FAKULTAS EKONOMI

UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

The Audit Market

Learning Objectives

After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Distinguish between different theories of audit services
including agency theory.
2. Understand drivers for audit regulation.
3. Understand the role of public oversight.
4. Distinguish between different audit firms.
5. Describe the elements of audit quality an audit fee.
6. Identify auditors liability issues.
7. Understand legal liability in Indonesian environment

Learning Objectives

After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

8. Know the auditors responsibilities with regard to the
detection of fraud and illegal acts.
9. Identify some current developments in the audit market.
10. Portray the series of industry codes of conduct and
guidance.

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 1:
Distinguish between different
theories of audit services
including agency theory.

Origin of audit market

The emergence of todays auditors happened during the

Industrial Revolution that started in Great Britain around
1780.
This revolution led to the emergence of large industrial
companies with complex bureaucratic structures and,
gradually, the need to look for external funds in order to
finance further expansion: the separation between capital
provision and management.
Both developments resulted in demand for the services of
specialists in bookkeeping and in auditing internal and
external financial representations.
The institutionalization of the audit profession was then
merely a matter of time.

Origin of audit market (contd)

Management controls the accounting systems, the internal

controls, and the financial reports to investors.
The financial statements measure the financial and nonfinancial performance and financial position of the
organization that management manages, which become a
tool for communication to stockholders
Management is not independent or objective because their
success depends on positive reports.
The auditor increases the confidence of the report users by
giving an independent opinion on the fairness of these
reports.

Theories in audit services

Demand for audit services explained by several

different theories:
The Policeman Theory
The Lending Credibility Theory
The Theory of Inspired Confidence
Agency Theory

The Policeman Theory

The Policeman Theory Auditing was focused on arithmetical

accuracy and on prevention and detection of fraud.
Popular 1940s US.
Weakness is its inability to explain the shift of auditing to
'verification of truth and fairness of the financial statements'.

The Lending Credibility Theory

The Lending Credibility Theory: Primary function of

auditing the addition of credibility to the financial statements.
The theory as such is unable to explain the various other
functions the users of financial statements expect the auditor
to assume as part of attestation function.

The Theory of Inspired Confidence

10

The Theory of Inspired Confidence: Developed in the late

1920s by the Dutch professor Theodore Limperg.
Limpergs theory addresses both the demand and the supply
of audit services.
The demand for audit services is the direct consequence of
the participation of outside stakeholders (third parties) in the
company.
The auditor should act in such a way that he does not
disappoint the expectations of a rational outsider, while, on
the other hand, he should not arouse greater expectations in
his report than his examination justifies.

Agency Theory

11

A company is viewed as the result of 'contracts', in

which several groups make some kind of contribution
to the company, given a certain 'price'.
Management is seen as the agent, trying to obtain
contributions from principals such as bankers,
stockholders and employees.

Management tries to do what is best for management

and has a considerable advantage over the principals
regarding information about the company (information
asymmetry).

Agency theory can be used to explain the supply side of

the audit market.

Agency Theory (contd)

12

The contribution of an audit to third parties is basically

determined by (1) the probability that the auditor will detect
errors in the financial statements (or other irregularities, such as
fraud or illegal acts) and (2) her willingness to report these errors
(e.g.., by qualifying her auditor's report), even against the wish of
the auditee (auditor independence).
Cost of an agency relationship are:
monitoring costs (the cost of monitoring the agents),
bonding costs (the costs, incurred by an agent, of insuring
that agents will not take adverse actions against the
principals), and
residual loss(effective loss that results despite the bonding
and monitoring costs incurred).

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 2:
Understand drivers for audit
regulation.

Audits Required

14

In most countries, this demand for audit has long been on a

voluntary basis, i.e. it was left to the companies to decide
whether they had their financial statements audited or not.
In most countries, audits are now legally required for some
types of companies (statutory audits)
E.g., listed companies, companies receiving government
money, certain industries

Audits Required (contd)

15

The supply of audit services is currently also

regulated in most countries.
In the European Union, statutory audits, i.e. audits
required by law, can only be performed by auditors
who have met specific technical requirements with
regard to education and experience.
Laws in other countries require audits of
companies issuing public equity or debt, companies
receiving government money, and companies in
certain industries (like banking and utilities).

