臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

近年來財務報表舞弊事件接二連三的爆發，會計師所扮演之角色再度遭受質疑，其中最為人所詬病之一在於會計師的獨立性，其中特別是會計師任期對盈餘資訊（審計）品質之影響。我國公開發行公司財務報表簽證規定採會計師個人雙簽制度，與美國或大陸規定不盡相同，本研究融合先前文獻及我國會計師簽證特殊規定，將會計師任期的衡量分為會計師事務所任期、主簽會計師任期、主簽和副簽會計師任期，並將任期以5年以上為過長與7年以上為過長方式加以區分，檢視不同角度衡量的會計師任期過長是否影響盈餘資訊（審計）品質；傳統常透過報表盈餘管理為盈餘資訊（審計）品質之替代變數，本研究則考量到公司評價角度是以公司未來現金流量為主，故本研究則以盈餘資訊風險為盈餘資訊（審計）品質之替代變數。本研究發現會計師事務所任期對盈餘資訊品質係呈現非線性的關係（亦即審計品質與會計師事務所任期呈現非線性關係），會計師事務所任期在大於5年時能產生較低之盈餘資訊風險即盈餘資訊（審計）品質較佳，但若超過7年時則會產生較高之盈餘資訊風險即較低盈餘資訊（審計）品質：主簽會計師任期在大於6年時還能呈現出較低之盈餘資訊風險，但超過7年後則會產生不穩定之狀況，故本研究推論事務所任期最佳期間應介於5年至7年間，而主簽會計師任期則應介於6年至7年間，本研究推論，審計品質與事務所任期呈現非線性關係，可能係經濟依賴關係所導致。本研究貢獻主要區分為兩部份：法人為主的事務所任期及自然人為主的會計師任期，事務所任期部分本研究發現事務所任期與盈餘資訊（審計）品質之關係呈現U型關係，透過事後訪談的方式瞭解可能是經濟依賴所導致，而在會計師任期部分本研究發現會計師任期並未與盈餘資訊（審計）品質並未呈現U型關係，而是任期越長盈餘資訊（審計）品質越佳，本研究推論可能是知識累積效果所導致。

Accounting irregularities let investors challenged the role of auditor, especially on the effect between auditor tenure and earning quality or audit quality. In this study we survey the relationship between auditor tenure and earning information risk again. First we distinguish auditor tenure into three categories which were auditor firm tenure、engagement partner tenure and engagement partner & cool reviewer tenure. Then we distinguish longer tenure by 7 or 5 years. We find that auditor firm tenure and earning information risk was appear to curve liner, the auditor firm tenure longer than 5 years reduce the earning information risk but longer than 7 years do not reduce the earning information risk. We argue that was affected by economics dependent with auditor firm. Further in engagement partner although we didn’t find it had the curve liner with information risk, but we find the engagement partner tenure longer than 5 years also reduce the earning information risk, but longer than 7 years do not reduce the earning information risk too. We argue that was affected by the pressure of personal sympathy. Our contribution：We find the U type relationship between auditor firm tenure and audit quality and the audit quality was better when the auditor firm tenure between 5 and 7 years. Although we didn’t find the U type relationship between engagement partner tenure and information risk but in our study we find the best tenure should be at 6 years.

表目錄 IV
圖目錄 V
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究問題目的及研究貢獻 5
第二章 文獻探討及假說建立 8
第一節 文獻探討 8
第二節 假說建立 11
第三章 研究方法 13
第一節 研究設計 13
第二節 變數定義 15
第三節 資料蒐集 18
第四章 實證結果 21
第一節 敘述統計量 21
第二節 會計師任期對盈餘資訊風險之非線性回歸測試 23
第三節 會計師任期與盈餘資訊風險之多元迴歸分析 27
第四節 總結 36
第五章 結論與建議 38
第一節 研究結論與建議 38
第二節 研究限制及未來研究建議 41
參考文獻 43

