The influence of audit tenure, audit opinion, KAP reputation and auditor switch on audit report lag with auditor industry specialization as a moderation variable

Source: SPSS processed result

Y = Audit Report Lag

a = Constant

X1 = Tenure Audit

X2 = Audit Opinion

X3 = KAP reputation

X4 = Auditor Switching

b1 - b10 = Regression coefficient

e = error (error rate) 5%

The interpretation of the formula above is:

1. Regression coefficient for audit tenure is -17.354; 1. This implies that the audit's significance grows with time. Audit reporting lag days would grow significantly by 17,354 days if all other factors remained the same.

2. The regression coefficient for the Audit Opinion variable is -0.298. This means that, all other things being equal, the time necessary to obtain an audit report is anticipated to be 298 days shorter if a corporation obtains an unqualified opinion.

3. The KAP Reputation variable has a regression coefficient of 4.070. Using a KAP affiliated with one of the Big Four audit firms is strongly connected with a 4,070-day increase in audit report delays, assuming all other variables remain constant.

4. For the variable "Auditor Change," the regression coefficient is 2.420. Therefore, it is reasonable to anticipate a 2,420-day increase in the duration of audit reporting lag days if a corporation switches auditors, all else being equal.

5. Fifth, the correlation between auditor industry specialization and regression coefficient

6. is 39.586. Assuming no other variables affect the timing of the audit report, this indicates a positive correlation between the auditor's area of expertise and the projected coefficient of 39,586 days.

7. The regression coefficient for mthe interaction of audit tenure with auditor industry specialization is -18.533. This implies that a one unit increase in the interaction variable between audit length and auditor industry specialization is associated with a decrease in audit report delay of 18,533 days, while all other variables are held constant.

8. Regression analysis shows that the interaction coefficient between audit opinion and auditor industry specialization is -20.595. This shows that a one unit increase in the interaction between audit opinion and auditor industry specialization is associated with a decrease in audit report lag of 20.595 days assuming all other variables do not change.

9. The regression coefficient of the interaction between hood reputation and auditor industry specialization is -19.399. This shows that a one unit increase in the interaction variable, which represents the combined effect of KAP reputation and auditor industry specialization, is associated with a decrease in audit report delays of 19,399 days, assuming all other variables are held constant.

10. Regression analysis shows a coefficient of 3.686 for the interaction variable which represents the combination of auditor turnover

11. and auditor industry specialization. This shows that, even though other variables remain constant, an increase in the interaction between auditor turnover and auditor industry specialization by one unit is associated with an increase in audit report lag of 3,686 days.

Coefficient of Determination

The modified R-squared highlights the importance of the coefficient of determination. Audit report lag is determined by several factors, as shown by the coefficient of determination: audit duration, audit opinion, audit reputation, auditor turnover, auditor specialization, and interactions between these variables. Specifically, these factors accounted for 19.3% of the variation in audit report delays, while the remaining 80.7% could be attributed to other variables not considered in this study.

Hypothesis Test

If analyzed mathematically, it is obtained that Fcount > Ftable, or 3.904 > 1.97. The significance level (0.000 0.05) is low enough so that the hypothesis is accepted. This suggests that auditor industry specialization can have a significant impact on audit report latency when paired with audit duration, audit opinion, KAP reputation, and auditor turnover. The extent to which the independent variable helps explain the dependent variable is the focus of this statistical study. Brief Analysis of T-Test Data:

1. First, looking at the Tenure Audit, the tcount value of 3.008 is greater than the ttable value of 1.98373. However, the value of 0.003 is less significant than the baseline value of 0.05. Thus, the hypothesis is confirmed by the finding that Audit Tenure is a statistically significant predictor of Audit Report Lag.

2. The Audit Opinion t-calculated value of 0.036 is much lower than the significance threshold of 1.98373. Apart from that, the significance value of 0.971 is greater than the predetermined threshold of 0.05. This means that there is not enough evidence to support the premise that Audit Opinion has a significant impact on Audit Report Lag.