Audit Regulation

16

Major bourses (including NYSE, NASDAQ, London Stock

Exchange, Tokyo NIKKEI, and Frankfurt DAX) have listing
rules that require all companies to have an audited annual
report.

Although there is regulation around the world, two that

may be the most influential are:
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 required the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) to create a Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB).
European Union Eighth Council Directive 84/253/EEC and EU
Directive 2006/43/EC

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 3:
Understand the role of public
oversight.

Independent Oversight

18

There is a recent growth in accounting oversight boards

government or professional committees to review the
work of auditors and take an active part in setting and
enforcing standards.
The global oversight organization in the International
Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR).
Others similar boards are:
In Australia - Financial Reporting Council,
In the UK -The Review Board,

Independent Oversight (contd)

19

Others similar boards are:

In the Netherlands - Authority for the Financial
Markets (AFM),
France - Autorit des marchs financiers(AMF)
USA -Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
Indonesia ?

The International Forum of Independent

Audit Regulators (IFIAR) Core Principles

20

comprehensive and well defined accounting and auditing

principles and standards
legal requirements for the preparation and publication of
financial statements according to those principles and
standards;
an enforcement system for preparers of financial statements
to ensure compliance with accounting standards
corporate governance practices that support highquality
corporate reporting and auditing practice; and
effective educational and training arrangements for
accountants and auditors.

10

Who supervises Auditing rules

and Auditing Firms?
Firms?

21

Public Company
Accounting Oversight
Board (PCAOB)
Created by the SarbanesUS classes
Oxley Act of 2002

PCAOBs Audit Standards

22

PCAOB has passed 16 audit

standards as of December 2010.
They also enforce as temporary
standards the existing audit
standards by the Audit Standards
Board called Statements of Audit
Standards (SAS)

US classes

11

PCAOBs Audit Standards US classes

23

AS No. 1: References in Auditors Reports to the Standards

of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
AS No. 3: Audit Documentation
AS No. 4: Reporting on Whether a Previously Reported
Material Weakness Continues to Exist
AS No. 5: An Audit of Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting That Is Integrated with An Audit of Financial
Statements
AS No. 6: Evaluating Consistency of Financial Statements
AS No. 7: Engagement Quality Review
US classes

PCAOBs Audit Standards US

classes

24

AS No. 8: Audit Risk

AS No. 9: Audit Planning
AS No. 10: Supervision of the Audit Engagement
AS No. 11: Consideration of Materiality in Planning and
Performing an Audit
AS No. 12: Identifying and Assessing Risks of Material
Misstatement
AS No. 13: The Auditor's Responses to the Risks of Material
Misstatement
AS No. 14: Evaluating Audit Results
AS No. 15: Audit Evidence

US classes

12

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 4: Distinguish between
different audit firms.

Big Four Firms & Non-Big Four

26

Deloitte, Ernst & Young, KPMG,

PricewaterhouseCoopers
Second Tier Grant Thornton; BDO Seidman;
McGladrey & Pullen; Moss Adams; Myer, Hoffman
& McCann; Crowe Group, American Express, BKD

13

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 5: Describe the
elements of audit quality an
audit fee.

Technical and Functional Audit

Quality

28

Technical audit quality is the degree to which an

audit meets a consumer's expectations with regard
to the detection and reporting of errors and
irregularities - the quality of the outcome of the audit
process.
Functional audit quality is the degree to which the
process of carrying out the audit and
communicating its results meets a consumer's
expectations - the process itself.

14

Audit Fees

29

Important determinants of audit fees are:

$ the size of the auditee and the geographical dispersion;
$ the size of the audit firm (Big Four firms seem to
demand a fee premium);
$ the quality of the auditee's internal control system;
$ the type of fee contract (fixed fee versus variable fee).

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 6:
Identify auditors liability
issues.

