我國雙簽制度下主副簽會計師聲譽之探討

Abstract

本研究以博達、皇統、力霸此三件具有代表性之舞弊案件研究會計師聲譽。首先，承襲諸多國內外研究探討涉及審計失敗之會計師事務所的客戶股價是否較市場上其他公司有更負之情形，本研究發現涉及審計失敗之會計師事務所的客戶股價較市場上其他公司有顯著負向之情形。 由於臺灣之查核報告亦有查核會計師署名，本研究檢視市場對於審計品質之衡量係以會計師事務所為基礎或以會計師個人為基礎，承襲國內研究探討涉及審計失敗之會計師的客戶股價是否較市場上其他公司有更負之情形，實證結果顯示牽涉審計失敗之會計師客戶股價較市場上其他公司股價有較負之情形。 在臺灣的雙簽制度下，本研究進一步觀察涉及審計失敗之會計師中，主簽會計師客戶股價反應是否與副簽會計師客戶股價反應有所不同，實證結果並未能發現顯著差異。綜合上述實證結果，投資人主要是以會計師事務所甚至是會計師個人之聲譽作為衡量會計師聲譽及審計品質之基礎，但並未明確區分主簽會計師及副簽會計師。 除此之外，本研究亦考量涉及審計之敗之會計師(事務所)的會計師任期及產業專精是否亦會對股價造成影響，實證結果顯示會計師任期在會計師事務所層級對股價有正向之影響，代表會計師任期越長，投資人越予以信賴，較不會受到單一審計失敗案件之影響。實證結果亦顯示產業專精並未對客戶股價產生顯著的影響，未能支持本研究認為產業專精程度較佳之會計師(事務所)客戶的股價較不會受到單一審計失敗案件影響之假設。

In this study, I investigate the market reaction of three severe audit failures─Procomp, Summit, and Rebar─in Taiwan to examine whether auditor reputation matters. Following prior literature, I first examine whether clients have a more negative market reaction when their audit firm is involved in audit failure and find that the involved audit firm clients have a significantly more negative market reaction than other companies in the market. Since audit reports in Taiwan are also signed by individual audit partners, I also observe whether the market assesses audit quality on the basis of audit firm or individual audit partner. Following literature in Taiwan, I examine whether involved audit partner clients experience a more negative market reaction than other companies and find that involved audit partner clients experience a more negative market reaction than other companies in the market. Specifically, under the dual attestation system in Taiwan, I further examine whether the market reaction of the involved lead audit partner clients and the involved concurring audit partner clients is different and find no statistically significant difference. The empirical results above suggest that investors seem to assess the auditor reputation and audit quality at the audit firm level and the audit partner level but view no difference between the lead audit partner and the concurring audit partner. In addition, I also consider the effect of audit tenure and industry specialization of the involved audit firm/partner. I find that tenure has significantly positive effects on the market reaction to audit failures at the audit firm level. It shows that investors of clients with longer tenure rely more trust on their auditors and are less affected by single audit failure. The empirical results also show that industry specialization of the involved audit firm/partner doesn’t have significant effects on the market reaction to audit failure and could not support my hypothesis that clients of industry specialist auditors are less affected by single audit failure.