IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/epw/ejbmr0/v5y2020i2id50237.html

Auditors’ Opinion: The Paradox of “True and Fair View” of Financial Statements

Author

Listed:
  • Raphael S. Etim

    (University of Uyo, Nigeria.)

  • Mfon S. Jeremiah

    (University of Uyo, Nigeria.)

  • Ofonime O. Jeremiah

    (University of Uyo, Nigeria.)

Abstract

The appropriateness of the age-old accounting phrase “true and fair view” has been questioned in recent times. This stems from the irreconcilable corporate failures of entities whose financial statements had been earlier adjudged, by audit opinion, as being “true and fair”. In the light of the increasing doubts about the truism of financial statements, the objective of this study is to examine how true and fair financial statements are, and propose an alternative concept for use in expressing audit opinion on financial statements. The desk-based approach supplemented with information from some accounting practitioners, is used and the method of analysis is explanatory in nature. The issues highlighted in the discourse on the “true and fair view” concept corroborate the opinion of previous empirical studies that it is virtually and currently unrealistic to describe financial statements as being “true”. It is thus recommended that the phrase should rather be ‘’that the financial statements present fairly the state of the affairs of the organization’’.

Suggested Citation

  • Raphael S. Etim & Mfon S. Jeremiah & Ofonime O. Jeremiah, 2020. "Auditors’ Opinion: The Paradox of “True and Fair View” of Financial Statements," European Journal of Business and Management Research, European Open Science, vol. 5(2), March.
  • Handle: RePEc:epw:ejbmr0:v:5:y:2020:i:2:id:50237
    DOI: 10.24018/ejbmr.2020.5.2.237
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://eu-opensci.org/index.php/ejbmr/article/view/50237
    File Function: Abstract page
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://eu-opensci.org/index.php/ejbmr/article/download/50237/6857
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.24018/ejbmr.2020.5.2.237?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:epw:ejbmr0:v:5:y:2020:i:2:id:50237. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Support Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://eu-opensci.org/index.php/ejbmr .

    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.