臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

2002年沙氏法案提出後，審計委員會重要性議題一直延燒至今。公司治理機制較良好的企業為避免管理階層因進行舞弊隱匿、操縱盈餘或其他因素而延遲查核報告日，董事會傾向設立審計委員會以監控會計、財務報表流程及財務規劃。此外，審計委員會亦扮演著管理階層與查核人員之間的橋樑，因此，若審計委員會成員具備會計財務相關知識，應能與查核人員進行良好之溝通，提昇會計師查核效率，進而讓查核人員提早出具查核報告時間。故本研究欲探討審計委員會存在與其專業性是否能縮短查核報告時間落差。
研究結果發現，當公司設有審計委員會時，能有效縮短查核報告時間落差。此外，審計委員會成員中，若具備會計及財務專長時，更能有效縮短查核報告時間落差。其中，審計委員會具會計財務專長時，確實更能縮短查核報告時間落差。但相較於僅具財務專長者，其縮短查核報告時間落差效果顯著性並未優於僅具財務專長之審計委員會。

After Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), the issues of the audit committee has been discussed. To avoid management of fraud, earnings management or other factors delay audit report date, the companies that have great corporate governance mechanisms tend to set up an audit committee to monitor accounting, financial statements processes and financial planning. Furthermore, audit committee also plays an important role on communication between auditor and management. So if the members of the audit committee have accounting related knowledge, it should be able to communicate well with the auditors, improve the efficiency of auditors, and make the auditors early issue the audit reports. Therefore, this study will explore whether the audit committee and its expertise can reduce the audit report delay.
The results indicate that audit committee variable is negative significantly associated with audit report delay. In addition, when the members of audit committee are accounting financial expert or nonaccounting financial expert, it can more effective to reduce the audit report delay. However, compared to the audit committee with accounting financial expertise and nonaccounting financial expertise, the significance of the audit committee with accounting financial expertise is not superior to nonaccounting financial expertise.

第一章 緒論 p.1
第一節 研究背景與動機 p.1
第二節 研究問題與目的 p.4
第三節 研究貢獻 p.6
第四節 研究架構 p.7
第二章 文獻探討 p.9
第一節 審計委員會設立與責任 p.9
第二節 查核報告與時間落差 p.13
第三節 審計委員會專業性與查核報告時間落差 p.16
第三章 假說建立與研究方法 p.19
第一節 假說建立 p.19
第二節 變數衡量 p.22
第三節 實證模型 p.27
第四節 研究期間、樣本選取與資料來源 p.28
第五節 資料分析方法 p.31
第四章 實證結果分析 p.32
第一節 敘述性統計 p.32
第二節 多元共線性檢定 p.35
第三節 單變量分析 p.37
第四節 OLS最小平方法檢定 p.41
第五章 結論 p.47
第一節 研究結論 p.47
第二節 研究限制及建議 p.48
參考文獻 p.50
一、中文部分 p.50
二、英文部分 p.50

一、中文部分
陳省吾，2011，實質盈餘管理操縱對審計報告時間落差之影響，輔仁大學會計學系碩士論文
林有志、黃邵彥、辛宥呈、施志成，2007，我國上市公司半年報申報時間落差特性之研究,當代會計第八卷第一期民國九十六年五月，P 85-112
陳慶隆、楊麗文、林信煒及詹惠雯，2002，我國上市公司會計師更換對審計報告時間落差之影響，管理學域學術研討會論文集，第三屆 (2002 / 05 / 07) ，P 273-287
黃莉盈，2016，審計委員會與公司風險承擔相關性，會計與公司治理第十一卷第一期2016年6月，P51-78
二、英文部分
Abernathy, J. L., Beyer, B., Masli, A., & Stefaniak, C. 2014. The association between characteristics of audit committee accounting experts, audit committee chairs and financial reporting timeliness. Advances in Accounting, 30(2),P 283-297
Afify H.A.E.2009. Determinants of audit report lag: Does implementation of corporate governance have any impact? Applied Accounting Research, 10 (1), P 56-86
Apadore, K., & Noor, M. M. 2013. Determinants of audit report lag and corporate governance in Malaysia. International Journal of Business & Management, 8(15), P 151-163.
Ashton, R., Willingham.J, & Elliott.R, 1987. Empirical Analysis of Audit Delay. Journal of Accounting Research (autumn). P 275-292.
Bamber,E.M.,.Bamber L.S, and Schoderbek.M.P.1993.Audit structure and other determinants of audit report lag: An Empirical Amalysis.Auditing:A Journal of Practice & Theory 12 (1):23.
Bédard, J., Chtourou, S. M., & Courteau, L. 2004. The effect of audit committee expertise, independence, and activity on aggressive earnings management. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 23(2),P 13-35.
Blue Ribbon Committee.1999. Report and Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees. New York Stock Exchange and National Association of Securities Dealers.
Carcello.J.Hollingsworth.C.W, Klein.A, and.Nea.T.L. 2006. Audit Committee Financial Expertise, Competing Corporate Governance Mechanisms, and Earnings Management
DeFond, Hann.R,Hu .X.2005. Does the market value financial expertise on audit committees of boards of directors? Journal of Accounting Research, 43 .. P 153–193
Ettredge, M., Li, C. and Sun, L. 2005, Internal control quality and audit delay in the SOX era.
Gilling,D.M.1977.Timeliness in corporate reporting: some further comment.Accounting and Business Research(Winter).P 34-36
Givoly, D.and Palmon, D.1982.Timeliness of annual earnings announcements: some empirical evidence. The Accounting Review. Vol. 57 No. 3.P 485-508.
Hashim and Abdul Hashim, J., & Abdul Rahman, R. 2011. Audit Report Lag the Effectiveness of Audit Committee Among Malaysian Listed Companies. International Bulletin of Business Administration, 10, 50-6.
Haron, H., Chambers, A., & Ismail, R. R. 2004. The Reliance of external auditors on internal auditors Managerial Auditing Journal, 19(9), P 1148-1159.
Jaggi, B., & Tsui, J. 1999. Determinants of audit report lag: Further evidence from Hong Kong. Accounting and Business Research, 30(1), P 17-28.
Klein, A. 2002, “Audit Committee, Board of Director Characteristics, and Earnings Management.” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 33, No.3,P 375-400
Krishnan, J.2005. Audit committee quality and internal control: An empirical analysis. The Accounting Review, 80(2),P 649-675.
Leventis, S., Weetman, P. and Caramanis, C. 2005.Determinants of audit report lag: some evidence from the Athens Stock Exchange, International Journal of Auditing, Vol. 9.P 45-58.
Mohamad, N. S., & Wan Hussin, W. N. 2010. Corporate Governance and Audit Report Lag in Malaysia. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 6(2), P 57-84.
Nelson, S. P., & Shukeri, S. N. 2011. Corporate Governance and Audit Report Timeliness: Evidence from Malaysia. In S. Susela Devi & Keith Hooper (Eds.), Accounting in Asia (Research in Accounting inEmerging Economies). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Owusu-Ansah .S.2000.Timeliness of corporate financial reporting in emerging capital markets: empirical evidence from the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange, Accounting and Business Research. Vol. 30 No. 3, P 241-54.
Plitch,P.,and G.F.Ceron.2003.Finance Expertise Differs by Regulators. Wall Street Journal April 16
Pricewaterhousecoopers. 1999b. Audit Committees : Good Practices for Meeting Market Expectations. PricewaterhouseCoopers.