著者

朴 大栄

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要 = ST.ANDREW,S UNIVERSITY BULLETIN OF THE RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ISSN:1346048X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.41, no.1, pp.81-108, 2015-07-27

---

This paper discusses "the principle of dual responsibility," one of the basic principles in auditing theory. "The principle of dual responsibility" assumes that financial statements are the responsibility of the company's management and that the auditor's responsibility is to express an opinion on the fair presentation of financial statements based on his or her audit. Actually, it means the "division of responsibility." The expression "the principle of dual responsibility" seems to have taken root in auditing theory texts in Japan from the 1960s. However, it is not apparent why "dual" responsibility is refered to, instead of "division" of responsibility between management and the auditor. In addition, this expression is widely used in textbooks on auditing in Japan but it is not discussed as a principle in American texts. What's the difference between them? As complications under current accounts, there are various issues concerning accounting estimates and uncertainty of measurement. Management is required to use good judgment in the selection and application of accounting principles. Shareholders and investors require the auditor to provide much more information in the auditor's report. Whenever an auditor includes specific information on uncertainties in his report, it may be inconsistent with "the principle of dual responsibility." What is the difference between Japan and the United States in relation to "the principle of dual responsibility"? Is the provision of specific information on uncertainties in an auditor's report against "the principle of dual responsibility"? That is the theme of this paper.

著者

朴 大栄 宮本 京子

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要 = ST.ANDREW,S UNIVERSITY BULLETIN OF THE RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ISSN:1346048X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.38, no.1, pp.1-25, 2012-08-31

---

Audit failures are often caused by the inability of auditors to maintain independence. The lack of independence is an enemy of systematic and efficient audit operations. How can auditors secure independence? To answer this question, we need to discuss a wide variety of issues, including not only an appropriate organization of auditors, quality control and governance but also the necessity of auditors' rotation and the whereabouts of an authority to select auditor members or determine remuneration for auditors. This paper focuses on audit quality control, which is an essential task in ensuring reliable audit results, and discusses present situations and problems regarding audit quality control systems from the viewpoint of audit firms, JICPA ( Japanese Institute of Certified Public Accountants) and CPAAOB (Certified Public Accountants and Auditing Oversight Board). We also discuss whether or not the size of an audit firms is relevant to its ability to conduct appropriate quality control of audit operations, since we consider it important to clarify such relevance or irrelevance for identifying desirable quality control systems for respective audit firms. We conducted a questionnaire survey on both large audit firms and small and medium-size counterparts to find and analyze the status of their respective quality control systems, and this paper explains the survey results.

著者

朴 大栄/宮本 京子 宮本 京子

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要 (ISSN:1346048X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.38, no.1, pp.1-25, 2012-08-31

---

Audit failures are often caused by the inability of auditors to maintain independence. The lack of independence is an enemy of systematic and efficient audit operations. How can auditors secure independence? To answer this question, we need to discuss a wide variety of issues, including not only an appropriate organization of auditors, quality control and governance but also the necessity of auditors' rotation and the whereabouts of an authority to select auditor members or determine remuneration for auditors. This paper focuses on audit quality control, which is an essential task in ensuring reliable audit results, and discusses present situations and problems regarding audit quality control systems from the viewpoint of audit firms, JICPA ( Japanese Institute of Certified Public Accountants) and CPAAOB (Certified Public Accountants and Auditing Oversight Board). We also discuss whether or not the size of an audit firms is relevant to its ability to conduct appropriate quality control of audit operations, since we consider it important to clarify such relevance or irrelevance for identifying desirable quality control systems for respective audit firms. We conducted a questionnaire survey on both large audit firms and small and medium-size counterparts to find and analyze the status of their respective quality control systems, and this paper explains the survey results.