• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.14 no.12
• /
• pp.111-120
• /
• 2016

PCAOB conducts the direct supervision for the PCAOB registered accounting firm. Therefore, if an accounting firm is registered with the PCAOB, it will thoroughly manage for their quality management systems. The registered auditor can be expected to have better quality of the audit. This study carried out the analysis using the audit fee which proxies for audit quality. The results of analysis are as follows. After controlling for foreign accounting firms affiliated status, company size, risky assets, leverage, ROA, and market-related variables, PCAOB is a significant explanatory variable for the audit fees. The results of this study support the hypothesis that PCAOB-registered auditors will provide a good audit quality.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.9 no.5
• /
• pp.721-727
• /
• 2023

To prevent corruption, waste, and abuse in national governance, audit agencies are established and granted significant authority and responsibilities, including ensuring their independence. However, questions have been raised about who oversees these agencies and addresses issues or misconduct that may arise within them. In the United States, to address this oversight concern, the Inspector General Act was enacted, creating an audit community called the Inspector General Community. This community comprises various audit agencies and promotes compliance with standards and investigates potential wrongdoing by audit personnel. It fosters a culture of independence and collaboration among diverse stakeholders, such as Congress, the President, the Government Accountability Office, and agency leadership. In light of this successful approach in the United States, this research seeks to study and apply similar oversight mechanisms to audit agencies in South Korea. There is a need to develop the relationship between oversight bodies and parliament in terms of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations. Accordingly, this paper studies this American case and presents efficient policy measures for the supervisory system to be applied to Korea's audit organizations. It aims to identify policy insights for effective supervision, ensuring independence, and fostering a collaborative culture within our audit institutions. Therefore, domestic interest and research on this matter are essential to enhance our audit mechanisms and achieve efficient governance.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.113-127
• /
• 2012

From the end of 1st quarter of 2012, Korean mandatory firms had started releasing financial reports conforming to the K-IFRS(Korean adopted International Financial Reporting Standards). Major characteristics of IFRS, such as 'principles based' features, consolidated reporting, 'fair value' measurement, increased pressure for non-financial disclosures have resulted in brief and various disclosure practices regarding the main body of each statements and vast amount of note description requirements. Meanwhile, a host of previous studies on IFRS disclosures have incorporated regulatory and/or 'compete information' perspectives, mainly focusing on suggesting further enforcement of strengthened requirements and providing guidelines for specific treatments. Thus, as an extension of prior findings and suggestions this study had explored to conduct an integrative approach embracing views of the reporting entities and the users of financial information. In spite of all the state-driven efforts for faithful representation and comparability of corporate financial reports, an overhaul of disclosure practices of fiscal year 2010 and 2011 had revealed numerous cases of insufficiency and discordance in terms of mandatory norms and market expectations. As to the causes of such shortcomings, this study identified several factors from the corporate side and the users of the information; some inherent aspects of IFRS, industry/corporate-specific context, expenditures related to internalizing IFRS system, reduced time frame for presentation. lack of clarity and details to meet the quality of information - understandability, comparability etc. - commonly requested by the user group. In order to improve current disclosure practices, dual approach had been suggested; Firstly, to encourage and facilitate implementation, (1) further segmentation and differentiation of mandates among companies, (2) redefining the scope and depth of note descriptions, (3) diversification and coordination of reporting periods, (4) providing support for equipping disclosure systems and granting incentives for best practices had been discussed. Secondly, as for the hard measures, (5) regularizing active involvement of corporate and user group delegations in the establishment and amendment process of K-IFRS (6) enforcing detailed and standardized disclosure on reporting entities had been recommended.