本文選題：公允價(jià)值 + 審計(jì)質(zhì)量�。� 參考：《重慶工商大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：2006會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則中會(huì)計(jì)信息的計(jì)量直接或間接運(yùn)用了公允價(jià)值。公允價(jià)值側(cè)重于會(huì)計(jì)信息的相關(guān)性，計(jì)量中上以市價(jià)或估值技術(shù)對(duì)資產(chǎn)或負(fù)債項(xiàng)目進(jìn)行確認(rèn)，這樣的計(jì)量模式對(duì)注冊會(huì)計(jì)師的審計(jì)工作提出了新的要求。本文主要從公允價(jià)值的計(jì)量層次入手，研究公允價(jià)值計(jì)量應(yīng)用程度對(duì)注冊會(huì)計(jì)師審計(jì)質(zhì)量的影響。 首先對(duì)相關(guān)文獻(xiàn)進(jìn)行了回顧，界定了審計(jì)質(zhì)量的衡量方法，明晰了公允價(jià)值的內(nèi)涵及特點(diǎn)，并結(jié)合注冊會(huì)計(jì)師的審計(jì)判斷決策模型，論述了公允價(jià)值計(jì)量對(duì)審計(jì)質(zhì)量的影響，提出研究的假設(shè)，在最后對(duì)假設(shè)進(jìn)行實(shí)證檢驗(yàn)。 基于以上思路，以A股市場中2007-2010年度符合篩選條件的公司為樣本進(jìn)行了實(shí)證分析。首先建立注冊會(huì)計(jì)師審計(jì)意見預(yù)測模型，計(jì)算出會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所謹(jǐn)慎性水平并與實(shí)際的審計(jì)意見進(jìn)行對(duì)比得出是否發(fā)生審計(jì)意見購買從而衡量審計(jì)質(zhì)量的高低。公允價(jià)值是以公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的資產(chǎn)作為其指標(biāo)進(jìn)行衡量，，最后分年度進(jìn)行實(shí)證模型檢驗(yàn)，得出本文研究的實(shí)證結(jié)論。 實(shí)證檢驗(yàn)表明： 1.2006會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則頒布后注冊會(huì)計(jì)師的審計(jì)質(zhì)量呈U形變化。審計(jì)質(zhì)量在剛開始會(huì)呈現(xiàn)質(zhì)量下降的趨勢，在2008年中審計(jì)質(zhì)量達(dá)到最低點(diǎn)，其中年度審計(jì)意見購買行為達(dá)到了15%的比例，在后續(xù)2009和2010年中審計(jì)質(zhì)量逐步提高，審計(jì)意見購買行為平均在8%的水平。 2.2008年公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的資產(chǎn)的應(yīng)用規(guī)模對(duì)審計(jì)質(zhì)量有顯著影響，在5%的置信水平上顯著；2007、2009和2010年中公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的資產(chǎn)的應(yīng)用規(guī)模對(duì)審計(jì)質(zhì)量的影響在統(tǒng)計(jì)上不顯著。 3.公允價(jià)值在會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則中的不同應(yīng)用事項(xiàng)中對(duì)審計(jì)質(zhì)量的影響不同。資產(chǎn)減值和債務(wù)重組利得中公允價(jià)值的應(yīng)用降低了審計(jì)質(zhì)量，其它項(xiàng)目如公允價(jià)值變動(dòng)損益和非貨幣性資產(chǎn)交換中公允價(jià)值應(yīng)用并沒有和審計(jì)質(zhì)量存在顯著的關(guān)系。 基于上述研究結(jié)果，筆者得出公允價(jià)值計(jì)量對(duì)審計(jì)質(zhì)量的影響存在著時(shí)效性和差異性。在存在影響的年份和事項(xiàng)中公允價(jià)值計(jì)量會(huì)降低注冊會(huì)計(jì)師的審計(jì)質(zhì)量。為了加強(qiáng)注冊會(huì)計(jì)師的審計(jì)質(zhì)量，提高會(huì)計(jì)信息的可靠性，筆者提出如下建議：1．加強(qiáng)新準(zhǔn)則中公允價(jià)值計(jì)量細(xì)則的相關(guān)研究，出臺(tái)專門的公允價(jià)值計(jì)量準(zhǔn)則，給注冊會(huì)計(jì)師的審計(jì)工作提供制度依據(jù)。2.加強(qiáng)審計(jì)監(jiān)管的力度，監(jiān)管部門應(yīng)學(xué)習(xí)公允價(jià)值計(jì)量的會(huì)計(jì)信息的相關(guān)準(zhǔn)則并提高鑒別公允價(jià)值計(jì)量模式下會(huì)計(jì)信息的真實(shí)性與否的能力，從而加強(qiáng)對(duì)注冊會(huì)計(jì)師的監(jiān)管，減少其與企業(yè)管理層合謀的機(jī)會(huì)。
[Abstract]:Fair value is directly or indirectly used in accounting information measurement in 2006 accounting standards. Fair value is focused on the relevance of accounting information, and the market value or valuation technology is used to confirm the assets or liabilities in the measurement. This kind of measurement mode puts forward new requirements for the audit work of certified public accountants. From the level of fair value measurement, this paper studies the influence of fair value measurement application degree on CPA audit quality. First of all, it reviews the relevant literature, defines the measurement method of audit quality, clarifies the connotation and characteristics of fair value, and discusses the impact of fair value measurement on audit quality combined with the audit judgment decision model of CPA. The hypothesis of the research is put forward, and the hypothesis is tested empirically at the end. Based on the above ideas, the sample of A-share market companies that meet the screening criteria in 2007-2010 is analyzed empirically. Firstly, a prediction model of CPA audit opinion is established to calculate the level of accounting firm caution and compare it with the actual audit opinion to determine whether the audit opinion purchase occurs to measure the audit quality. Fair value is measured by assets measured by fair value. The empirical test shows that: After the promulgation of 1.2006 accounting standards, the audit quality of CPA is U-shaped. The audit quality will show a downward trend at the beginning. In 2008, the audit quality reached the lowest point, among which the annual audit opinion purchase behavior reached 15%, and the audit quality gradually improved in the following 2009 and 2010. The audit opinion purchase behavior average at 8% level. 2. The application scale of assets measured by fair value in 2008 has a significant impact on audit quality, and the application scale of assets measured by fair value in 2007 / 2009 and 2010 is not statistically significant at the confidence level of 5%. 3. The impact of fair value on audit quality is different in different application items of accounting standards. The application of fair value in asset impairment and debt restructuring profits reduces the audit quality. Other items such as fair value change gains and losses and fair value application in non-monetary asset exchange have no significant relationship with audit quality. Based on the above results, the author draws the conclusion that the impact of fair value measurement on audit quality is time-efficient and different. Fair value measurement will reduce the audit quality of CPA in years and events of influence. In order to strengthen the audit quality of CPA and improve the reliability of accounting information, the author puts forward the following suggestion: 1. 1. Strengthen the relevant research on the rules of fair value measurement in the new standards, introduce special fair value measurement standards, and provide the system basis for the audit work of certified public accountants. In order to strengthen the supervision of audit, the supervision department should learn the relevant standards of accounting information of fair value measurement and improve the ability to distinguish the authenticity of accounting information under the fair value measurement mode, so as to strengthen the supervision of certified public accountants. Reduce opportunities for collusion with management.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：重慶工商大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：F239.4;F233;F224