15

Legal liability of the auditor

31

varies from country to country.

based on one or more of the following:
common law,
civil liability under statutory law,
criminal liability under statutory law, and
liability for members of professional accounting
organizations.

Common Law Ultramares - Touche case

(Ultramares Corporation v Touche et al.)

32

the accountants were negligent for not finding that a

material amount of accounts receivable had been
falsified when careful investigation would have shown it
to be fraudulent,
not liable to a third party bank because the creditors
were not a primary beneficiary, or known party,
called the Ultramares doctrine, that ordinary negligence
is not sufficient for a liability to a third party because of
lack of privity of contract between the third party and the
auditor.

16

Caparo Industries, PLC v Dickman

33

The question in Caparo was the scope of the assumption of

responsibility of the auditor if a clean opinion was given for
negligent accounts, and what the limits of liability ought to be.
The House of Lords of the UK, following the Court of Appeal, set
out a "three-fold test for an obligation (duty of care) to arise
from negligence
harm must be reasonably foreseeable
the parties must be in a relationship of proximity and
it must be fair, just and reasonable to impose liability.

Civil Liability Under Statutory Law

34

The Securities Act of 1933 established the first U.S. statutory

civil recovery rules for third parties against auditors.
Original purchasers have recourse against the auditor for up to the
original purchase price if the financial statements are false or
misleading.
The auditor has the burden of demonstrating that reasonable
investigation was conducted or that all the loss of the purchaser of
securities (plaintiff) was caused by factors other than the
misleading financial statements.

17

Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 Civil

Penalties for CEOs and CFOs

35

If there is a material restatement of a companys reported

financial results due to the material noncompliance of the
company, as a result of misconduct, the CEO and CFO
shall reimburse the company for any bonus or incentive or
equity-based compensation received within the 12 months
following the filing with the financial statements
subsequently required to be restated (Section 304)
Financial statements filed with the SEC by any public
company must be certified by CEOs and CFOs. If all
financials do not fairly present the true condition of the
company CEOs and CFOs may receive fines of up to $1
million. If certifications are made knowing the statements
are incorrect, the fine can be up to $5 million.

Criminal Liability Under Statutory

Law

36

The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in the United

States sets out (Rule 10b-5) criminal liability for the
auditor to employ any device, scheme or artifice to
defraud or intentionally or recklessly misrepresent
information for third party use.
Not In Text Cases: In United States v. Natelli
(1975)* United States v. Weiner (1975) * ESM
Government Securities v. Alexander Grant & Co.
(1986).

18

Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 Criminal

Penalties for CEOs, CFOs and Auditors

37

To knowingly destroy, create, manipulate

documents and/or impede or obstruct federal
investigations is considered felony, and violators will
be subject to fines or up to 20 years imprisonment,
or both
All audit reports or related workpapers must be kept
by the auditor for 7 years. Failure to do this may
result in 10 years imprisonment.
CFOs and CEOs who falsely certify financial
statements or internal controls are subject to 10
years imprisonment. Willful false certification may
result in a maximum of 20 years imprisonment

Liabilities as Members of
Professional Organizations

38

Nearly all national audit professions have some sort of disciplinary

court.
The disciplinary court makes its judgment and determines the
sanction. It may be:

1. a fine;
2. a reprimand (either oral or written);
3. a suspension for a limited period of time (e.g. 6 months);
or
4. a lifetime ban from the profession.

19

In order to hold the auditor successfully legally liable in a

civil suit, the following conditions have to be met: - US
Classes

39

An audit failure/neglect has to be proven

(negligence issue).
The auditor should owe a duty of care to the
plaintiff (due professional care).
The plaintiff has to prove a causal relationship
between her losses and the alleged audit failure
(causation issue)
The plaintiff must quantify her losses (quantum
issue).

financial risks resulting from

litigation for audit firms

40

European Union Commissioner Charlie McCreevy

has said:
We have concluded that unlimited liability combined
with insufficient insurance cover is no longer tenable. It
is a potentially huge problem for our capital markets and
for auditors working on an international scale. The
current conditions are not only preventing the entry of
new players in the international audit market, but are
also threatening existing firms.

