IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/avo/emipdu/v34y2025i2p581-597.html

Reasons For Modifying Audit Opinions On Financial Reports Of Listed Companies In Bosnia And Herzegovina

Author

Listed:
  • Amira Pobric

    (University of East Sarajevo, Faculty of Economics Brcko, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Abstract

This paper examines audit opinions on financial reports of listed companies in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The aim of the research is to determine the frequency of modified audit opinion as well as to identify the reasons that lead auditors to modify their opinion. The research was carried out on a sample of 886 auditor’s reports. The period from 2017 to 2021 is covered by the research. The content analysis method was used in the research. This research shows that the frequency of modified audit opinions was on average 17.6%. The existence of materially significant misstatements in financial reports is a much more frequent reason for modifying the audit opinion than the existence of limitations in the scope of the audit. The most common misstatements in financial reports that were the reason for the modification of the auditor's opinion refer to the impairment of assets.

Suggested Citation

  • Amira Pobric, 2025. "Reasons For Modifying Audit Opinions On Financial Reports Of Listed Companies In Bosnia And Herzegovina," Economic Thought and Practice, Department of Economics and Business, University of Dubrovnik, vol. 34(2), pages 581-597, november.
    • Handle: RePEc:avo:emipdu:v:34:y:2025:i:2:p:581-597
    DOI: 10.17818/EMIP/2025/17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php/clanak/490898
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17818/EMIP/2025/17?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hanen Moalla & Rahma Baili, 2019. "Credit ratings and audit opinion: evidence from Tunisia," Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(1), pages 103-125, March.
    2. Joachim Gassen & Hollis A. Skaife, 2009. "Can Audit Reforms Affect the Information Role of Audits? Evidence from the German Market," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 867-898, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alaskar, Mohammad Zaid & Kim, Ja Ryong & Nguyen, Tam Huy & Rafique, Muhammad, 2025. "Balancing performance and ethics: Navigating visual recognition technology adoption in the auditing industry," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    2. Stuart, Iris & Shin, Yong-Chul & Cram, Donald P. & Karan, Vijay, 2013. "Review of choice-based, matched, and other stratified sample studies in auditing research," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 88-113.
    3. Martinez-Blasco, Monica & Garcia-Blandon, Josep & Vivas-Crisol, Laura, 2016. "El informe de auditoría con salvedades: ¿una mayor independencia y competencia del auditor aumenta su contenido informativo?," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 89-101.
    4. Beng Wee Goh & Jayanthi Krishnan & Dan Li, 2013. "Auditor Reporting under Section 404: The Association between the Internal Control and Going Concern Audit Opinions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 970-995, September.
    5. Cascino, Stefano & Gassen, Joachim, 2010. "Mandatory IFRS adoption and accounting comparability," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2010-046, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    6. Sandro Brunelli & Francesco Venuti & Thomas Niederkofler & Camilla Falivena, 2024. "Financial distress, auditors’ going concern modification (GCM) and investors’ reaction in a concentrated ownership environment: new evidence from the Italian stock market," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(2), pages 313-339, June.
    7. J�rgen Ernstberger & Michael Stich & Oliver Vogler, 2012. "Economic Consequences of Accounting Enforcement Reforms: The Case of Germany," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 217-251, August.
    8. Dirk Simons & Nicole Zein, 2016. "Audit Market Segmentation -- The Impact of Mid-tier Firms on Competition," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 131-154, May.
    9. Reiner Quick & Niklas Schenk & Florian Schmidt & Thilo Towara, 2018. "The impact of corporate governance on auditor choice: evidence from Germany," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 22(2), pages 251-283, June.
    10. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:avo:emipdu:v:34:y:2025:i:2:p:581-597. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Nebojsa Stojcic (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/oedubhr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.