Rules Rather than Discretion in Audit Standards: Going-Concern Opinions in Belgium
研究比利时转向规则导向审计标准后，持续经营意见报告的变化，发现非六大审计师对同时违反两项标准的客户减少了第二类错误，但增加了第一类错误，对债权人、审计师、公司和员工的影响取决于优先顺序。
ABSTRACT: We study going-concern (GC) reporting in Belgium to examine the effects associated with a shift toward rules-based audit standards. Beginning in 2000, a major revision in Belgian GC audit standards took effect. Among its changes, auditors must ascertain whether their clients are in compliance with two “financial-juridical criteria” for board of directors' GC disclosures. In a study of a sample of private Belgian companies, we report two major findings. First, there is a decrease in auditor Type II errors, particularly by non-Big 6/5 auditors for their clients that fail both criteria. Second, there is an increase in Type I errors, again particularly for companies that fail both criteria. We also conduct an ex post analysis of the decrease in Type II errors and the increase in Type I errors. Our findings suggest the standard engenders both favorable and unfavorable effects, the net of which depends on the priorities assigned to the affected parties (creditors, auditors, companies, and employees).