政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/128777

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/128777

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | Items with full text/Total items : 113318/144297 (79%)
Visitors : 50973735 Online Users : 869

RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.

Scope

please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results

please goto advance search for comprehansive author search

Adv. Search

Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer

Goto mobile version

政大典藏 > College of Commerce > Department of Accounting > Theses > Item 140.119/128777

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/128777

Title:	重大性判斷與司法判決 Materiality Decisions and Court`s Judgments
Authors:	廖柏蒼 Liau, Bo-Tsang
Contributors:	馬秀如俞洪昭 Ma, Sheree Yu, Hung-Chao 廖柏蒼 Liau, Bo-Tsang
Keywords:	重大性判斷財報不實質性因素量性因素重大性水準 SEC幕僚會計公告99號 Materiality Qualitative Factor Quantitative Factor Financial Statement Mispresentation SAB No.99
Date:	2020
Issue Date:	2020-03-02 10:59:09 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	重大性判斷是審計過程中極為重要卻又模糊不清的觀念。本研究採質性分析判決文字，歸納出多項影響因素，並以Logistic迴歸模型獲得實證結果，研究問題係以「影響法院認定財務爭議具重大性之判斷要素」為核心，探究美國SEC幕僚會計公告所明示之質性因素與量性因素如何影響我國法院對於財務報告重大性之評價。本研究的實證結果部分支持裁判功能固著假說，顯示當重大性判斷出現爭議時，原告提出質性因素作為重大性水準的判斷標準較容易為法院接受；反之，若為被告提出質性因素抗辯，則無顯著效果；實證結果亦支持會計專業信任假說，顯示會計師懲戒委員會或鑑識會計人員在訴訟中提供的額外資訊，有助於法官作出判斷，會計審計專家所提出的重大性判斷標準，多為法院所接受，法院鮮少挑戰會計師懲戒委員會的決定。最後，本研究之實證結果支持投資人保護假說，投資人保護中心提出的訴訟主張，亦因其公益地位而較易被法院所接受。
Reference:	中文文獻王志誠，2012，財務報告不實罪之判定基準：以重大性之測試標準為中心（上），臺灣法學雜誌198期，48頁。王雪玲，1985，審計人員對重要性之界定與揭露之研究-我國會計師專業之實證研究，政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。申佩芝，1988，審計人員重要性判斷行為之研究-透視模型之應用，政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。杜榮瑞與林孝倫，2010，法官對審計品質之評估：後果知識與經驗之影響，會計評論，第50期。林志潔、林孝倫，2010，從力霸案論臺灣會計師簽證財報不實之法律責任：一個實證的分析。臺大法學論叢，第39卷第3期。俞洪昭，1988，重要性判斷之研究-透視模型的應用，政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。馬秀如，1996，重大性標準與查核風險變動方向之探討，會計研究月刊，第132期。許皎慧，1991，我國財務報表使用者、編製者及審計人員對重要性原則判斷行為之比較研究，國立政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。連琪勻，2016，財報不實民事責任之實證研究—以證券交易法第20條第2項及第20條之1為中心，輔仁大學法律研究所碩士論文。郭大維，2018，證券交易法財報不實裁判評析，收錄於證券交易法刑事責任裁判評析，元照出版社。郭啟賢，1992，經驗與事務所規模對重要性判斷行為影響之研究，國立政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。陳俊元，2019，我國會計師因財報不實對第三人民事責任之法律實證分析，政大法學評論，第159期。陳脩文，2012，淺談重大訊息之「重大性」概念，證券暨期貨月刊，第三十卷第八期。臺灣證券交易所研究報告，2008，我國上市公司重大資訊揭露管理之研究，臺灣證券交易所研究報告，2011，重大資訊揭露之管理法制研究，臺灣證券交易所。劉嘉雯，2002，會計師執業資格、法律責任與審計市場之研究，管理學報，第19卷第1期。劉嘉雯、王泰昌與賴信蒼，2009，訴訟風險與大型會計師事務所之客戶財務風險可接受水準，臺大管理論叢，第20卷第1期。蕭安德，2007，應用「經驗法則」評估重大性水準以我國上市（櫃）公司為例，國立東華大學企業管理學系碩士論文。英文文獻 Acito, A. A., J. J. Burks, and W. B. Johnson. 2009. Materiality decisions and the correction of accounting errors. The Accounting Review 84(3): 659–88. Acito, A. A., J. J. Burks, and W. B. Johnson. 2019. The materiality of accounting errors: evidence from SEC comment letters. Contemporary Accounting Research 36(2): 839–68. Bernardi, R. A. and K.V. Pincus. 1996. The relationship between materiality thresholds and judgments of fraud risk. Managerial Finance 22(9): 1-15. Carmichael, D. 1979. Discussion of a judgement-based definition of materiality. Accounting Review 49: 342-352. Cassell, C., L. Dreher, and L. Myers. 