Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/30152
|
| Title: | 會計師法律責任對經理人舞弊與會計師查核努力水準之研究 |
| Authors: | 簡駿貿 |
| Contributors: | 戚務君
簡駿貿 |
| Keywords: | 會計師法律賠償責任
連帶賠償
比例賠償
經理人舞弊
Auditor`s legal liability
Joint and several liability
Proportionate liability
Management fraud |
| Date: | 2003 |
| Issue Date: | 2009-09-11 17:21:06 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 在美國，會計師界多主張受到不公平的法律對待，一直到現在，他們對於未偵測到的重大財務報表誤述，多需負起「連帶賠償」的責任，因此近二十年來會計師團體一直極力爭取更為寬鬆的「比例賠償」制度，終於在最近幾年得到逐步地改善；但另一方面，投資人則擔心「比例賠償」制度的實施，將會使得投資人在面臨被告經理人沒有能力償還賠償時，無法從被告會計師身上取得補償而降低對其之保護。有鑑於此項議題之爭議不斷，本研究欲藉由檢視會計師法律責任會如何影響經理人的舞弊行為以及會計師的查核努力，以釐清會計師法律責任對審計失敗的影響。
本研究修正Patterson and Wright (2003)的分析模型，進一步以經理人策略性選擇舞弊金額的情況加入賽局模型，探討在審計品質只受會計師查核努力與其同時受到會計師查核努力和經理人舞弊金額的兩種審計情境下，不同會計師法律賠償責任對於會計師最適查核努力和經理人舞弊金額選擇之影響。
□ 本研究發現，無論在何種審計情境下，若會計師被裁定應負擔法律賠償比率與其早先的查核努力水準間有相當程度之敏感性時，則在比例賠償制度下，會計師的查核努力水準將會大於連帶賠償制度下所投入的水準，如此將使得財務報表的查核品質提升，增加對投資人事前的保護。本研究之結果希冀能提供國內主管機關在制訂會計師法律賠償責任時的參考依據。
In America, the audit profession contends legal practices treat auditors unfairly. Until recently, they have been held jointly and severally liable for undetected material misstatements and have had to pay their own legal fees whether or not they prevail in court. Hence, they have asked for proportionate liability regime in decades and have got some success. A primary concern about proportionate liability is its potential effects on stockholders. Opponents claim that proportionate liability would decrease investor protection when managers are bankrupt due to the reduction in compensatory payments from auditors. Until now, this controversy still exists. To understand how auditor’s legal liability affects audit failure, this study focuses on the impacts of auditor’s legal liability on management fraud and audit effort.
Based on Patterson and Wright (2003) analytical model, this study investigates the effectiveness of proportionate liability in reducing the amount of management fraud and the audit failure rate relative to joint and several liability in two strategic audit settings: one that audit quality is affected by audit effort and one that audit quality is affected by both audit effort and the amount of management fraud.
My results show that a proportionate liability rule with large marginal liability relief for audit quality can effectively decrease the amount of management fraud and the audit failure rate relative to joint and several liability in both strategic audit settings. This result would provide valuable reference in auditor’s legal liability determination for policy-makers and regulators. |
| Reference: | 中文部分
汪泱若，1982，企業管理舞弊，台北：華泰書局。
林秋景，2003，不同法律制度下管理者與會計師策略之研究，國立台北大學會計系未出版碩士論文。
林嬋娟、劉嘉雯，1999，我國與先進國家會計師懲戒制度之比較，中華民國會計師公會全國聯合會委託研究。
馬秀如，1996a，員工舞弊與管理舞弊釋疑，會計研究月刊，第126期（5月）：104-111。
＿＿＿，1996b，非法事項、錯誤及舞弊，會計研究月刊，第129期（8月）：112-123。
財團法人中華民國會計研究發展基金會審計委員會，1987，審計準則公報第十四號「舞弊與錯誤」。
＿＿＿，1996，審計準則公報第二十九號「法令遵循之考量」。
陳秋芳，1998，公司管理舞弊會計師豈應連坐同罪，會計研究月刊，第147期（2月）：7-8。
黃惠琦，2002，會計師破產風險對於審計品質與投資之影響，私立中原大學會計系未出版碩士論文。
鄭惠之，2004a，財務報表的管理責任A會計研究月刊，第220期（3月）：31-41。
＿＿＿，2004b，投資人要獲得真實的正義，會計研究月刊，第220期（3月）:42-46。
＿＿＿，2004c，財務報表的審計責任，會計研究月刊，第220期（3月）：53-60。
劉漢妮，1999，我國會計師懲戒制度之研究，國立台灣大學會計系未出版碩士論文。
蕭萬龍，2003，會計師簽證民事責任之研究，私立中原大學財經法學系未出版碩士論文。
英文部分
Albrecht, W. S. 2003. Fraud Examination. Thomson South-Western.