中文部分
（期刊）
李建然、林秀鳳，民國94年，會計師任期與異常應計數之關聯性研究，管理評論，第二十四卷第四期，103-126。
（研討會論文集）
王周傳、鄔展霞，民國95年，盈餘訊息可靠性與權益風險溢價-基於中國上市公司財務數據的實證研究，第三屆中國金融學年會。
官月緞、郭子緯，2006，會計師任期與審計品質認知，2006當前會計理論與實務研討會論文集，223-253。
（碩博士論文）
賴春田，民國89年，會計師的業務、責任及會計師事務所組織的演變，國立台灣大學會計研究所碩士論文。
英文部分
（Book）
Watts, R., and J. L. Zimmerman. 1986. Positive accounting theory. Prentice Hall.
（Journal paper）
Balvers , R. , B. McDonald , and R. E. Miller , 1988. Underpricing of New Issues and the Choice of Auditor as A Signal of Invest2ment Banker Reputation. The Accounting Review 63 : 605-22.
Beatty , R. 1989. Auditor Reputation and the Pricing of InitialPublic Offerings . The Accounting Review 64: 693- 709.
Becker, C. L., M. L. DeFond, J. Jiambalvo, and K. R. Subramanyam. 1998. The effect of audit quality on earnings management. Contemporary Accounting Research 15 : 1–24.
Bricker, R. 2002. Transparency, independence, technology and the CPA scope of services: New challenges to the profession. The Ohio CPA Journal (April–June): 48–50.
Brody, R. G., and S. A. Moscove. 1998. Mandatory auditor rotation. National Public Accountant(May): 32–36.
Carey, P., and R. Simnett. 2006. Audit Partner Tenure and Audit Quality. The Accounting Review 81: 653–676.
Carmichael, D. R. 1999. In search of concepts of auditor independence. The CPA Journal: 39–43.
Chi, W., and H. Huang. 2005. Discretionary accruals, audit-firm tenure and audit-partner tenure:Empirical evidence from Taiwan. Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics 1:65–92.
DeAngelo, L.1981. Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics 3:183-199.
Dechow, P., and I.Dichev , 2002. The quality of accruals and earnings: the role of accrual estimation errors. The Accounting Review 77:35–59.
Dopuch, N., R. R. King, and R. Schwartz. 2003. Independence in appearance and in fact: An empirical investigation. Contemporary Accounting Research 65: 83–113.
Easley, D., and M. O’Hara.2002.Is information risk a determinant of asset returns? The Journal of Finance,59:1553-1583
Fama, E. F., and K. French. 2000. Forecasting profitability and earnings. Journal of Business 73:161–175.
Fama, E., French, K., 1997. Industry costs of equity. Journal of Financial Economics 43:153–193.
Farmer, T., L. Rittenberg, and G. Trompeter. 1987. An investigation of the impact of economic and organizational factors in auditor independence. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 7: 1–14.
Francis, J., and E. Maydew, and H. Sparks. 1999. The role of Big 6 auditors in the credible reporting of accruals. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 18: 17-34.
Francis, J., R. LaFond, P. Olsson and K. Schipper, 2004. Costs of equity and earnings attributes. The Accounting Review 79:967-1010.
Francis, J., R. LaFond, P. Olsson and K. Schipper, 2005. The market pricing of accruals quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics 39:295-327.
Frankel, R. M., M. F. Johnson and K. K. Nelson, 2002. The Relationship Between Auditors’ Fees for Nonaudit Services and Earnings Management, The Accounting Review, 77:71-105.
Ghosh, A., and D. Moon. 2005. Does audit tenure impair audit quality? The Accounting Review 80: 585–612.
Johnson, V., I. K. Khurana, and J. K. Reynolds. 2002. Audit-firm tenure and the quality of financial reports. Contemporary Accounting Research 19: 637–660.
Kinney, W. 1999. Auditor independence: A burdensome constraint or core value? Accounting Horizons 13: 69–75.
Mansi, S. A., W. F. Maxwell, and D. P. Miller. 2004. Does auditor quality and tenure matter to investors? Evidence from the bond market. Journal of Accounting Research 42: 755–793.
Myers, J. N., L. A. Myers, and T. C. Omer. 2003. Exploring the term of the auditor-client relationship and the quality of earnings: A case for mandatory auditor rotation? The Accounting Review 78:779–800.
Ryan, S. G., R. H. Herz, T. E. Iannaconi, L. A. Maines, K. Palepu, C. M. Schrand, D. J. Skinner,and L. Vincent. 2001. Commentary. SEC auditor independence requirements: AAA Financial Accounting Standards Committee. Accounting Horizons 15: 373–386.
Solomon, I., M. D. Shields, and R. O. Whittington. 1999. What do industry specialist auditors know? Journal of Accounting Research 37: 191–208.
（Working paper）
Davis, L. R., B. Soo, and G. Trompeter. 2002. Auditor tenure, auditor independence and earnings management. Working paper, Boston College, Boston, MA.
Mautz, R. K., and H. A. Sharaf. 1961. The Philosophy of Auditing. Monograph No. 6. Sarasota, FL:American Accounting Association.
（Institution Report）
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1978. The Commission on Auditors Responsibilities: Report, Conclusions and Recommendations. New York, NY:AICPA.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1992. Statement of Position Regarding Mandatory Rotation of Audit Firms of Publicly Held Companies. SEC Practice Section. New York, NY: AICPA
Auditing Practices Board（APB）.2004. Ethical Standards for Auditors.
Financial Reporting Commission (Ryan Commission). 1992. Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Expectations of Users of Published Financial Statements. Dublin, Ireland: The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland.
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), 1994. Staff Report on Auditor Independence. Chicago, IL: Commerce Clearing House.
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), 2001. Final Rule: Revision of the Commission’s Auditor Independence Requirements. File No. S7-13-00. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
U.S. Senate. 1977. Improving the Accountability of Publicly Owned Corporations and Their Auditors. Prepared by the Subcommittee on Reports, Accounting, and Management of the Committee on Governmental Affairs. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
（News Paper）
Wall Street Journal. 2002a. Questioning the books: SEC queries of global crossing likely to resurface.(February 11): A8.
Wall Street Journal. 2002b. Questioning the books: Court documents show Andersen ties with Enron were growing in early 1990s. (February 26): A6.
（Net Work）
Turner, L. 2002. Testimony and Statements before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs United States Senate, Available at: http: / /banking.senate.gov/02 02hrg/022602/turner.htm.