Supplementary Submission to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit - The Placement of Standard Setting in Auditing in the Regulatory Structure and Empirical Research in Auditing

Sep 4, 2026

Supplementary submission by K.A. Houghton to Australia’s Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit examines how auditing standard setting should be positioned within the existing regulatory framework and evaluates efficiencies and benefits from auditing research. The paper discusses auditor independence governance across stakeholders, then argues for placing the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AuASB) under the same umbrella as the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) through the Financial Reporting Council (FRC). It also reviews the role of empirical auditing research and the importance of data availability, including limitations affecting higher education and related regulatory charging practices.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages6

Reading Time15 min

AccessFree to download

1.0 Introduction and Objective of the Submission

2.0 The Place of Auditing Standards

2.1 Benefits of the Repositioning of the Auditing Standards Board

3.0 Research in Auditing

SUPPLEMENTARY SUBMISSION TO THE JOINT COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS AND AUDIT REVIEW OF INDEPENDENT AUDITING BY REGULATED COMPANY AUDITORS: THE PLACEMENT OF STANDARD SETTING IN AUDITING IN THE REGULATORY STRUCTURE AND EMPIRICAL RESEARCH IN AUDITING by K.A. Houghton Submission to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit Parliament of Australia May 24, 2002 SUPPLEMENTARY SUBMISSION TO THE JOINT COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS AND AUDIT REVIEW OF INDEPENDENT AUDITING BY REGULATED COMPANY AUDITORS: THE PLACEMENT OF STANDARD SETTING IN AUDITING IN THE REGULATORY STRUCTURE AND EMPIRICAL RESEARCH IN AUDITING 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE OF THE SUBMISSION Issues relating to auditor independence can focus on any one or more of a series of stakeholders. In my earlier submission in mid-April 2002 I indicated one possible way forward in respect of the means by which auditors managed and governed their auditor independence process. Other stakeholders also have a role in the process; they include the boards of directors and audit committees of the companies subjected to audit (the auditees), corporate regulators that deal with the disclosure and governance of such companies (Australian Stock Exchange, ASX and Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC), individual and institutional shareholders, the accounting profession more generally and those that govern the auditing standard setting process (Australian Accounting Research Foundation, AARF and the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board in Australia, AuASB) . In addition those who study and research the behaviour in the market for audit services have a place in the current debate. This supplementary submission deals with two specific matters: (1) the structural placement of auditing standard setting within the existing regulatory framework; and (2) the efficiencies in and benefits of auditing research. 2.0 THE PLACE OF AUDITING STANDARDS A recent policy document issued by CPA Australia (Larsen, 2002) highlighted the need to simplify the current structure within which accounting and auditing fit. This policy document contains many propositions but I will focus on one. The CPA Australia document acknowledged that there was a need for a one umbrella organization under which much, if not all, of the regulatory structure should sit. In particular for my purposes here, the document argued that both the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AuASB) and the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) should function under one umbrella governance organization. While the CPA Australia document calls for a newly developed umbrella organization, Australia already has an umbrella organization which some will argue is adequate for this purpose. This organization, the Financial Reporting Council (FRC), is presently the governance body under which the AASB currently operates. Even some of those who have been sympathetic to the creation of FRC have acknowledged that it has taken some “settling-in” time for the organization to be fully effective, I believe there are sound reasons for suggesting that FRC is now functioning well. Because of this and given the likely cost of substantial restructure of such an organization (in time, money and stability), I would propose that the AuASB and the AASB both sit under the control of the same umbrella organization; that organization being FRC. 2.1 Benefits of the Repositioning of the Auditing Standards Board At present the AuASB operates under a joint management agreement between CPA Australia and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia. These organizations are both important professional organizations within our community with strong professional standards and ideals. The cost burden of the AuASB on these two organizations while not onerous is still substantial. However, it must be acknowledged that these two organizations do not represent the only stakeholders in the market for audit services.

FAQs

What two main topics does the supplementary submission address?

It addresses (1) the structural placement of auditing standard setting within the existing regulatory framework and (2) the efficiencies in and benefits of auditing research.

Why does the submission recommend repositioning the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AuASB)?

It argues that current arrangements restrict board membership and may disadvantage broader agenda-setting; placing AuASB under the same umbrella as AASB through the FRC would improve governance and reduce costs and timetable burdens.

What is the role of empirical research in auditing according to the submission?

The submission notes Australia’s leadership in empirical auditing research and emphasizes that data availability is crucial, while also pointing to concerns about data limitations influenced by higher-education resources and regulatory charging practices.

Sep 4, 2026

Uploaded by Sophia Brooks