Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
In Southeast Asia, auditors play a crucial role in the quality of financial reports. With the introduction of a new format of auditors’ report that requires disclosure of key audit matters (KAM), the disclosure practice of auditors is, thus, of great interest. Specifically, this study aims to investigate the factors that auditors take into consideration when issuing KAMs.Design/methodology/approachThe research design is quantitative, with a focus on the number of KAM disclosures issued by auditors. As existing studies rely on the number of KAM disclosures in the analysis, this current research, thus, uses the quantity of KAM disclosures for comparison purposes. The analysis relies on secondary data and multiple regression analysis is used to establish the association between the number of KAM disclosures and three groups of determining factors, namely, auditor characteristics, corporate governance mechanisms and firm characteristics.FindingsThe significant determining factors of KAM disclosure include auditor’s litigation risk, firm complexity, profitability and industry type. Firms using a Big 4 audit firm, firms with many subsidiaries and firms in the technology, property and construction and finance industries have higher numbers of KAMs, while highly profitable firms issue lower numbers of KAMs. As for corporate governance mechanisms, the number of KAMs is significantly positively correlated with the number of independent directors (p < 0.10).Originality/valueThis research includes key corporate governance parties in the examination, including external auditors, independent directors and audit committees. The finding affirms the influence of Big 4 on KAM disclosure in Southeast Asia, while their roles are not significant in Western samples. The result also unearths the monitoring role of independent directors in KAM disclosure. The role of the audit committee in KAM disclosure is insignificant in Thai samples, while the committee role is statistically significant in the Western samples. Variations in the findings between this study and previous research could be attributed to differences in institutional settings between both regions.
Pacific Accounting Review – Emerald Publishing
Published: Dec 11, 2020
Keywords: Corporate governance; Thailand; Audit report; Key audit matter; Industry effect
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.