【摘要】： 20世紀(jì)60年代中期以來，西方民間審計(jì)人員的訴訟案件不斷涌現(xiàn)，形成“訴訟爆炸”的局面。隨著大量公司破產(chǎn)倒閉事件的發(fā)生，會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所及其注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師們被紛紛的告上法庭，審計(jì)報(bào)告的使用者往往將大部分責(zé)任歸結(jié)于注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師專業(yè)勝任能力不夠，執(zhí)業(yè)缺乏獨(dú)立性，希望從注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師方面得到賠償，但他們卻從來沒有真正探究責(zé)任歸屬問題以及產(chǎn)生這些問題的真正原因。誠(chéng)然，由于注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師的舞弊或失職，確實(shí)可能導(dǎo)致審計(jì)報(bào)告的失實(shí)，從而誤導(dǎo)廣大公眾。但是，在這些訴訟事件中也存在著一些注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師已經(jīng)按照現(xiàn)存準(zhǔn)則進(jìn)行了合理審計(jì)但仍受到牽連的案例。通過研究我們發(fā)現(xiàn)，造成這一現(xiàn)象的原因就在于“審計(jì)期望差距”的存在。正是由于公眾沒有對(duì)其進(jìn)行深入地研究，對(duì)這一概念尚存在模糊的認(rèn)識(shí)和不清晰的界定才造成了這一奇怪的現(xiàn)象。因此，為了遏制注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師受到不公平的指控，探明造成這些訴訟案件的真正原因，同時(shí)也為了弄清社會(huì)公眾的“期望”，使注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師的工作不斷地向公眾要求靠近，深入研究“審計(jì)期望差距”就成為一個(gè)非常緊迫和重要的問題。 “審計(jì)期望差距”即指：社會(huì)對(duì)審計(jì)的期望和審計(jì)師實(shí)際業(yè)績(jī)的公眾看法之間的差距。研究審計(jì)期望差距，要涉及到三個(gè)要素：即審計(jì)師、社會(huì)公眾以及現(xiàn)實(shí)中規(guī)范審計(jì)師工作的審計(jì)準(zhǔn)則。弄清這三方面之間存在的差距，，以及形成這些差距的原因，是本文討論的重點(diǎn)。在抓住了這些問題之后，因地制宜找出解決之道，從而減少審計(jì)期望差距造成的危害是本文的目的所在。在文章中，同時(shí)還探討了審計(jì)期望差距的未來動(dòng)態(tài)發(fā)展趨勢(shì)及其只能減少而不能最終消除的本質(zhì)所在。 “審計(jì)期望差距”是一個(gè)在更廣的范圍中討論了與審計(jì)職能和審計(jì)責(zé)任相關(guān)的一個(gè)重要問題。自20世紀(jì)70年代AICPA提出審計(jì)期望差距以來，審計(jì)期望差距被認(rèn)為是當(dāng)前審計(jì)執(zhí)業(yè)界和監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)面臨的最棘手的問題之一(Humphrey et al.1992)。通過對(duì)它的研究，一方面，可以更加明確注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師的法律責(zé)任，使其免受不合理的指控，加強(qiáng)對(duì)他們的保護(hù)。另一方面，能使注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師加強(qiáng)其執(zhí)業(yè)能力，將審計(jì)結(jié)果向公眾的期望靠近，從而達(dá)成一個(gè)雙贏的結(jié)果。再次，明確了審計(jì)期望差距的成因也可以促成審計(jì)準(zhǔn)則的修訂，為我們營(yíng)造一個(gè)穩(wěn)定和諧的社會(huì)環(huán)境提供了一個(gè)根本保障。最后，通過再深一層的分析，我們還可以得出這樣的結(jié)論：正是由于審計(jì)期望差距的存在，才引起了審計(jì)目標(biāo)的演變。因此可以說，審計(jì)期望差距是審計(jì)范圍中的一個(gè)最基本的概念，對(duì)它進(jìn)行研究對(duì)我國(guó)甚至世界都具有重大意義。
[Abstract]:Since the middle of 1960's, the litigation cases of western folk auditors have been constantly emerging, forming the situation of "lawsuit explosion". With the occurrence of a large number of corporate bankruptcy and bankruptcy, accounting firms and their certified public accountants have been sued in court. Users of audit reports often attribute most of the responsibility to the lack of professional competence of certified public accountants. The practice lacks independence and expects compensation from certified public accountants, but they have never really explored the attribution of responsibility and the real causes of these problems. To be sure, CPA fraud or dereliction of duty may lead to false audit reports and mislead the public. However, there are some cases in which CPA has carried out reasonable audit according to the existing standards. Through the research, we find that the reason of this phenomenon lies in the existence of "audit expectation gap". It is precisely because the public has not deeply studied the concept that there is still a vague understanding and unclear definition which causes this strange phenomenon. Therefore, in order to curb the unfair charges against CPAs, to find out the real causes of these litigation cases, and to clarify the "expectations" of the public, the work of CPAs is constantly approaching the public. It becomes a very urgent and important problem to study the audit expectation gap in depth. "Audit expectation gap" refers to the gap between the expectation of audit and the public opinion of auditor's actual performance. There are three factors involved in the study of audit expectation gap: auditor, public and the auditing standards that regulate auditor's work in reality. It is the focus of this paper to make clear the gap between the three aspects and the reasons for the gap. After grasping these problems, the purpose of this paper is to find out solutions according to local conditions and reduce the harm caused by audit expectation gap. At the same time, the paper also discusses the future trends of the audit expectation gap and its essence that can only be reduced but not eventually eliminated. "Audit expectation gap" is an important issue related to audit function and audit responsibility. Since AICPA put forward the audit expectation gap in 1970s, the audit expectation gap has been considered as one of the most difficult problems faced by the auditing practitioners and regulators. On the one hand, the legal liability of CPAs can be clarified, and their protection from unreasonable charges can be strengthened. On the other hand, it can strengthen the CPA's practice ability and bring the audit result to the public's expectation, so as to achieve a win-win result. Thirdly, the causes of audit expectation gap can also lead to the revision of auditing standards, which provides a fundamental guarantee for us to build a stable and harmonious social environment. Finally, through a further analysis, we can draw such a conclusion: it is because of the existence of audit expectation gap that the audit objective evolves. Therefore, it can be said that the audit expectation gap is the most basic concept in the scope of audit, and it is of great significance to our country and even the world to study it.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2007
【分類號(hào)】：F239.4

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 李雪;張帆;;審計(jì)期望差距的成因及校正路徑的探討[J];南京財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年04期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 李雪;張帆;;對(duì)審計(jì)期望差距的成因及縮小路徑的探討[A];中國(guó)會(huì)計(jì)學(xué)會(huì)財(cái)務(wù)成本分會(huì)2011年年會(huì)暨第二十四次理論研討會(huì)論文集[C];2011年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 崔婧;基于審計(jì)準(zhǔn)則視角的審計(jì)期望差距研究[D];沈陽大學(xué);2011年

2 王國(guó)君;審計(jì)期望差距及其控制研究[D];北京林業(yè)大學(xué);2011年

3 張曉曼;基于審計(jì)重要性的審計(jì)期望差距研究[D];東北大學(xué);2009年

4 李碧波;審計(jì)期望差距及其控制研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2009年

5 尹健;基于經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)視角的審計(jì)期望差距研究[D];山東財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2012年

6 朱偉;我國(guó)審計(jì)期望差距的構(gòu)成要素及縮小對(duì)策之研究[D];浙江工商大學(xué);2013年

本文編號(hào)：2317109