AN ANALYSIS OF THE ACCOUNTING PROFESSION'S OLIGARCHY: THE AUDITING STANDARDS BOARD

Research in Accounting Regulation

Volumn 16, Issue C, 2003, Pages 29-44

  McEnroe, John E ^a   Pitman, Marshall K ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 65249130563     PISSN: 10520457     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1052-0457(02)16002-4     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) (1992). Auditing standards board resume. In Our Opinion, 8(2), 1-2.
3. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) (1997). Statement on auditing standards No. 82. Consideration of fraud in a financial statement audit. New York: AICPA.
4. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) (2002a). http://volunteers.aicpa.org/handbook/groupDetail.asp?271
5. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) (2002b). Statement on auditing standards No. 95. Generally accepted auditing standards. New York: AICPA.
6. Arens, A. (1993). An academic's perspective of setting auditing standards. In: M. Usry (Ed.), Mary Ball Washington Forum Series in Accounting Education (pp. 36-47). Pensacola, FL: University of West Florida.
7. Berton, L., & Ingersoll, B. (1990). Rep. Dingell to take aim at accountants, SEC, in hearings on profession's role as watchdog. In: L. Berton & J. Schiff (Eds), The Wall Street Journal on Accounting (pp. 45-48). Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
8. Carmichael, D., & Craig, J. (1994). The Auditing Standards Board at work-interviews with selected members. The CPA Journal (March), 40-45.
9. Commission on Auditors' Responsibilities (CAR) (1978). Report conclusions and recommendations. New York, NY: AICPA.
10. Davidson, I., & Anderson, G. (1987). The development of accounting and auditing standards. Journal of Accountancy (May), 110-127.
11. General Accounting Office (GAO) (1996). The accounting profession: Major issues: Progress and concerns. Washington, DC: GAO.
12. General Accounting Office (GAO) (2002a). Accounting profession: Oversight auditor independence and financial reporting issues. Washington DC: GAO.
13. General Accounting Office (GAO) (2002b). The accounting profession: Status of panel on audit effectiveness recommendations to enhance the self-regulatory system. Washington, DC: GAO.
14. Ingersoll, B. (1991). House democrats question SEC's role in guarding against audit failures. In: L. Berton & J. Schiff (Eds), The Wall Street Journal on Accounting. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
15. Kaplan S., and Pany K. A study of public comment letters on the auditor's consideration of the going concern issue (SAS 59). Research in Accounting Regulation 6 (1992) 3-23
16. Kinney, W. (1986). Audit technology and preferences for auditing standards. Journal of Accounting and Economics (March), 73-89.
17. Landsittel, D., & Bedard, J. (1997). Consideration of fraud in a financial statement audit: A new AICPA auditing standard. The Auditors Report, 4-5.
18. Marsh, H. (1988). Interview. The Internal Auditor (April), 34-39.
19. Martens S., and McEnroe J. Interprofessional conflict, accommodation and the flow of capital: The ASB vs. the securities industry and its lawyers. Accounting, Organizations and Society 23 4 (1998) 361-376
20. Martens, S., & McEnroe, J. (2001). Strategies for maintaining professional legitimacy claims: The case of SAS 82 (Working Paper).
21. McEnroe, J. (1993). An analysis of comment integration involving SAS No. 54. Abacus (September), 160-178.
22. McEnroe J. An examination of voting behavior of the ASB. Journal of Accounting, Auditing, and Finance 9 1 (1994) 117-147
23. McEnroe, J. (2000). The auditing standards board and the auditing standard-setting process. Internal Auditing (July/August), 25-31.
24. McEnroe, J. (2002). An analysis of post expectation gap voting behavior by the ASB. Abacus (forthcoming).
25. McEnroe, J., & Martens, S. (1998). An examination of the auditing standards promulgation process involving SAS No. 69. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy (17), 1-26.
26. National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting (Treadway Commission) (1987). Report of the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting.
27. Oliphant, W. (1978). Report of the Special Committee of the AICPA to study the structure of the Auditing Standards Executive. New York: AICPA.
28. Pitt, H. L. (2002). Public statement by SEC chairman: Regulation of the accounting profession (January 17). Washington, DC: SEC.
29. P. L. 107-204, Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
30. Previts, G. J., & Merino, B. D. (1998). A history of accountancy in the United States: The cultural significance of accounting. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
31. Robson, K., Willmott, H., Copper, D., & Puxty, T. (1994). The ideology of professional regulation and the market for accounting labor: Three episodes in the recent history of the U.K. accounting profession. Accounting Organizations and Society (19), 527-533.
32. Smith, R., & Schroeder, M. (2002). Pitt's SEC Plan for self-regulation of accountants may have pitfalls. Wall Street Journal (January 18), C15.
33. The Panel on Audit Effectiveness (PAE) (2000). Report and recommendations. Stamford, CT: Public Oversight Board.
34. Turner, L. E. (2001). Comment letter No. 1 to the Auditing Standards Board (June 4).
35. U.S. Senate (1976). The accounting establishment. A staff study prepared by the Subcommittee on Reports, Accounting and Management of the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Operations, 94th Congress, 2nd Session. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.