Abstract

Audit quality in South Africa is perceived by the audit regulator to be deteriorating, with the primary cause being a compromise of auditor independence, mostly as a result of excessively long audit firm tenures. The regulator has responded with mandatory audit firm rotation (MAFR). The purpose of this research is to employ field surveys to collect the views of experienced audit committee (AC) chairs, chief financial officers (CFOs) and auditors of JSE-listed companies on the necessity for, and potential efficacy of, this regulation. An additional focus of the paper is to explore potential unintended outcomes, as well as identify preferred alternatives and provide recommendations and practical solutions to negative effects. Findings show that auditors, CFOs and AC chairs are strongly opposed to MAFR in South Africa on a cost-benefit analysis. Respondents do not believe that audit quality and independence has deteriorated and feel that existing measures to safeguard auditor independence are sufficient. In addition, the loss of knowledge and experience of the clients that will result from firm rotation, together with other unintended consequences such as unmanageable cost increases, provide further reasons not to implement MAFR. Findings also indicate that MAFR will not contribute towards decreasing the dominance of the market by the ‘Big 4’ firms. Practical recommendations are suggested based on the findings.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call