20

Suggested Solutions to Auditor

Liability

41

Some countries (e.g. Germany) have put a legally

determined cap on the liability of auditors (to the
client in the case of Germany)
A system of proportionate liability - an audit firm is
not liable for the entire loss incurred by plaintiffs but
only to the extent to which the loss is attributable to
the auditor.
In order to protect the personal wealth of audit
partners, some audit firms are structured as a
limited liability partnership (e.g. in the UK).

Suggested Solutions to Auditor

Liability (cont)

42

To make insurance of all liability risks

compulsory using new legislation was one of the
recommendations of a EU commission.
Exclude certain activities with a higher risk profile
from the auditors' liability. A mechanism to achieve
this outcome would be to introduce so-called safe
harbour provisions by legislation.

21

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 7: Understand legal
liability in Indonesian
environment

Legal environment where the

accountant practice

44

Public accountants legal liability may arises from the client,

third party, or criminal.
Factors that might increase the possibility of legal suit:
There is growing awareness of the responsibility of public
accountants by user of financial statements;
There is an increased consciousness of Bapepam-LK/OJK
regarding its responsibility for protecting investors interest;
Auditing and accounting are more complex because of factors
such as the increasing size of business, globalization of
business and intricacies of business operations;

22

Legal environment where the

accountant practice (contd)

45

Factors that might increase the possibility of legal suit :

(contd)
Many CPA firms are willing to settle their legal problems out
of court in an attempt to avoid costly legal fee and adverse
publicity rather than resolve them through the judicial process;
and
Many of accounting principles available to be chosen by
clients, whereby no concise criteria available for auditor to
evaluate whether the chosen alternative is appropriate..

Indonesian legal liability for public

accountants

46

Several law and regulation are affected public

accountants:
Law No.5 Year 2011 on Public Accountants (Law No
5);
Law No. 8 Year 2008 on Capital Market (Law No 8);
Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata (Civil Code);
Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (Penal Code).

46

23

Indonesian legal liability for public

accountants (contd)

47

Penal and civil provisions under Law No. 5

Imprison for max 5 years and fine for max Rp millions if
Public Accountants (verse 55)
Manipulating, assist in manipulating, and/or falsifying data
related to services provided; or
Deliberately manipulating, falsifying and/or omitting data or
note in working papers or does not preparing working paper
related to services provided.

Imprison for max 5 years and fine for max Rp millions

for anybody who (verse 57 (1))
Providing false statement or give false or forged documents to
obtain Public Accountant license.
47

Indonesian legal liability for public

accountants (contd)

48

Administrative provision under Law No. 5

Minister of Finance (through PPAJP) has authority to
charge the public accountant for administrative
violations;
Administrative charge:

a recommendation to do certain obligation;

a written reprimand ;
a limitation to provide services for certain type of entity;
a limitation in providing certain services;
a suspension of license;
a revocation of license; and/or
a fine.
48

24

Indonesian legal liability for public

accountants (contd)

49

Several provision under Law No.8

Setiap profesi penunjang pasar modal (antara lain akuntan)
wajib menaati kode etik dan standar profesi yang ditetapkan
asosiasi profesi sepanjang tidan bertentangan dengan UU ini
dan atau peraturan pelaksanaannya.
Akuntan yang terdaftar pada Bapepam yang mengaudit
laporan keuangan Emiten, Bursa Efek, Lembaga Kliring dan
Penjaminan, Lembaga Penyimpanan dan Penyelesaian, dan
Pihak lain yang melakukan kegiatan di bidang Pasar Modal
wajib menyampaikan pemberitahuan yang sifatnya rahasia
kepada Bapepam selambat-lambatnya dalam waktu 3 (tiga)
hari kerja sejak ditemukan adanya hal-hal sebagai berikut:
pelanggaran yang dilakukan terhadap ketentuan dalam
UU no.8/1995 dan atau peraturan pelaksanaannya; atau
hal-hal yang dapat membahayakan keadaan keuangan
lembaga dimaksud atau kepentingan para nasabahnya.
49

Indonesian legal liability for public

accountants (contd)

50

Under a Civil Code, accountant also has legal

responsibilities, such as to meet the contract. For
example, according to verse 1234, he/she
responsible for
negligence; and / or
breach of contract due to:
can not provide the promised services; or
did not act diligently (due care) in exercising its work

50

25

Indonesian legal liability for public

accountants
Under a Penal Code, accountant also has legal
responsibilities. For example, liability regarding:
Disclosing confidential information (v.322);
Using faked degrees/title (v.229);
Falsification of accounting vouchers, proof of
transactions, documents (v.263, 264, 270, 271 and 274).

