Uzņēmuma darbības turpināšanas audits un riska novērtējums
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7250/eb.2013.013Keywords:
Starptautiskie Revīzijas standarti, finanšu pārskatu revīzija, pieņēmums par uzņēmuma darbības turpināšanu, bankrota prognozēšanas modeļi.Abstract
Pētījums tiek saistīts ar 570. Starptautiskā revīzijas standarta: Uzņēmuma darbības turpināšanas pieņēmuma novērtēšana praksē. Tiek veikta auditoru atzinumu par darbības nepārtrauktību binomālo modeļu faktoru analīze, integrālā novērtējuma metodoloģiskie paņēmieni un risku klases atbilstība auditoru atzinumiem par darbības nepārtrauktību. Autori, lai iegūtu darbības nepārtrauktības ievērošanas integrālo novērtējumu, ierosina izmantot hierarhijas analīzes metodi. Pētot sakarības starp bankrota prognozēšanas modeļiem un darbības nepārtrauktības novērtējumu, tiek veikta divu nosacītās varbūtības modeļu precizitātes pārbaude.
References
Going Concern, ISA 570. 2006. International Federation of accounts. [skatīts 05.07.2012.]. Pieejams http://www.iasplus.com/en/binary/ifac/0703edisa570.pdf.
Green paper. Audit policy: Lessons from the Crisis. [skatīts 05.07.2012.]. Pieejams http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/docs /2010/ audit/summary_response_en.p .
Waldron, M. Continued Concern for “Going Concern” Reporting. CFA Institute. 2012. [skatīts 05.07.2012.]. Pieejams: http://blogs.cfainstitute.org/marketintegrity/2012/05/22/continued-concern-for-going-concern-reporting/.
K.R. Al-Adeem, Accounting Theory: A Neglected Topic in academic accounting research. Dissertation, Western Reserve University, 2010. 205 p. [skatīts 05.07.2012.]. Pieejams: http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.сgi?accnum=case1256045 265
A.R. Belkaoui, Accounting Theory. 5th Edition, 2004. Thomson, p. 210-230.
R. K. Storey, Revenue Realization, Going Concern and Measurement Of Income. Accounting Review, 1959. vol. 34, N 2, p. 232-238.
W. Hahn, The Going-Concern Assumption: Its Journey into GAAP. Accounting & Audits, 2011, February, p. 26-30. [skatīts 05.07.2012.] Pieejams: http://edit.seu.edu/Editor/assets/seuniversity/academics/faculty/pages.pdf
C. T. Devine, Essay thirteen: Some aspect of scientific method I. Essays in Accounting Theory. Studies in Accounting Research 22. 1985, Vol. II. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association. pp.119-130.
J. Betge, Balansovedenie. Moskva: Izd-vo "Buhgalterskij uchet, 2000. 454 с.= Jrg Baetge. Bilanzen. – 4, berarbeitete Auflage. – Dsseldorf: IDW-Verlag GMBH, 1996
J. Graham, D. Kaye A Risk Management Approach to Business Continuity: Aligning Business Continuity with Corporate Governance. Rothsten Associates, 2006. 400 p. ISBN 10:1931332363.
A. Hiles, Business Continuity: Best Practices. Word-Classic Business Continuity Management. Rothstein Associates Inc., 2003. 290 p. ISBN 13:9781931332224.
Syed, Akhtar, Syed Afsar. Business Continuity Planning Methodology. Sentryx, 2003. 310 p.
V.I. Drozzhinov, Moiseenko, G.E. Nepreryvnost biznesa i problemy 2000 goda. Moskva, MCNiTI, 1999. 86 s.
L.J. Abbott, Parker, S., Peters, G.F. The effects of post-bankruptcy financing on going concern reporting. Advances in Accounting, 2003, vol. 20, p. 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0882-6110(03)20001-8
M.A. Geiger, D.V. Rama, Audit Firm Size and Going-Concern Reporting Accuracy. Accounting Horizons, March 2006, vol. 20, N 1. p. 1-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/acch.2006.20.1.1
S.E. Kaplan, D.D. Williams, Do going concern audit reports protect auditors from litigation? A simultaneous equations approach. May 2011. 52 p. [skatīts 07.07.2012.] Pieejams: http://www.isarhq.org/papers/C2-3_Kaplan_Williams_ISAR_2011.pdf.
