Estudo sobre a alteração do conteúdo dos pareceres de auditoria independente após a adoção da lei 11.638/2007

• Autor(a) principal: Sena, Sandra Regina Siqueira de
• Data de Publicação: 2011
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações do Mackenzie
• Texto Completo: http://dspace.mackenzie.br/handle/10899/26235
• topic: auditoria; pareceres de auditores; convergência contábil; auditing; auditors reports; accounting convergence; CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::ADMINISTRACAO::CIENCIAS CONTABEIS

The primary goal of this study is to verify whether there have been any changes in the reports issued by independent auditors after the adoption of Act Number 11638/2007. The sample is composed of non-financial listed companies whose shares are traded on the Bovespa (São Paulo Stock Exchange) with released Financial Statements in the period between 2006 and 2009, totaling 449 companies with 1.796 observations, whose data was extracted from the database of the CVM (Brazilian Securities and Exchange Commission). The auditors reports were analyzed as divided among the Big Four auditing firms, i.e., Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu;Ernst & Young; PricewaterhouseCoopers and KPMG, and the Non Big Four representing the other auditing firms. The conclusion was that the contents of the auditors reports maintained the same standards along the four fiscal years considering the following types of reports:unqualified; qualified; disclaimer of opinion and adverse opinion. Particular attention was given to the utilization of emphasis paragraphs which may be found in unqualified and qualified reports pointing out that the observations therein contained referred several times to uncertainties which would not have had any impact on the financial statements. It was also identified that the majority of the open capital companies chose to hire the Big Four during the period analyzed, moreover, the Non Big Four appeared to be more conservative, because they presented a significantly higher level of observations as compared with the Big Four.The collected data suggested that the Non Big Four have greater independence in the development of their auditing work, expressing their opinion in a more forceful manner, even if unfavorable to the audited company. However, we must question whether the Big Four issue almost all their opinions as unqualified because the companies hiring them are large corporations and, consequently, have more strict requirements through their audit committees with the necessary internal controls, or if the Big Four are, apparently, more dependent on their contracting companies thus suffering pressure to issue unqualified opinion reports due to agency conflicts, since the hiring company is responsible for the fees paid to the audit firms.