Bankruptcies, audit reports, and the Reform Act

Auditing

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 186-195

  Geiger, Marshall A ^a   Raghunandan, K ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Bankruptcy; Going concern reporting; Private securities litigation reform act

Indexed keywords

EID: 0040081927     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/aud.2001.20.1.187     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Altman, E. I. 1982. Accounting implications of failure prediction models. Journal of Accounting Auditing and Finance (Fall): 4-19.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1988. The Auditor's Consideration of an Entity's Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 59. New York, NY: AICPA.
3. _. 1992. Statement by the Board of Directors of the AICPA. Journal of Accountancy (November 1992): 18.
4. Berton L. 1995. Big accounting firms weed out risky clients. Wall Street Journal (June 26): B1, B6.
5. Boyle, E. J., and F. N. Knopf. 1996. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. CPA Journal (April): 44-47.
6. Carcello, J., and Z-V. Palmrose. 1994. Auditor litigation and modified reporting on bankrupt companies. Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement): 1-30.
7. _, D. Hermanson, and F. Huss. 1995. Temporal changes in bankruptcy-related reporting. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 133-143.
8. _, _, and _. 1997. The effect of SAS No. 59: How treatment of the transition period influences results. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Spring):114-123.
9. Carmichael, D. R., and K. Pany. 1993. Reporting on uncertainties, including going concern. In The Expectation Gap Standards: Progress, Implementation Issues, and Research Opportunities. Jersey City, NJ: AICPA.
10. Chen, K. C. W., and B. K. Church. 1992. Default on debt obligations and the issuance of going-concern opinions. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 30-49.
11. Chenok, P. 1994. Worth repeating. Journal of Accountancy (January): 47-50.
12. Cloyd, C. B., J. R. Frederickson, and J. W. Hill. 1998. Independent auditor litigation: Recent events and related research. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy: 121-142.
13. Cook J. M., E. M. Freedman, R. J. Groves, J. C. Madonna, S. F. O'Malley, and L. A. Weinbach. 1992. The liability crisis in the United States: Impact on the accounting profession. Journal of Accountancy (November): 19-23.
14. Ellingsen, J. E., K. Pany, and P. Fagan. 1989. SAS No. 59: How to evaluate going concern. Journal of Accountancy (January): 24-31.
15. Geiger, M. A., K. Raghunandan, and D. V. Rama. 1998. Costs associated with going-concern modified audit opinions: An analysis of auditor changes, subsequent opinions, and client failures. Advances in Accounting (16): 117-139.
16. Gramling, A. A., J. W. Schatzberg, A. D. Bailey, Jr., and H. Zhang. 1998. The impact of legal liability regimes and differential client risk on client acceptance, audit pricing, and audit effort decisions. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance (Fall): 437-460.
17. Hopwood, W., J. McKeown, and J. Mutchler. 1989. A test of the incremental explanatory power of opinions qualified for consistency and uncertainty. The Accounting Review 64 (January): 28-48.
18. _, _, and _. 1994. A reexamination of auditor versus model accuracy within the context of the going-concern opinion decision. Contemporary Accounting Research (Spring): 409-431.
19. Kida, T. 1980. An investigation into auditors' continuity and related qualification judgments. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 506-523.
20. King, R. R., and R. Schwartz. 1997. The Private Securities Reform Act of 1995: A discussion of three provisions. Accounting Horizons (March): 92-106.
21. McKeown, J. C., J. F. Mutchler, and W. Hopwood. 1991a. Towards an explanation of auditor failure to modify the audit opinion of bankrupt companies. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Supplement): 1-13.
22. _, _, and _. 1991b. Reply. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Supplement): 21-24.
23. Mednick, R., and J. J. Peck. 1994. Proportionality: A much-needed solution to the accountants' legal liability crisis. Valparaiso University Law Review (23): 867-918.
24. Menon, K., and K. B. Schwartz. 1987. An investigation of audit qualification decisions in the presence of going concern uncertainties. Contemporary Accounting Research (Fall): 302-315.
25. Mutchler, J. F. 1984. Auditors' perceptions of the going-concern opinion decision. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Spring): 17-29.
26. _. 1985. A multivariate analysis of the auditor's going-concern opinion decision. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 668-682.
27. _, and D. D. Williams. 1990. The relationship between audit technology, client risk profiles, and the going-concern opinion decision. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 39-54.
28. _, W. Hopwood, and J. C. McKeown. 1997. The influence of contrary information and mitigating factors on audit opinion decisions on bankrupt companies. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 295-310.
29. Nogler, G. 1995. The resolution of auditor going-concern opinions. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 54-73.
30. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. 1995. Public Law No. 104-67. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
31. Public Oversight Board (POB). 1993. Annual Report 1992-1993. Stamford, CT: POB.
32. Raghunandan, K., and D. V. Rama. 1995. Audit opinions for companies in financial distress: Before and after SAS No. 59. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Spring): 50-63.
33. Stone, M., and J. Rasp. 1991. Tradeoffs in the choice between Logit and OLS for accounting choice studies. The Accounting Review (January): 170-187.
34. U.S. House of Representatives. 1985. Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. (February 20). No. 99-17. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
35. _. 1990. Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. (August 2). No. 101-196. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.