Search results

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to understand the role of the statutory auditing profession in France. The study is theoretically based on distinctions between a functionalist view of professions and a neo-weberian view. Prior research, conducted in Anglo-American countries has shown that the auditing profession has focussed primarily on protecting the private interests of the profession. Hence, there is a need to conduct research on this topic in a code law country where the state is expected to play a significant role in protecting the public interest.

The methodology involves a content analysis of 148 disciplinary decisions issued against statutory auditors in France from 1989 to 2006. This analysis identified 21 types of violations grouped into public interest or private interest offences. Because visible offences are public and are more likely to threaten the reputation of the profession, these types of decisions are also studied with respect to their visibility.

The results reveal that in a code law country such as France the auditing profession tends to defend both the public interest as well as its private interests. The results also support the “visibility” effect.

The written disciplinary decisions have been anonymized so that the names of the auditors and the clients cannot be identified.

This paper differs from previous studies conducted in the Anglo-American context which show an emphasis on protecting the private interests of the auditing profession. Moreover, this study reveals the existence of “mixed” offences and underlines that a profession primarily focusses on these cases. Thus, the work reconciles in part the functionalist and neo-weberian perspectives. Lastly, this paper confirms the importance of the visibility effect.

The purpose of this study is to provide a systematic review of research development on auditing in the European Union over the past decade and suggest future research directions.

Following the PRISMA protocol, the authors systematically reviewed the relevant literature and conducted a qualitative content analysis of 107 studies on auditing in the European Union published between 2012 and 2023.

The results indicate increased auditing literature in the European Union from 2012 to August 2023. Around 40% of the papers were focused on six nations: Germany, Spain, Italy, the UK, Sweden and France. Additionally, 35.5% of papers have been published in three major journals: Accounting in Europe, International Journal of Auditing and the European Accounting Review. Moreover, 82.24% of papers used quantitative methods, with a few using qualitative or mixed methods. Also, most of the studies in the sample endorsed the European Union’s auditing reforms, which included implementing a cap on nonaudit fees and enhancing the independence of audit committees. Contrary to this viewpoint, multiple studies have expressed disagreement with enforcing a total prohibition on nonaudit services, as certain services can enhance auditing quality. Similarly, other studies have contested the necessity of mandatory auditor rotation every 10 years, citing the significant additional expenses associated with this practice. Finally, further studies supported the European Union’s decision to make the joint audit voluntary, as it is related to high audit fees and low audit quality.

The limitations of this research primarily stem from the authors’ choices in selecting the database and defining the criteria for searching the studied papers.

This paper offers valuable insights into the future research prospects in the European Union’s auditing field. Hence, this analysis can be helpful for researchers and practitioners in developing this field based on future research recommendations and the identified themes.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first study to systematically review the developments of the European Union auditing literature over the past decade.