A. Vanstraelen, Going-Concern Opinions, Auditor Switching and the Self-fulfilling Prophecy Effect Examined in the Regulatory Context of Belgium. Journal of accounting, auditing &finance, 2003, vol. 18, N 2, p.231 -253.
D. Foroghi, Shahhahani, A.M. Audit Firm Size and Going-Concern Reporting. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 2012, vol. 18, No 2, p. 1093 – 1098.
J. Berkson, Application of the Logistic Function to Bio-assay. Journal of the American Association, 1944, N 9, p. 357-365.
J. Ohlson, Financial Ratios and the Probabilistic Prediction of Bankruptcy. Journal of Accounting Research, 1980, N 19, p. 109-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2490395
M.E. Zmijewski, Methodological Issues Related to the Estimation of Financial Distress Prediction of Financial Distress Prediction Models. Journal of Accounting Research, 1984, vol. 22. Studies on Current Econometric Issues in Accounting Research, p. 59- 82.
W. Hopwood, J.C. McKeown, J.F. Mutchelr, A re-examination of auditor versus model accuracy within context of going-concern decision. Contemporary Accounting Research, vol. 10, N 2 (Springer), p. 409-431.
M. Khoshtinat, M. Ghasoori, Comparing the financial ratio and accrual ratio for predicting bankruptcy (Text in Persian). The Iranian Accounting Studies (9). 2005. 43–61 p.
E. Altman, Financial Ratios, Discriminant Analysis and the Prediction of Corporate Bankruptcy. Journal of Finance. 1968, N 23, p. 589-609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1968.tb00843.x
M. Zmijewski, Methodological Issues Related to the Estimation of Financial Distress Prediction Models. Journal of Accounting Research, 1984, vol. 22, p. 59 – 82. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2490859
J. K. Reynolds, J. R. Francis, Does size matter? The influence of large clients on office-level auditor reporting decisions. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 2000, 30 (3), p. 375- 400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(01)00010-6
X. Belloty, J-J. Uang, D. Citron, R. Taffler, The predictive Ability of Audit Report Going-Concern Uncertainty Narratives.
J.A. Lawrence, S. Parker, G. F. Peters, The Effects of Post-Bankruptcy Financing on Going Concern Reporting. Advances in Accounting, 2003, vol. 20, p. 1-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0882-6110(03)20001-8
M.A. Geiger, D.V. Rama, Audit Firm Size and Going-Concern Reporting Accuracy. Accounting Horizons, 2006, vol. 20, N 1, p. 1 -17. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/acch.2006.20.1.1
L. Jiang, R. Radich, S. Zhao, The Successful Resolution of Auditor Going Concern Opinions: Evidence from the U.S. and Australia. AFAANZ conference, 2010. [skatīts 13.07.2012.] Pieejams: http://www.afaanz.org/openconf/2010/modules/request.php?module=oc_program&action=view.php&id=225.
S.E. Kaplan, D.D. Williams, Do going concern audit reports protect auditors from litigation? A simultaneous equations approach. [skatīts 13.07.2012.] Pieejams: http://www.uic.edu/classes/actg/actg593/Readings/Auditing/Audit-Firm-Size-And-Going-Concern-2pp.pdf
M.L. DeFond, J.R. Francis, X. Hu, The Geography of Auditor Independence and SEC Enforcement. 2008. [skatīts 13.07.2012.] Pieejams: http://www.accountancy.smu.edu.sg/research/seminar/pdf/3_0_defond_francis_hu_may_13_2008_final.pdf.
P.C. Trønnes, E. Carson, R. Simnett International Consistency in Audit Reporting Behaviour: Evidence from Going Concern Modifications. NCAAR Conference, ANU, December 2008. [skatīts 13.07.2012.]Pieejams: http://www.fdewb.unimaas.nl/ISAR2009/01_03 _Tronnes_Carson_Simnett.pdf.
N. Ratzinger, Auditors’ Discretionary Scope of Action – German Evidence from Audit and Non-audit Fees and Going Concern Emphasis of Matter Paragraphs. 6 th EARNet Symposium, Norway, 2011. [skatīts 13.07.2012.] Pieejams: http://conference.rente.nhh.no/earnet/2011/papers/Paper_18.pdf.
N. Sormunen, K.K. Jeppesen, S. Sungren, T. Svanströn, Auditors’ Going Concern Reporting before Bankruptcy – A Study of Bankrupt Companies in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark. 6 th EARNet Symposium, Norway, 2011. [skatīts 13.07.2012.] Pieejams: http://conference.rente.nhh.no/earnet/2011/papers/Paper_72.pdf.
