盟 平 台

二0二一 我们一起追逐梦想 出品@会计学术联盟(ID：KJXSLM) ,部分转自YCY会计行业观察，文献由会计期刊前沿栏目整理，新西兰梅西大学Sean博士指导。

     世间对于新鲜事务，都是格外关注！

  行使监管职责，证券监管部门出具监管问询函是再正常不过了，但前不久，深交所出具的《关于对深圳赫美集团股份有限公司的关注函中小板关注函【2021】第32 号》，让赫美说明不再续聘永拓会计师事务所，拟改聘深圳堂堂会计师事务所担任你公司 2020 年度审计机构的有关事项。

    此文一出，在圈内引起了广泛关注，不知何原因，赫美最终又临时换所。但质询公司是否存在购买审计意见的情形，却成为大家讨论的焦点。什么是审计意见购买？如何判定存在审计意见购买？今天小编为朋友们推荐几篇文章，下载学习（详见文后）1.Do companies successfully engage in opinion-shopping? Evidence from the UK☆

Journal of Accounting and Economics
Volume 29, Issue 3, June 2000, Pages 321-337
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(00)00025-2

 Clive Lennox
University of Southern California

Abstract:Since observed audit opinions do not generally become more favourable after companies switch auditors, it has been argued that companies do not successfully engage in opinion-shopping. Rather than comparing observed pre- and post-switch audit reports, this study tests for opinion-shopping by predicting the opinions companies would have received had they made opposite switch decisions. My results indicate that companies would have received unfavourable reports more often under different switch decisions. This suggests that companies do successfully engage in opinion-shopping.

Keywords：Opinion-shopping; Auditor switching; Audit reporting

2.Do Audit Clients Successfully Engage in Opinion Shopping? Partner‐Level Evidence

Journal of Accounting Research
Volume54, Issue1，March 2016，Pages 79-112
DOI: 10.1111/1475-679X.12097

FENG CHEN
University of Toronto and University of Missouri‐Columbia

SONGLAN PENG
York University

SHUANG XUE
Shanghai University of Finance and Economics

ZHIFENG YANG
City University of Hong Kong

FEITENG YE
Shanghai Lixin University of Commerce

ABSTRACT：This study investigates whether companies engage in audit opinion shopping activities by exerting influence over an audit firm's decision to switch the engagement partner (“partner‐level opinion shopping”) in the Chinese setting, where the identities of engagement partners are publicly disclosed. Adopting the empirical framework developed by Lennox [2000], we show evidence that companies successfully engage in partner‐level opinion shopping. Further, partner‐level opinion shopping is more likely to be successful if a company is economically important to an audit firm, and it is less likely to be successful if the audit firm is formed as a partnership rather than a corporation. We also find that companies successfully engaging in partner‐level opinion shopping exhibit significantly lower earnings quality. Finally, we directly compare audit records between incoming and outgoing partners and find that, for companies that successfully improve audit opinions after partner switching, incoming partners have a significantly higher propensity to issue clean opinions than their outgoing counterparts.

3.Opinion Shopping to Avoid a Going Concern Audit Opinion and Subsequent Audit Quality

AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory
2019， 38 (2): 101–123.
https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-52154

Heesun Chung; 

Sejong University

Catherine Heyjung Sonu; 
Korea National Open University

Yoonseok Zang; 
Singapore Management University

Jong-Hag Choi
Seoul National University

ABSTRACT：Despite regulatory concerns over opinion shopping (OS) behavior, there exists little systematic evidence on the prevalence and consequences of OS to avoid a going concern opinion (GCO). Using Lennox's (2000) framework to identify OS, we find that distressed firms successfully engage in OS to avoid a GCO. Moreover, clients engaging in OS exhibit a higher ex post Type II error rate in audit opinions than clients that do not, and the higher Type II error rate is salient for clients switching auditors for OS but not for clients retaining auditors for OS. We continue to find this asymmetric effect of the two types of OS on audit quality measured by restatements. These results indicate that auditor switching for OS not only results in a higher likelihood of audit reporting failures but also impairs other dimensions of audit quality, while auditor retaining for OS has little adverse effect on audit quality.

                          

审计意见购买文献下载

1、关注会计学术联盟公众号

扫 码 关 注奥

---

2、给会计学术联盟公众号发信息

回复关键词：OS

2020年国家自然科学基金项目统计

会计、审计、财管中标清单Excel

回复关键词：2020国自科

1999-2019国家自科基金财会与金融类Execl

回复关键词：二十年自科

 西南财经大学2021年会计学院博士生录取名单
 上海财大会计学院2021博士生拟录取名单分析报告
 对外经贸大学2021年会计学博导名单
  中国人民大学2021年会计/财务博士研究生复试成绩公示

“全球华人会计金融博士群”欢迎新录取的博士生同学加入！

与全球关注会计学术联盟的财会金融博士共成长，文献传递，交流研究心得、就业心得等，高年级博士学长、学姐在群里等你。期待加入！

全球华人会计金融博士群2现对外开放申请，咨询加入/审核入群，可联系萌小二（微信:13717527221，加微信注明：姓名+单位+职称+学历或职务）

蔡春教授:认识自身价值，勇担时代重任！
董事会的女性为何“能见度”低？
《中国工业经济》2021年重点选题领域
中国政府审计研究中心2020年度报告发布！
第一期“财经文本研究”数据资助计划申请通知
2020年国家自科基金“会计类”课题立项117项
会计研究的迷失：如何提升会计研究的相关性
会计学术研究应从“统计显著性崇拜”中走出
早年经历大饥荒CEO与公司会计与财务行为
会计金融领域，实证研究常用数据库清单！
如何成为一名优秀的博士生？建议优秀本硕阅读

《中国工业经济》2021年重点选题领域
“南开管理评论”最新五篇会计与财务类文章
CSSCI前沿:证券市场导报.2021年选题指南
CSSCI前沿:会计与经济研究.2021年选题指南
CSSCI期刊:资本市场开放选题”15篇文章
CSSCI前沿"财经科学"2021年最新四篇会计与财务类文章
CSSCI前沿“中南财经政法大学学报”最新六篇会计类文章
CSSCI前沿“山西财经大学学报”最新四篇会计类文章
CSSCI前沿“财经问题研究”七篇会计与财务类文章！
CSSCI前沿“上海经济研究”最新十篇文章
CSSCI前沿“现代财经”最新四篇会计与财务类文章
2021年注册会计师考试全年日历(收藏)

---

名家热议《黄世忠:共享经济的业绩计量和会计问题》
雷光勇教授团队论文，在国际一流期刊JBE发表！
第四届审计与会计研究训练营征文-5月1日截稿
CCGAR2021年第一期审计主题研究工作坊-4月1日截稿
“厦大家澍百年辉映”葛家澍学术思想讨论会-2月28日JG
Call for Papers | Australian Accounting Review(SSCI)
2021 Financial Markets and Corporate Governance Conference

WINTER

关注会计学术联盟

为财会人智慧成长赋能

近14万高端财会人关注

前沿.会议.招聘.生态圈