3. Third, the t-value of KAP Reputation is calculated at 0.338, which is lower than the minimum t-value of 1.98373. The significance level of 0.736 also exceeds the lower limit of 0.05. Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis which states that there is no relationship between KAP Reputation and Audit Report Lag.

4. The t-count value for Auditor Switching is 0.328, lower than the significance level of 1.98373 shown by the t table. In addition, the significance level of 0.744 is higher than the

5. minimum required value of 0.05. Consequently, we cannot accept the null hypothesis that changing auditors will reduce the time required to complete the audit report.

6. Fifth, tcount of Auditor Industry Specialization of 2.976 is greater than ttable of 1.98373. Furthermore, the significance value of 0.004 is less than the minimum required value, namely 0.05. There is no statistically significant relationship between Auditor Industry Specialization and Audit Report Lag, so the null hypothesis is accepted.

7. For the interaction between Audit Tenure and Auditor Industry Specialization, the t table value of 1.98373 is greater than the estimated t value of 2.568. Furthermore, 0.012 is smaller than the statistical significance limit of 0.05. Because auditor industry specialization is assumed to reduce the impact of auditor experience on audit report delays, this hypothesis can be accepted..

8. Even though the t-table value for the relationship between Audit Opinion and Auditor Industry Specialization is 1.98373, the t-count value for this interaction is only 1.776. In addition, the p value of 0.079 is statistically significant (p 0.05). Therefore, we conclude that the hypothesis which states that the influence of Audit Opinion on Audit Report Lag is moderated by auditor specialization in the industry is wrong.

9. For the interaction between KAP Reputation and Auditor Industry Specialization, the calculated t value is 1.459, smaller than the critical t value of 1.98373. The significance level is 0.148, higher than the required 0.05. Because auditor industry specialization was found to have no moderating influence on the influence of KAP reputation on audit report lag, this hypothesis was rejected.

10. In the t table, the cutoff value is 1.98373, so the interaction value between auditor change and field of specialization is 0.293, which is below the cutoff. Moreover, because 0.770 is greater than 0.05, this hypothesis is not supported, and Auditor industry specialization does not impact auditor change on audit report latency.

Conclusion

Delays in posting audit results for food and beverage companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange increase as the audit period increases. This phenomenon can be attributed to the fact that audit firms with more extended engagement periods tend to develop a sense of emotional closeness with their client companies, thereby potentially endangering auditor independence. Audit completion times may be extended due to increased emotional closeness between the primary audit partner (KAP) and the client organization. This phenomenon can be attributed to the potential impact of KAP on its long-standing clients with whom it has established collaborative relationships. The audit reporting period for food and beverage companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange is not significantly influenced by the presence or absence of an audit view. Audit reporting times in the food and beverage sector for companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange differ slightly based on the quality of the AP. When people or businesses narrow their attention and resources to one area, they are said to “specialize.” The presence of industrial auditors has been shown to have a beneficial influence on the duration of audit report delays. However, it is essential to note that the expertise of industry specialist auditors does not necessarily guarantee speedy delivery of financial reports because auditors who specialize in the industry in conducting audits on new clients still have to understand and comprehend the business and background of their clients, such as by conducting inquiry, analytical procedures, observations, inspections, and also information from other sources such as legal advisors, government statistics, reports from journal analysts, newspapers, and others. Professional industrial auditors can help reduce delays in audit reports for food and beverage subsector companies traded on the Indonesian Stock Exchange. Choosing a Public Accounting Firm (KAP) with industry knowledge will reduce the time needed to audit the company's annual financial reports. Based on the findings of this research, food and beverage subsector industry experts who audit public companies on the Indonesia Stock Exchange do not aim to underestimate the impact of audit opinions on the time required to publish audit reports. These findings indicate that auditors in the food and beverage sector do not ignore the impact of the KAP's reputation on the time lag between completing the audit and issuing reports on companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. The auditor's familiarity with the food and beverage subsector does not have much influence on the impact of changing auditors on audit report latency in companies traded on the Indonesia Stock Exchange.