I.G. Basioudis, M.A. Geiger, V. Papanastasiou, Audit Fees, Non-audit Fees, and Auditor Reporting on UK Stressed Companies. [skatīts 13.07.2012.] Pieejams: http://static.aston.ac.uk/asig/Basioudis.pdf.
A. Vanstraelen, Going-concern opinions, auditor switching, and the self-fulfilling prophecy effect examined in the regulatory context of Belgium. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 18, 2003. p. 231-253.
N. N. Ovchinnikova, Razvitie metodiki ocenki nepreryvnosti dejatelnosti organizacii. Ekonomicheskie nauki, No 8 (33), 229 – 233 s.
N.A. Remizov, Nepreryvnost dejatelnosti i audit // Finansovye i buhgalterskie konsultacii. 2004. №3. С. 55-63
N. N. Ovchinnikova, Analiticheskie procedury v ocenke nepreryvnosti dejatelnosti organizacii. Avtoreferat dissertacii. Novosibirsk: SibUPK, 2011. 16 s.
Primenimost dopuschenija nepreryvnosti dejatelnosti audiruemogo lica. Pravilo (Standart) auditorskoj dejatelnosti (PSAD) N 11. [skatīts 07.07.2012.] Pieejams: http://www.rosec.ru/audit/standard/standard6.html
N.V. Shalanov, Sistemnyj analiz. Kibernetika. Sinergetika: matematicheskie metody i modeli. Ekonomicheskie aspekty. Novosibirsk, NGTU, 2008. 288 с.
S. Lili, The effects of client’s size and stress criteria on bankruptcy prediction models: an empirical analysis. [skatīts 23.07.2012.]. Pieejams: http:// saahq.org/audit/midyear/04midyear/papes/bpt-stres%20size.doc.
A. Young, Y. Wang, Multi-risk level examination of going concern modification. Managerial Auditing Journal, vol. 25, iss. 8, p.756 – 791. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1881518
R. Šorins, I. Voronova, Uzņēmuma maksātnespējas novērtējums. // Ekonomiskās problēmas uzņēmējdarbībā. Rīga : RTU, 1998. 125.-131.lpp.
I. Voronova, J. Romancēviča, Uzņēmumu ekonomiskās stabilitātes novērtēšana. 6 International Scientific Conference. Public Relations: Quality, Benefits and Risks, Selected papers, Riga, Biznesa augstskola TURĪBA, 2005. p. 134-142.
R. Šneidere, Finanšu analīzes metodes uzņēmuma maksātnespējas prognozēšanai. Rīga, Lietišķās informācijas dienests, 2009.- 232 lpp.
Šķiltere, D., Žuka, R. Statistical Evaluation of Applying of Forecasting an Enterprise’s Financial Condition in Latvia. Scientific Papers University of Latvia. vol. 706, Riga, LU, 2006. p. 109 - 124.
I. Genriha, I. Voronova, Maksātnespējas noteikšanas modeļi Latvijas uzņēmumiem // RTU zinātniskie raksti. 3. sēr., Ekonomika un uzņēmējdarbība. 8. sēj., 2010. 38.-50. lpp.
K. Didenko, J. Mežiels, I. Voronova, Assessment of Enterprises Insolvency: Challenges and Opportunities // 17th International Scientific Conference "Economics and Management-2012" (ICEM-2012), Estonia, Tallinn, 28.-30. March, 2012. p. 69-76.p.
I. Voronova, Financial Risks: Cases of Non-Financial Enterprises. In Risk Management for the Future – Theory and Cases. InTech, 2012. p.435-466.
Z. Muceniece, N. Lāce, Tirdzniecības uzņēmumu maksātnespējas prognozēšana Latvijā // Ekonomiskie pētījumi uzņēmējdarbībā. - 8. sējums, 2010. 141.-149. lpp.
I. Genriha, I. Voronova, Maksātnespējas noteikšanas modeļi Latvijas uzņēmumiem. // RTU IEVF Zinātniskie raksti. Ekonomiskie pētījumi uzņēmējdarbībā. 8. sējums. – Rīga: RTU Izdevniecība, 2010.
I. Genriha, G. Pettere, I. Voronova, Entrepreneurship Insolvency Risk Management: case Latvia.//International Journal of Banking, Accounting and Finance (IJ BAAF), 2011, vol. 3. N 1. [skatīts 13.07.]
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2014 Jānis Mežiels, Irina Voronova (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
