The effectiveness of the auditor’s opinion on the internal controls over financial reporting

Abstract

PurposeRecent studies have concluded that auditors underreport existing internal control over financial reporting (ICFR) weaknesses. This study aims to assess how effective external auditors are, as independent third parties, at disclosing reliable opinions to the public on the ICFR.Design/methodology/approachUsing a logistic regression, the authors analyzed a sample of 106 US companies classified as large accelerated filers or accelerated filers consisting in 53 companies which restated their financial statements and a control group of 53 companies having “clean financial statements” at any given moment during the research period, between 2005 and 2018.FindingsThe results indicate that only 34% of companies with financial statements deemed unreliable have received an adverse ICFR opinion issued by the external auditor during the misrepresentation period or its prior year. The authors also notice that external auditors are somewhat effective in identifying and disclosing red flags to the public that certain companies have internal control (IC) material weaknesses. The results also indicate that the average presence of an adverse IC opinion issued by the external auditor during the misrepresentation period or its prior year for companies with unreliable financial statements is higher than for companies with financial statements deemed reliable.Practical implicationsThis study tests if an increase in efforts and disbursements with audit fees are justifiable by external auditors’ issuing effective, reliable opinions and reinforcing a more transparent and ethical capital markets environment, that is, an environment where accurate information is available for stakeholders. If external auditors are negligent in providing a qualitative and independent opinion to stakeholders, the increase of disbursements made with audit fees is less justifiable. Thus, the research has practical implication for auditors as well as standard setters.Originality/valueThis study extends the literature on ICFR by empirically testing whether the public can rely on external auditors’ opinions expressed on Sarbanes–Oxley Section 404 reports.