Financial and Non Financial Factors on Going-Concern Opinion
Keywords:financial, disclosure, mitigating evidence, risk
Company's ability to survive is a fundamental uncertainty faced in the preparation and auditing financial statements. Provision of going-concern opinion on these financial statements the company is still being debated. Public Accountant Professional Standards in section 341 states that the auditor is responsible for evaluating whether there is a major doubt on the ability of entities in the continued survival of the appropriate period of time, not more than one year from the date of the financial statements being audited. This research analyzed the financial and non financial factors that affected the provision of going-concern opinion. This research used samples of 63 companies with 315 observations, taken from years 2005-2009. The logistic regression analysis showed that the company's financial condition variables, mitigating evidence, and disclosure significantly influence the acceptance of going-concern opinion. Enterprise risk was not significant at propensity of going-concern opinion.
Altman, Edward I. (1968). Financial ratios: Discriminate analysis and prediction of corporate bankruptcy. Journal of Financial, 4, 589–609.
Altman, and McGouch, Thomas P. (1974). Evaluation of a company as a going-concern. The Journal of Accountancy: 50 – 57.
Deangelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor independence, ‘lowballing’, and disclosure regulation. Journal of Accounting and Economics: 113-127.
Deangelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 3 (December), 183–200.
Dopuch, Nicholas, Holthausen, Robert W. and Le Bftwich, Richard W. (1987). Predicting audit qualification with financial and market variables, The Accounting Review, 62 (3), 431 – 454.
Geiger, Marshall A. and Rama, Dasaratha V. (2006). Audit firm size and going-concern reporting accuracy. Accounting Horizons, 20 (1), 1 – 17.
Geiger, Marshall A. and Raghunandan, K. (2002). Auditor tenure and audit reporting failures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 21 (1), 67-78.
Gosh, Aloke, and Moon, Doocheol. (2005). Auditor tenure and perceptions of audit quality. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, (January/March), 209-247.
Haron, Hasnah, Hartadi, Bambang, Ansari, Mahfooz and Ismail, Ishak. (2009). Factors influencing auditor’s going-concern opinion. Journal of Accounting Literature 23: 153-193.
Hopwood, W., McKeown, J., & Mutchler, J. (1994). Re-examination of auditor versus model accuracy within the context of the going-concern opinion decision. Contemporary Accounting Research, 11, 295–310.
Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia (IAI). (2001). Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik, Jakarta: Salemba Empat.
Junaidi dan Hartono, Jogiyanto. (2010). Non financial factors on going-concern opinion. Journal International Economics and Bussiness, UGM.
Hian Chye Koh, and Sen Suan Tan. 1999. A neural network approach to the prediction of going-concern status. Accounting and Business Research, 29 (3), 211-216.
Hian Chye Koh and Killough, L. N. 1990. The use of discriminant analysis in the assessment of the going-concern status of audit client. Journal of Business, Finance and Accounting. Accessed from http://www.ssrn.com.
Chi-Wen Jevons Lee, Chiawen Liu, Taychang Wang. (1999). The 150-hour Rule. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 27 (2), 203-228.
Menon, Krishnagopal and Schwartz, Kenneth B. (1987). An empirical investigation of audit qualification decision I presence of going-concern uncertainties.Contemporary Accounting Research, 3 (2), 302-315
Mutchler, Jane F. (1984). Auditors' perceptions of the going-concern opinion decision. A Journal of Practice & Theory,3 (2), 17-30.
Mutchler, Jane F. (1986). Empirical evidence regarding the auditor’s going-concern opinion decision. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 6 (1), 148-163.
Mutchler, Jane F., Hopwood, William dan McKeown, James M. (1997). The Influence of Contrary Information and Mitigating Factors on Audit Opinion Decisions on Bankrupt Companies. Journal of Accounting Research, 35 (2), 295-310.
Santosa, Arga Fajar, dan Wedari, Linda Kusumaning. (2007). Analisis faktor faktor yang mempengaruhi kecenderungan penerimaan opini audit going-concern. JAAI, 11(2), 141-158.
Watkins, A.L. W. Hillison, dan S.E. Morecroft. (2004). Audit Quality: A Synthesis of Theory and Empirical Evidence. Journal of Accounting Literature, 23, 153-193.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License - Share Alike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC BY-SA)