Based on the facts explained in the previous discussion, the author proposes a series of recommendations.

1. For companies operating in the food and beverage industry. It is vital to encourage potential investors by emphasizing the importance of devoting more attention to financial statements. To increase potential investors' interest in financial reports, especially those related to Audit Tenure, Audit Opinion, KAP Reputation, Auditor Switching, and Auditor Industry Specialization.

2. For Further Researchers. Use other independent variables that affect Audit Report Lag, such as listing age and contingencies. Furthermore, not only use research objects in food and beverage companies, but can also look for other companies on the Indonesian Stock Exchange.

3. For Investors and Other Stakeholders. Analysis of a company's financial and business reports is expected to involve careful consideration of the timeliness of financial report disclosures because this factor directly impacts the reliability of the information presented in the report. Based on the findings of this research, it is recommended that investors give more significant consideration to the relationship between the Principal Audit Partner (KAP) and the company, as well as the caliber of the KAP employed. This will ensure the maintenance of the reliability of the financial reports produced by a company.

References

1. Aini, N., & Yahya, M. R. (2019). Pengaruh Management Change, Financial Distress, Ukuran Perusahaan Klien, Dan Opini Audit Terhadap Auditor Switching. Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Ekonomi Akuntansi (JIMEKA), vol. 4, no. 2, 245-258.

2. Apriyanti, & Rejeki, D. (2021). Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Opini Audit Dan Reputasi Auditor Terhadap Audit Report Lag Pada Kantor Akuntan Publik Wilayah Jakarta Selatan. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Bisnis Krisnadwipayana, vol. 8, no. 2, 146-157.

3. Astuti. (2021). Analisa Laporan Keuangan. Bandung: Penerbit Media Sains Indonesia.

4. Azzuhri, H., Kamaliah, & Rasuli, M. (2019). Pengaruh Audit Tenure, Kompleksitas Operasi Perusahaan, Kualitas Dan Opini Audit Terhadap Audit Report Lag Dengan Spesialisasi Industri Auditor Eksternal Sebagai Variabel Moderasi. Pekbis Jurnal, Vol. 11, No. 2, Juli 2019, 124-136.

5. Dewi, G. A., & Suputra, I. D. (2017). Pengaruh Kompleksitas Operasi, Kontinjensi, Pergantian Auditor Pada Audit Report Lag Dengan Spesialisasi Auditor Sebagai Pemoderasi. E-JurnalAkuntansi Universitas Udayana, vol. 21.2. November (2017), 912-941.

6. Effendi, E., & Dani, U. R. (2021). Pengaruh Audit Tenure, ReputasiAuditor, Ukuran Perusahaan dan Komite Audit. Bandung: Penerbit Adab.

7. Ekaputri, D., & Apriwenni, P. (2021). Audit Report Lag Dan Faktor Yang Memengaruhi. Jurnal Online Insan Akuntan, vol. 6, No.1 Juni 2021, 29-44.

8. Gaol, R. L., & Sitohang, M. (2020). Pengaruh Pergantian Auditor, Ukuran Kantor Akuntan Publik, Solvabilitas Dan Umur Perusahaan Terhadap Audit Report Lag. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi & Keuangan, 6(2), 207-228.

9. Ghozali, I. (2016). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program SPSS. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

10. Hermawan, A., & Yusran, H.L. (2017). Penelitian Bisnis: Pendekatan Kuantitatif. Jakarta: Penerbit Kencana.

11. Ibrahim, A. M. (2016). Pengaruh Profitabilitas, Leverage, Reputasi Kap Dan Opini Audit Terhadap Audit Delay (Studi pada Perusahaan Sektor Infrastruktur, Utilitas dan Transportasi Selama Periode 2012 - 2014). Ultima Accounting, vol 8. No. 1. Juni 2016, 1-21.

12. Junaidi, & Nurdiono. (2016). Kualitas Audit Perspektif Opini Going Concern. Yogyakarta: CV. Audit Offset.

13. Kosasih, M., & Arfianti, R. I. (2020). Kemampuan Spesialisasi Industri Auditor Memoderasi Pengaruh Audit Tenure Dan Kualitas Audit Serta Pengaruh Rasio Keuangan Terhadap Audit Report Lag. Auditing Volume 9 Nomor 1 Februari 2020, 86-106.

