會計師獨立性之研究

Abstract

會計師這個行業存在的基本由來是因為利益關係人基於商業活動，需要瞭解一家公司狀況時，因為難以看懂複雜的財務資訊，或不能完全信賴該公司自編的財務報表，而必須委請專業且公正客觀的第三者－會計師來對財務報表的內容是否允當表示意見所致。故利益關係人期待會計師必須獨立於受查公司。會計師如何保持實質的獨立，並且讓利益關係人亦覺得會計師顯然獨立於受查公司的同時，獲得受查公司更多審計以外的業務，讓會計師獲得較大的利益，一直是會計師界不斷努力的方向。 但隨著社會要求會計師必須更加獨立，美國政府公布沙氏法案以他律的方法來監督會計師，會計師在提供審計客戶各項非審計服務時，受到了很大的限制。 本研究主要在探討四大會計師事務所為了配合國外總所對於獨立性的規範所做的努力、所得到的正面效益以及實際作業中面臨的困難。根據探討的結果認為，我國政府若要按沙氏法案之精神規範會計師各項非審計業務時，可考量下列建議： 一、適度放寛沙氏法案不得提供之服務範圍。 二、對不得提供服務的非審計業務，宜置入重要性考量。 三、對集團客戶的限制宜加以適度修改。 四、修改會計師輪調政策，以利執行。 五、可要求事務所按ISQC1的規定建立內部控制制度，並督導其執行。

The auditing profession exists as a result of information risk and financial statement credibility. As the stakeholders need to understand an entity’s conditions when conducting business activities, but are not capable of understanding complex financial information or do not have full confidence in financial statements prepared by the entity, an auditor, representing a professional and objective third party, is engaged to issue an opinion on the fairness of financial statements. Therefore stakeholders expect that the auditors will be independent of the auditees. It has always been the goal of the profession for the auditors to provide more non-audit services to auditees and protect the economic interests of audit firms while ensuring that auditor independence is in fact maintained and is recognized by stakeholders. However, with society demanding a higher level of auditor independence, the United States implemented a system of public regulation under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, significantly restricting the scope of non-audit services that auditors may provide to the audit client. This research paper investigates the efforts undertaken, the positive benefits received and the difficulties encountered by Big-4 accounting firms in order to comply with global firm policies with respect to independence rules and requirements. Based on this investigation, Taiwan’s governing authority may consider the following recommendations if it is to adopt the spirit of Sarbanes-Oxley Act requirements and place restrictions on the non-audit services that auditors may provide: 1.Consider narrowing the scope of prohibited services as defined in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as appropriate; 2.Consider materiality in the evaluation of certain prohibited non-audit services; 3.Consider modifying restrictions on corporate group clients, as appropriate; 4.To enhance compliance, consider modifying policy on auditor partner rotation requirements, as appropriate; and 5.Request audit firms to establish quality control policies and procedures in accordance with ISQC1 and monitor compliance with such policies.