Going GAGAS for due process: examining Yellow Book standard participation

Author:

Flasher ReneeORCID,Lau Michelle,Marshall Dara M.ORCID

Abstract

PurposeThe US federal government requires auditors to follow governmental auditing standards when performing audits of entities expending significant federal government dollars. This study explores stakeholder participation during the comment letter phase of government auditing standard setting to determine if participation is symbolic or substantive.Design/methodology/approachResearchers conduct an analysis of the 179 comment letters submitted to the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) and received for their 2010 and 2017 exposure drafts of government auditing standards.FindingsThe distribution of stakeholder participation groups in the government auditing standard-setting process differs from the distribution in the private company auditing standard-setting process. On average, participants submit letters that are greater than two pages in length. Participants also contribute feedback on topics that the GAO directly solicits. Taken together, the results demonstrate stakeholder behaviors that are consistent with a substantive rather than symbolic due process involvement for government auditing standards.Research limitations/implicationsStakeholder beliefs are inferred based on the observed behavior of comment letter submissions. Also, there is a subjective element to the classification of the comment letters for the study.Practical ImplicationsGiven the far-reaching implications of Yellow Book auditing standards on public, private and nonprofit entities, the findings are relevant to a heterogeneous audience. This study reveals opportunities for users of government auditing standards, practitioners and academics for greater involvement in due process standard setting to bring additional legitimacy to the GAO and its standard-setting activities.Originality/valueBeyond the current study, little empirical research examines Yellow Book auditing standards or the due process through which these standards are established. This is the first study to examine the complete set of comment letters for the 2010 and 2017 exposure drafts of government auditing standards.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Strategy and Management,Public Administration

Reference58 articles.

1. AICPA (2019a), “Auditing standards board”, available at: https://www.aicpa.org/research/standards/auditattest/asb.html (accessed 25 November 2019).

2. AICPA (2019b), “Auditing, attestation and quality control standards setting activities”, available at: https://www.aicpa.org/content/dam/aicpa/research/standards/auditattest/asb/downloadabledocuments/asb-operating-policies.pdf (accessed 25 November 2019).

3. Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the auditing section of the American Accounting Association on PCAOB release No. 2013-009, proposed rule on improving the transparency of audit: proposed amendments to PCAOB auditing standards to provide disclosure in the auditor's report of certain participants in the audit: participating committee members;Current Issues in Auditing,2014

4. An examination of international accounting standard-setting due process and the implications for legitimacy;The British Accounting Review,2016

5. Governmental auditing research: an analytic framework, assessment of past work, and future directions;Research in Governmental and Nonprofit Accounting,1986

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3