14. Lesmana, K., & Kurnia, R. (2016). Analisis Pengaruh Pergantian Manajemen, Opini Audit Tahun Sebelumnya, Financial Distress, Ukuran Kap, Dan Ukuran Perusahaan Klien Terhadap Voluntary Auditor Switching (Studi Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur di BEI Periode 2012-2014). Ultima Accounting. Vol. 8. No. 1. Juni 2016, 37-52.

15. Machmuddah, Z. (2020). Metode Penyusunan Skripsi Bidang Ilmu Akuntansi. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Deepublish.

16. Makhabati, D. N., & Adiwibowo, A. S. (2019). Pengaruh Spesialisasi Industri KAP, Reputasi Auditor, Dan Audit Tenure Terhadap Audit Report Lag. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting. Volume 8, Nomor 2, Tahun 2019, 1-9.

17. Manurung, S. (2021). Auditing. Bandung: Penerbit Media Sains Indonesia.

18. Mayling, P., & Prasetyo, A. B. (2020). Pengaruh Audit Tenure Dan Reputasi Kap Terhadap Audit Report Lag Dengan Spesialisasi Industri Auditor Sebagai Variabel Moderasi (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Industri Jasa yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2016 - 2018). Diponegoro Journal of Accounting. Volume 9 Nomor 2, Tahun 2020, 1-13.

19. Michael, C. J., & Rohman, A. (2017). Pengaruh Audit Tenure Dan Ukuran KAP Terhadap Audit Report Lag Dengan Spesialisasi Industri Auditor Sebagai Variabel Moderasi (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia tahun 2013-2015). Diponegoro Journal of Accounting Volume 6, Nomor 4, Tahun 2017, 1-12.

20. Natonis, S. A., & Tjahjadi, B. (2019). Determinant of Audit Report Lag Among Mining. JurnalOrganisasidan Manajemen. 15 (1)2019, 68-81.

21. Octaviani, S. (2017). Pengaruh Tenure Audit Dan Umur Listing Terhadap Audit Report Lag Dengan Spesialisasi Industri Auditor Sebagai Moderasi (Studi Empiris pada perusahaan LQ 45 yang terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2011-2014). JOM Fekon Vol. 4 No.1 (Februari) 2017, 1945-1959.

22. Parahyta, C., & Herawaty, V. (2020). Pengaruh Financial Distress, Profitabilitas Dan Audit Tenure Terhadap Audit Report Lag Dengan Ukuran Perusahaan Sebagai Variabel Moderasi. KOCENIN Serial Konferensi No. 1 (2020) Webinar Nasional Cendekiawan Ke 6 Tahun 2020, Indonesia, 1-9.

23. Praptika, P. Y., & Rasmini, N. K. (2016). Pengaruh Audit Tenure, Pergantian Auditor Dan Financial Distress Pada Audit Delay Pada Perusahaan Consumer Goods. E-Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana. Vol. 15.3, 2052-2081.

24. Primastiwi, A. (2017). Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Opini Auditor, Dan Reputasi Kap Terhadap Audit Delay. KNiST, 30 Maret 2017, 619-624.

25. Purba, E. (2021). Metode Penelitian Ekonomi. Medan: Penerbit Yayasan Kita Menulis.

26. Putri, A. D., & Rohman, A. (2022). Pengaruh Homogenitas Industri Dan Spesialisasi Industri Auditor Terhadap Audit Report Lag. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting Volume 11, Nomor 4, Tahun 2022, 1-15.

27. Risma, E. P., Achmad, B. (2022). Determinan Audit Report Lagdan Spesialisasi Auditor Sebagai Moderasi Pada Sektor Perdagangan, Jasa, Dan Investasi.Fair Value: Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi Dan Keuangan. Vol. 4, 1351-1374.