51

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 8:
Know the auditors
responsibilities with regard
to the detection of fraud
and illegal acts.

26

Object of an audit one hundred years

ago

53

In their review of the historical development of the audit

professions views regarding the issue of fraud, Humphrey et
al. (1991) cite from Dicksees 1900 edition of Auditing A
Practical Manual for Auditors, which states:
The object of an audit may be said to be threefold:
1. The detection of fraud.
2. The detection of technical errors.
3. The detection of errors of principle.
The detection of fraud is a most important portion of the
auditors duties. Auditors, therefore, should assiduously
C., Turley, S., Moizer, P.,
cultivate this branch of their activities. Humphrey,
1991.Protecting Against Detection: The Case
of Auditors and Fraud, unpublished paper,
University of Manchester,

Fraud a responsibility not assumed

54

Gradually, the auditors responsibilities began to

change, with fraud no longer being a key priority.
Some researchers have demonstrated this by the
changing priority of the fraud issue in Montgomerys
Auditing.
In its first three editions, fraud was labeled as a
chief audit objective but its priority was gradually
eroded until, in the 1957 Eighth Edition, it was
described as a responsibility not assumed.

27

Fraud a responsibility not assumed

(contd)

55

What was the reason of this development away

from fraud? Several most important reasons are:
the acceptance that the audit of the financial statements
on behalf of the third parties is an art of its own and
justifies the existence of auditors; and
the acceptance that an investigation aimed at finding any
kind of fraud is extremely laborious, expensive and not
practical, considering the increases in size and
complexity of the companies, as well as their improved
self or internal controls.

Fraud Back in the Spotlight

56

However, this total rejection of responsibility for fraud,

which is evident from this historical outline, gave way to
renewed discussion in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.
Under public pressure to investigate the reasonableness of
the auditors position regarding fraud, the profession was
forced to reconsider its total rejection stance that culminated
in the installation of several committees such as the Cohen
Commission (1978), the Treadway Commission (1987) and
the Dingell Committee (1988) in the USA, and the Davison
and Benson Committees (1985) in the UK.
The current position of the audit profession is described in
ISA 240.

28

Fraud Back in the Spotlight (contd)

57

According to ISA 240, the primary responsibility for the

prevention and detection of fraud and error rests with both
those charged with the governance and the management of
an entity.
Fraud may involve sophisticated and carefully organized
schemes designed to conceal it, such as forgery, deliberate
failure to record transactions, or intentional
misrepresentations being made to the auditor.
The auditor is responsible for obtaining reasonable
assurance the financial statements are free from material
statement, whether caused by fraud or error.

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 9:
Identify some current
developments in the audit
market.

29

Audit expectation gap

59

As discussed of audit theories, the policeman theory was

mentioned and its inability to explain the historic shift (from
around 1940 to 2002) from prevention and detection of fraud
to verification of truth and fairness of the financial
statements.
The development of the auditors duties, linked to changes in
the audit market, is still an object of public debate, often
referred to as the audit expectation gap debate.
This gap results from the fact that users of audit services
have expectations regarding the duties of auditors that
exceed the current practice in the profession.

Audit expectation gap (contd)

60

The users of audit services can broadly be classified as

auditees and third parties (shareholders, bankers,
creditors, employees, customers, and other groups), has its
own set of expectations with regard to an auditors duties.

Expectations were found with regard to the following duties

of auditors in giving an opinion on the:

the fairness of financial statements;

the company's ability to continue as a going concern;
the company's internal control system;
the occurrence of fraud; and
the occurrence of illegal acts.