2013. Reviewing the SEC’s review process: 10-k comment letters and the cost of remediation. The Accounting Review 88(6): 1875–908. Chewning, E. G., S. W. Wheeler, and K. C. Chan. 1998. Evidence on auditor and investor materiality thresholds resulting from equity-for-debt swaps. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 17(1): 39–53. Chong, H.G. 1992. Auditors and materiality. Managerial Auditing Journal 7: 8-17. Choudhary, P., K. J. Merkley, and K. Schipper. 2019. Auditors’ quantitative materiality judgments: properties and implications for financial reporting reliability. Journal of Accounting Research 57(5): 1303-1351. Donelson, D., K. Kadous, and J. Mcinnis. 2014. Research on litigation against auditors. In The Routledge Companion To Auditing. Edited by D. Hay, W. R. Knechel, and M. Willekins. NewYork: Routledge. Eilifsen, A. and W. Messier. 2015. Materiality guidance of the major public accounting firms. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 34: 3–26. Friedberg, A. H., J. R. Strawser, and J. H. Cassidy. 1989. Factors affecting materiality judgments: a comparison of the ‘big eight’ accounting firms’ materiality views with the results of empirical research. Advances in Accounting 7: 187–201. Johnston, R. and R. Petacchi. 2017. Regulatory oversight of ﬁnancial reporting: Securities and Exchange Commission comment letters. Contemporary Accounting Research 34 (2): 1128–1155. Keune, M. B. and K. M. Johnstone. 2012. Materiality judgments and the resolution of detectedmisstatements: the role of managers, auditors, and audit committees. The Accounting Review 87: 1641–1677. Kim, I. and D. Skinner. 2012. Measuring securities litigation risk. Journal of Accounting and Economics 53: 290–310 Messier, W. F., Jr. N. Martinov-Bennie, and A. Eilifsen. 2005. A review and integration of empirical research on materiality: two decades later. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 24(2): 153–187. Pany, K. and S. Wheeler. 1989. Materiality：an inter-industry comparison of the magnitudes and stabilities of various quantitative measures. Accounting Horizon 3: 71-78. SEC. 1999. Staff Accounting Bulletin No.99 – Materiality. Washington. DC: SEC. https://www.sec.gov/interps/account/sab99.htm SEC. 2006. Staff Accounting Bulletin No.108. Washington. DC: SEC. https://www.sec.gov/interps/account/sab108.htm Steinbart, P. J. 1987. The construction of a rule-based expert system as a method for studying materiality judgments. The Accounting Review 51(1): 97-116.
Description:	博士國立政治大學會計學系 97353503
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0097353503
Data Type:	thesis
DOI:	10.6814/NCCU202000288
Appears in Collections:	[Department of Accounting] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Size	Format
350301.pdf	886Kb	Adobe PDF2	301	View/Open

All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

社群 sharing

著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement

1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.

DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004 MIT & Hewlett-Packard / Enhanced by NTU Library IR team Copyright © - Feedback