28. Rosyidi, M. (2017). Pengaruh Audit Tenure, Tingkat Solvabilitas Terhadap Audit Delaydengan Spesialisasi Auditor Sebagai Variabel Pemoderasi. Jurnal Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta, 1-12.

29. Safriliana, R., & Muawanah, S. (2019). Faktor yang Memengaruhi Auditor Switching di Indonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi Aktual. Volume 6, Nomor 1, Februari 2019, 234-240.

30. Sanjaya, F. B. (2017). Pengaruh Auditor Spesialisasi Industri, Ukuran Kap, Audit Tenure, Kepemilikan Keluarga, Dan Kualitas Laba Terhadap Cost Of Equity. JurnalAkuntansiBisnis. Vol. 15, no. 2, September 2017, 263-285.

31. Sari, N. K., & Sujana, E. (2021). Pengaruh Reputasi Kap, Opini Audit, Profitabilitas, Dan Kompleksitas Operasi Perusahaan Terhadap Audit Delay (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Pertambangan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Pada Tahun 2015-2017). JIMAT(Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Akuntansi) Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha. Vol. 12, no. 02, 557-568.

32. Sari, T. P., & Novasari, L. (2019). Pengaruh Auditor Spesialisasi Industri Dan Redflags Terhadap Kualitas Laba Pada Perusahaan Publik Di Bidang Keuangan. Majalah Ilmiah Solusi. Vol. 17, no. 1 Januari 2019, 147-168.

33. Sastrawan, R., Perdhana, A. I., & Toliang, E. (2022). Spesialisasi Auditor Memoderasi Kualitas Kantor Akuntan Publik, Opini Audit, Pergantian Auditor Terhadap Audit Report Lag. E-JurnalAkuntansi, 32(1), 265-279.

34. Shinta, W., & Budiartha, N. M. (2016). Pengaruh Umur Perusahaan, Ukuran Perusahaan, Reputasi Auditor, Dan Pergantian Auditor Terhadap Audit Report Lag.. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 15(1), 200-228.

35. Sihombing, T. (2021). Pengaruh Audit Opinion, Audit Tenure, Dan Profitabilitas Terhadap Audit Delay Dengan Reputasi Kantor Akuntan Publik(KAP) Sebagai Variabel Moderasi. Jurakunman. Vol. 14, no. 1, Januari 2021, 26-43.

36. Siregar, Y., & Elissabeth, D. M. (2018). Pengaruh Audit Tenure, Reputasi Auditor, Spesialisasi Audit, Dan Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Kualitas Audit Pada Perusahaan Perbankan Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI). Jurnal Ilmiah Simantek. Vol. 2, no. 3, 1-13.

37. Soraya, E., & Haridhi, M. (2017). Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhivoluntary Auditor Switching (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Non Financing yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia tahun 2011-2015). Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Ekonomi Akuntansi (JIMEKA). Vol. 2, no. 1, 48-62.

38. Susandya, A. A., & Suryandari, N. N. (2021). Dinamika Karakteristik Komite Audit Pada Audit Report Lag. Media Riset Akuntansi, Auditing & Informasi. Vol. 21 No. 2 September 2021, 175-190.

39. Syafina, L. (2019). Metode Penelitian Akuntansi. Medan: Penerbit FEBI UIN-SU Press.

40. Syofyan, E. (2022). Pengaruh Rotasi Audit, Tenura Audit, dan Spesialisasi Auditor terhadap Kualitas Audit. Malang: Penerbit Unisma Press.

41. Verawati, N. M. (2016). Pengaruh Pergantian Auditor, Reputasi Kap, Opini Audit Dan Komite Audit Pada Audit Delay. E-Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana. Vol. 17.2. November (2016), 1083-1111.

42. Zarefar, A., Imelda, S., Adri, S. S., &. Pengaruh Opini Audit, Pergantian Auditor, Kesulitan Keuangan, dan Efektivitas Komite Audit Terhadap Audit Delay. Jurnal Akuntansi Keuangan dan Bisnis. Vol. 12, no. 2, November (2019), 135-144.

Размещено на Allbest.ru