Albrecht, W. S., and J. Wernz. 1993. The Three Factors of Fraud. Security Management (7): 95-97.
Albrecht, W. S., G. W. Wernz, and T. L. Williams. 1995. Fraud: Bringing Light to the Dark Side of Business. Irwin Professional Publishing.
Albrecht, W. S., D. J. Cherrington, R. Payne, A. Roe, and M. B. Romney. 1981. How to Detect and Prevent Business Fraud. Prentice-Hall.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. 1977. Statement of Auditing Standard No.16: The Independent Auditor’s Responsibility for the Detection of Errors or Irregularities. New York, NY: AICPA.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. 1983. Statement of Auditing Standard No.47: Audit Risk and Materiality in Conducting an Audit. New York, NY: AICPA.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. 1988. Statement of Auditing Standard No.53: The Auditor’s Responsibility to Detect and Report Errors and Irregularities. New York, NY: AICPA.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. 1988. Statement of Auditing Standard No.54: Illegal Acts by Clints. New York, NY: AICPA.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. 1997. Statement of Auditing Standard No.82: Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement. New York, NY: AICPA.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. 2003. Statement of Auditing Standard No.99: Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement. New York, NY: AICPA.
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. 1995. The Report to the Nation on Occupation Fraud and Abuse. Austin, TX: ACFE.
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. 1996. The Report to the Nation on Occupation Fraud and Abuse. Austin, TX: ACFE.
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. 2002. The Report to the Nation on Occupation Fraud and Abuse. Austin, TX: ACFE.
Beasley, M. S., J. V. Carcello, and D. R. Hermanson. 1999. Fraudulent Financial Reporting 1987-1997, An Analysis of U.S. Public Companies. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations.
College Edition. 1964. Webster’s New World Dictionary. Cleveland and New York: World.
Dye, R. 1993. Auditing Standards, Legal Liability, and Auditor Wealth. Journal of Political Economics 101: 887-914.
Hillegeist, S. A. 1999. Financial Reporting and Auditing Under Alternative Damage Apportionment Rules. The Accounting Review 74(3): 347-369.
Hollinger, R. C. 1989. Dishonesty in the Workplace: A Manager’s Guide to Preventing Employee Theft. Park Ridge, Ill.: London House Press.
Institute of Internal Auditors. 1990. Deterrence, Detection, Investigation, and Reporting of Fraud. Maitland, Fla.: IIA.
International Standards on Auditing. 2004. Section 240: Fraud and Error. Technical Pronouncements Handbook, IFAC.
International Standards on Auditing. 2004. Section 250: Consideration of Laws and Regulations in an Audit of Financial Statements. Technical Pronouncements Handbook, IFAC.
McDermott, E., and T. L. Williams. 1990. Organizational Structures to Deal with Employee Fraud. Security Journal 1(5): 258-270.
Narayanan, V. G. 1994. An Analysis of Auditor Liability Rules. Journal of Accounting Research 32: 39-59.
Patterson, E., and D. Wright. 2003. Evidence of Fraud, Audit Risk and Audit Liability Regimes. Review of Accounting Studies 8: 105-131.
Robertson, J. C., and T. J. Louwers. 1999. Auditing. McGraw-Hill Book.
Romney, M. B., W. S. Albrecht, and D. J. Cherrington. 1980. Red-Flagging the White-Collar Criminal. Management Accounting (3): 51-57.
Schwartz, R. 1997. Legal Regimes, Audit Quality and Investment. The Accounting Review 72(3): 385-406.
Teoh, S. H., and T. J. Wong. 1993. Perceived Auditor Quality and the Earnings Response Coefficient. The Accounting Review V68(2): 346-366.
Willenborg, M. 1999. Empirical Analysis of the Economic Demand for Auditing in the Initial Public Offerings Market. Journal of Accounting Research: 225-238. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
會計研究所
91353031
92 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0091353031 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [會計學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| index.html | 0Kb | HTML2 | 228 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
