IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dug/actaec/y2011i4p72-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Auditors’ Assessments of Materiality Between Professional Judgment and Subjectivity

Author

Listed:
  • Saher Aqel

    (Alquds University, East Jerusalem,Palestine)

Abstract

Materiality has been and continues to be a topic of importance for auditors. It is considered as a significant factor in the planning of the audit procedures, performing the planned audit procedures, evaluating the results of the audit procedures and issuing an audit report. Recently, there has been a renewed interest in the concept of materiality motivated by concerns at the Sarbanes- Oxley Act, Securities and Exchange Commission and International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board issuance of proposed standards on materiality. The objective of this paper is to discuss and analyze comprehensively the concept of audit materiality including how materiality threshold is determined by auditors. Auditing standards settings bodies pointed out that auditor’s determination of materiality threshold is a matter of professional judjment. As a judgmental concept, however, materiality is susceptible to subjectivity. Furthermore, the absence of audting standards on how materiality is determined has highlighted the significance of this issue and indicated that guidance for materiality professional judgments must come from other non-authoritative sources such as empirical researches. A number of new and important areas of materiality are in need of further investigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Saher Aqel, 2011. "Auditors’ Assessments of Materiality Between Professional Judgment and Subjectivity," Acta Universitatis Danubius. OEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 4(4), pages 72-88, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:dug:actaec:y:2011:i:4:p:72-88
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journals.univ-danubius.ro/index.php/oeconomica/article/view/936/911
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    2. Takiah Mohd Iskandar & Errol R Iselin, 1999. "A review of materiality research," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 209-239, September.
    3. Ojo, Marianne, 2006. "Eliminating the Audit Expectations Gap : Myth or Reality?," MPRA Paper 232, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Sep 2006.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Veronica Grosu & Dorel Mateș & Monica-Laura Zlati & Svetlana Mihaila & Marian Socoliuc & Marius-Sorin Ciubotariu & Simona-Maria Tanasă, 2020. "Econometric Model for Readjusting Significance Threshold Levels through Quick Audit Tests Used on Sustainable Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-32, October.

    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. Nur Ain Shahrier & Jessica Sze Yin Ho & Sanjaya Singh Gaur, 2020. "Ownership concentration, board characteristics and firm performance among Shariah-compliant companies," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 24(2), pages 365-388, June.
    2. Barbara Su, 2023. "Banking practices and borrowing firms’ financial reporting quality: evidence from bank cross-selling," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 201-236, March.
    3. Yeon‐Koo Che & Kathryn E. Spier, 2008. "Strategic judgment proofing," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(4), pages 926-948, December.
    4. Fabrizio Rossi & Maretno Agus Harjoto, 2020. "Corporate non-financial disclosure, firm value, risk, and agency costs: evidence from Italian listed companies," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 1149-1181, October.
    5. Klapper, Leora F. & Love, Inessa, 2004. "Corporate governance, investor protection, and performance in emerging markets," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 10(5), pages 703-728, November.
    6. Sevcan Yesiltas, 2009. "Financing Constraints and Investment: The Case of Turkish Manufacturing Firms," 2009 Meeting Papers 874, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    7. Kane, Gregory D. & Velury, Uma, 2004. "The role of institutional ownership in the market for auditing services: an empirical investigation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(9), pages 976-983, September.
    8. Tan, Monica & Liu, Bin, 2016. "CEO's managerial power, board committee memberships and idiosyncratic volatility," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 21-30.
    9. Theodore E. Christensen & Hang Pei & Spencer R. Pierce & Liang Tan, 2019. "Non-GAAP reporting following debt covenant violations," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 629-664, June.
    10. Ju Ryum Chung & Eun Jung Cho & Ho-Young Lee & Myungsoo Son, 2017. "The impact of labour unions on external auditor selection and audit scope: evidence from the Korean market," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(48), pages 4833-4850, October.
    11. Shin-ichi Fukuda, 2018. "Companies’ Financial Surpluses and Cash/Deposit Holdings," Public Policy Review, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan, vol. 14(3), pages 369-396, July.
    12. Boubakri, Narjess & Ghouma, Hatem, 2010. "Control/ownership structure, creditor rights protection, and the cost of debt financing: International evidence," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 2481-2499, October.
    13. Hartarska, Valentina M. & Nadolnyak, Denis A., 2012. "Financing Constraints and Access to Credit in Post Crisis Environment: Evidence from New Farmers in Alabama," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124882, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Hasan, Iftekhar & Lozano-Vivas, Ana, 2002. "Organizational Form and Expense Preference: Spanish Experience," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 135-150, April.
    15. Fabbri, Daniela & Menichini, Anna Maria C., 2016. "The commitment problem of secured lending," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 561-584.
    16. Sang Cheol Lee & Mooweon Rhee & Jongchul Yoon, 2018. "Foreign Monitoring and Audit Quality: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    17. DEGEORGE, François & DING, Yuan & JEANJEAN, Thomas & STOLOWY, Hervé, 2005. "Does Analyst Following Curb Earnings Management?," HEC Research Papers Series 810, HEC Paris.
    18. Xueyan Dong & Jingyu Gao & Sunny Li Sun & Kangtao Ye, 2021. "Doing extreme by doing good," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 291-315, March.
    19. Lien, Yung-Chih & Filatotchev, Igor, 2015. "Ownership characteristics as determinants of FDI location decisions in emerging economies," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 637-650.
    20. Gerry Gallery & Emerson Cooper & John Sweeting, 2008. "Corporate Disclosure Quality: Lessons from Australian Companies on the Impact of Adopting International Financial Reporting Standards," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 18(3), pages 257-273, September.

    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:dug:actaec:y:2011:i:4:p:72-88. 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: Daniela Robu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fedanro.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.