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 厲國威;鄭宇路;;基于風(fēng)險(xiǎn)導(dǎo)向?qū)徲?jì)理念下的公允價(jià)值審計(jì)探討[J];財(cái)會(huì)通訊;2010年30期

2 袁洋;;對(duì)我國新審計(jì)準(zhǔn)則體系的評(píng)價(jià)[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2007年17期

3 汪錦麗;;公允價(jià)值審計(jì)職業(yè)判斷難點(diǎn)分析——畢馬威新世紀(jì)金融公司審計(jì)案的啟示[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2010年32期

4 鄧川;現(xiàn)代風(fēng)險(xiǎn)導(dǎo)向?qū)徲?jì)的兩種視角及運(yùn)用難點(diǎn)分析[J];當(dāng)代財(cái)經(jīng);2005年09期

5 張龍平;聶曼曼;;更新審計(jì)執(zhí)業(yè)理念 推行風(fēng)險(xiǎn)導(dǎo)向?qū)徲?jì)——學(xué)習(xí)新審計(jì)準(zhǔn)則體系的體會(huì)[J];中國注冊會(huì)計(jì)師;2006年03期

6 賈喜云;;公允價(jià)值引入我國會(huì)計(jì)的困境解析及對(duì)策[J];科教文匯(下半月);2006年06期

7 劉仲藜;;創(chuàng)新審計(jì)準(zhǔn)則體系維護(hù)社會(huì)公眾利益[J];會(huì)計(jì)研究;2006年02期

8 葛家澍;徐躍;;會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)量屬性的探討——市場價(jià)格、歷史成本、現(xiàn)行成本與公允價(jià)值[J];會(huì)計(jì)研究;2006年09期

9 王杏芬;;新會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則下的公允價(jià)值審計(jì)[J];會(huì)計(jì)之友(中旬刊);2009年09期

10 謝詩芬;公允價(jià)值會(huì)計(jì)審計(jì)研究動(dòng)態(tài):國際視野與無形資產(chǎn)視角[J];會(huì)計(jì)之友;2005年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 魯婧;公允價(jià)值審計(jì)研究[D];山東大學(xué);2008年

2 樊曉華;公允價(jià)值計(jì)量與審計(jì)市場效率研究[D];河南大學(xué);2009年

3 李輝;我國公允價(jià)值審計(jì)準(zhǔn)則修訂的相關(guān)研究[D];西南大學(xué);2010年

4 鄒晉;公允價(jià)值審計(jì)探析[D];財(cái)政部財(cái)政科學(xué)研究所;2010年

本文編號(hào)：1803609