30

The fairness of F/S;

Company's going concern;

61

A large part of the financial community (users of

audit services) expects that financial statements
with an unmodified (unqualified) audit opinion are
completely free from error. The inherent limitations
of auditing not accepted.
In most national regulations, auditors need to
determine whether the audited entity is able to
continue as a going concern.

Opinion on the Companys Internal

Control System

62

The objective of the auditor is to identify and assess

the risks of material misstatement through
understanding the entity and its environment,
including the entitys internal control.
The United States Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
requires that company officers certify that internal
controls are effective and requires that an
independent auditor verify managements analysis

31

Company's Internal Control

63

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires each annual report

of a company to contain an internal control report which should:
(1) state the responsibility of management for establishing and
maintaining an adequate internal control structure and procedures
for financial reporting, and
(2) contain an assessment, as of the end of the fiscal year, of the
effectiveness of the internal control structure and procedures for
financial reporting.
(3) Companies must select suitable criteria (COSO-based) against
which it may evaluate the effectiveness of internal controls for
authorization, safeguarding assets, and properly recording of
transactions.
(4) An independent auditor attests to any difference between
managements assertions under 404 and the audit evidence on
internal controls
US classes

The Occurrence of Fraud

64

ISA 240- the responsibility for the prevention and detection of

fraud and error rests with both those charged with the governance
and the management.
ISA 210 states that when planning and performing audit
procedures and in evaluating and reporting the results, auditors
should consider the risk of misstatements in financial statements
resulting in fraud.
In planning the audit, the auditor must assess the risk that material
fraud or error has occurred.

32

Opinion on the Occurrence of Fraud

65

Both governments and the financial community

expect the auditor to find existing fraud cases and
report them.
Audit history as gone from the fraud detection as
the objective of an audit to not taking any
responsibility for fraud, to the current position that
the auditor is responsible for obtaining reasonable
assurance the financial statements are free from
material statement, whether caused by fraud or
error.

The Occurrence of Illegal Acts

66

Both ISA 250 and most national regulators state

that the auditors responsibility in this area is
restricted to designing and executing the audit in
such a way that there is a reasonable expectation of
detecting material illegal acts which have a direct
impact on the form and content of the financial
statements.
The professional regulations in some countries
require the auditor to inform members of the audit
committee or board of directors

33

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

LO 10:
Portray the series of
industry codes of conduct
and guidance.

Responses to Accounting
Controversies

68

In response to the controversies there have been in two

landmark studies (the COSO Report and the Cadbury
Report which lead to the Combined Code and the
Turnbull Report); and
Most recently have been legislated into the US
accounting profession by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.

34

COSO Report

69

The COSO report was published by the Committee of

Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. The COSO report envisaged:
1 harmonizing the definitions regarding internal control
and its components;
2 helping management in assessing the quality of internal
control;
3 creating internal control benchmarks, enabling
management to compare the internal control in their
own company to the state-of-the-art; and
4 creating a basis for the external reporting on the
adequacy of the internal controls.

Combined Code UK

70

In 1998 London Stock Exchange published a new

Listing Rule together with related Principles of Good
Governance and Code of Best Practice (called the
Combined Code).
The combined code combines the recommendations of
the so-called Cadbury, Greenbury, and Hampel
committees on corporate governance.

35

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 Restrictions on Auditors

71

Auditors must report to the audit committee

The lead audit partner and audit review partner must
be rotated every five years.
A second partner must review and approve audit
reports.
It is a felony with penalties of up to 20 years in jail to
willfully fail to maintain all audit or review work papers
for seven years.
Auditors are prohibited from offering certain
information system and accounting services.

FAKULTAS EKONOMI
UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

Further readings

36

Selected materials

73

Elder, Beasley, Arens & Jusuf, Ch.3, Professional Ethics in Auditing and
Assurance Services, an Indonesian Adaptation, 2009
Hayes, Wallage, and Gortemaker, Ch. 2, The Audit Market in Principles
of Auditing an Introduction to International Standards on Auditing, 3rd
Edition , 2014

37