Auditor's Public Interest Responsibilities and Audit Quality

Running head: AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
Auditor’s Public Interest Responsibilities and Audit Quality
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author’s Note:
Course ID:

1AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
Executive Summary:
The primary objective of the paper is to analyse the effect of material misstatements in the
financial reports of an ASX listed organisation. For this reason, BHP Billiton is taken into
consideration, which is one of the leading firms operating in the Australian mining sector. It has
been analysed that the auditors have obtained significant lessons from the downfall of Enron. If
the auditors are not able to identify, disclose and adjust material misstatements, the effect
would be significant on the key stakeholders of the audit clients. This has mandated the need to
enhance the overall auditing and accounting standards. Moreover, the top four audit firms are
required to undertake initiatives so that the audit quality could be enhanced further. This
would aid in restricting the happening of future collapses like Enron. Finally, the auditors are
required to be maintained to the necessary auditing principles and guidelines.

2AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
Table of Contents
Introduction:....................................................................................................................................3
1. Stakeholder analysis of BHP Billiton:...........................................................................................3
2. Independence and whistleblowing in relation to auditors:........................................................5
3. Lessons for the auditors from Enron scandal and behaviour of Arthur Andersen:....................7
4. Audit quality and steps to be taken by the auditors:................................................................10
Conclusion:....................................................................................................................................13
References:....................................................................................................................................15

3AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
Introduction:
Auditing is the method of examining and analysing the financial information of the
organisations in order to ascertain their accuracy and compliance with the prevailing guidelines
and norms (Asare, Wright and Zimbelman 2015). The external auditors have the responsibility
of providing their opinion that whether the financial reports contain material misstatements or
not after conducting substantive audit procedures. The primary objective of the paper is to
analyse the effect of material misstatements in the financial reports of an ASX listed
organisation. For this reason, BHP Billiton is taken into consideration, which is one of the
leading firms operating in the Australian mining sector (BHP 2019). The next aspect covered is
the consideration of public interest responsibilities in accordance with APES 110 while taking
into account whistleblowing and auditor’s independence. The next section would emphasise on
the lessons to be learnt by the auditors from the downfall of Enron. Finally, the report would
shed light on discussing the requirements of the auditors for improving audit quality.
1. Stakeholder analysis of BHP Billiton:
If the auditors are not able to identify, disclose and adjust material misstatements, the
effect would be significant on the key stakeholders of the audit clients. The below-stated
discussion would represent the effect of material misstatements on the stakeholders of Rio
Tinto:
Shareholders:

4AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
The shareholders form a key stakeholder group of Rio Tinto and the organisation is
intended to assure increased returns to its shareholders. For maintaining the same, the
organisation manages its investment activities with sound management of the balance sheet
statement of the organisation and the return on shareholders (Bhp.com 2019). Thus, the
shareholders of BHP Billiton take into account the disclosed financial information in the balance
sheet statement in relation to liabilities, assets and equity of the organisation for undertaking
investment decisions. If the material misstatements are not identified properly and no
disclosures or adjustments are made, the shareholders of BHP Billiton might have misleading
information about the financial position of the organisation. This could end up in undertaking
incorrect investment decision and as a result, the shareholders might not receive the expected
return on investment (Bédard and Courteau 2015).
Suppliers:
One of the key stakeholder groups in BHP Billiton includes the suppliers. BHP Billiton
uses the local suppliers along with providing support to them to improve community
development opportunities. In this context, it is noteworthy to mention that the suppliers of
the organisation assess the financial statements in order to identify its liquidity position. This is
because the credit decision relies heavily on the ability of the organisation in repaying its
existing business obligations (Bozkurt 2014). Thus, if the auditors are not able to identify,
disclose and adjust material misstatements in the financial reports of BHP Billiton, the liquidity
position shown might not be accurate, which results in the risk of inaccurate judgement of the
suppliers (DeZoort and Harrison 2018).

5AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
Employees:
The employees form a key part of the stakeholder group of BHP Billiton. It would not be
possible for the organisation to continue in the form of a going concern, if material
misstatements are identified in the financial reports. This is because it could hamper the career
development of the staffs working in the organisation (Griffin 2014).
2. Independence and whistleblowing in relation to auditors:
The auditor independence and whistleblowing are two significant aspects in the
profession of audit, which are summarised briefly as follows:
Independence of the auditors:
Based on the above discussion, it could be stated that the auditors have the
accountability of testing the fact regarding the presence of material misstatements in the
financial statements so that accurate audit opinion could be provided (Guiral et al. 2015). In this
method, one of the significant aspects is auditor independence to conduct the audit processes
while maintaining the needed objectivity. Owing to this reason, it is necessary for the auditors
to remain independent of their audit clients, as it would assist in avoiding conflict of interest
and effect on the audit opinion (Asic.gov.au 2019). In accordance with the norms of audit
independence, the auditors are expected to provide unbiased and accurate audit opinion after
analysing the financial statements of the organisations.
Whistleblowing:

6AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
There is internal relationship between auditor’s independence and whistleblowing,
since whistleblowing could be described as the method when the external or internal staffs of a
specific organisation involves in the reporting process as to whether any illicit or unscrupulous
business practices are adopted by the organisation. In case of external and internal regulatory
bodies, whisteblowing process is deemed to be extremely significant. Thus, the method of
exposing the illicit business functions could be defines as the whistleblowing method (Kassem
and Higson 2016).
Concepts of independence and whistleblowing in relation to APES 110:
With the help of APES 110, the accounting experts could have a sound knowledge of the
needed ethical principles in their profession. In accordance with “Section 210.11.1 of APES
110”, it is necessary for the audit clients to provide consent to the current auditors in gathering
information from the previous auditors (Apesb.org.au 2019). If the clients do not provide such
consent, the auditors have the chance of rejecting the audit nomination. The current auditors
are required to provide in writing the needed information at the time the audit clients provide
the consent due to the fact that the decision of nomination would rest on the same. The
primary reason that this regulation has been introduced is to ensure the needed safety to the
whistleblowers along with providing the needed freedom of speech to the internal as well as
external staffs and this is deemed to be another significant objective of APES 110. Moreover,
“Section 100.1 of APES 110” states that if the whistleblowers want to complain regarding the
illicit activities in their organisation, they need to assure the presence of needed and adequate

7AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
evidences for presenting the same to the regulatory authority (Klassen, Lisowsky and Mescall
2015).
3. Lessons for the auditors from Enron scandal and behaviour of Arthur Andersen:
For the auditors, the collapse of Enron has provided a number of lessons to be learnt
and particularly from the behaviour of Arthur Andersen. The lessons that the auditors need to
learn from the scandal are elucidated briefly as follows:
Manipulation of the books of accounts:
From the provided information of the Enron collapse, it could be observed that Arthur
Andersen was employed as the auditor so that the management of the organisation could meet
their personal interest by uncooking the books of accounts of the organisation (Libby,
Rennekamp and Seybert 2015). It is possible to keep this practice under control by involving the
government agencies for choosing the auditors rather than the business organisations. Along
with this, the downfall of Enron denotes the need of stringent auditing regulations with the
objective of imposing a ban on the auditors in delivering consulting as well as non-assurance
services to the audit clients (Litjens, Van Buuren and Vergoossen 2015).
Enhanced auditing standards:
In case of the Enron scandal, significant issues could be observed in accounting
standards as well as auditing standards, which have been accountable mainly for the collapse of
the organisation. Such aspect denotes the need for the introduction of enhanced standards and
regulations in the profession of accounting and auditing so that such issues do not take place in

8AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
future. The effective technique is to maintain adherence to the accounting standards and
guidelines that are accepted globally (Maroun and Atkins 2014).
Initiation of incentives for enhancement of audit quality:
The collapse of Enron has proved that the entire audit profession needs suitable
incentives, as the same would assist in improving the overall audit quality rather than fines. The
reason attributing this is the commitment of the profession towards professionalism and
integrity (Maroun 2017). Therefore, the utilisation of audit oversight would be crucial for
detecting the strengths and loopholes in the audit procedures.
Requirement of independent oversight:
From the collapse of Enron, it could be identified that the auditors of the organisation
had lack of independent oversight and thus, it mandates the need for independent oversight in
enhancing the overall audit procedures. In addition, the knowledge of the auditors requires
investigation, since it assures the ability of the auditors in applying knowledge in the audit
procedures (Sarwoko and Agoes 2014). Besides, the downfall of Enron denotes the necessity of
the introduction of inspection program in order to investigate the assumptions and judgements
of the auditors. This requires to be carried out, since the audit programs rely on the utilisation
of such judgements and assumptions.
Sound relationship between the auditors and the audit committee:
Another crucial lesson that could be learnt from the decline of Enron is that the auditors
could not apply independent vigilance over the audit procedures, if the audit clients are not

9AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
obliged to maintain accurate and fair disclosures. Hence, sound relationship needs to be
maintained between the audit committee and the auditors, since it would make the audit
program a success. Moreover, the audit clients have to enforce different forums for enhancing
the work of the internal audit committee. For the external auditors, the conduction of periodic
interviews would prove to be fruitful for the business organisations (Simnett and Huggins 2014).
Tight internal control:
From the collapse of Enron, it is evident that tight internal control would play a crucial
role in improving overall audit quality. This denotes that the auditors and the management of
the organisations are required to disclose their effectiveness of internal control in the process
of financial reporting and internal control. Hence, there is the need of initiating new audit
standards so that the added responsibility of the auditors could be included (Siriwardane, Kin
Hoi Hu and Low 2014).
Global profession:
From the collapse of Enron, it is evident that auditing is considered in the form of a
global profession. Due to this reason, the audit organisations are needed to comply with the
international regulations (Sirois, Bédard and Bera 2018).
Behaviour of Arthur Andersen:
Arthur Andersen was deemed to be the second oldest audit organisation at the time it
was the audit partner of Enron. In accordance with the audit responsibilities in Enron, Arthur
Andersen had ensured the accuracy and honesty of the financial statements by looking for

10AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
material misstatements. The stakeholders of the organisation had believed in the audit report
of Arthur Andersen, as they were of the belief that the financial statements are accurate and
fair (Tobi, Osasrere and Emmanuel 2016). It has been disclosed that Arthur Andersen had
business association with Enron and due to this reason; some of the officials of Arthur Andersen
were working in Enron. This denotes that Arthur Andersen had personal interest in Enron and
therefore, the auditors did not take into account the material impact in the financial statements
of the organisation. Along with this, the auditors working with Arthur Andersen had been
responsible for eradicating a number of significant auditing documents of Enron before the
federal agency investigation was appointed for verifying the financial information of the
organisation. This means that the organisation has not adhered to the pertinent auditing
guidelines and thus, they could be held accountable for the collapse of Enron. Therefore, it
could be learnt that the auditing regulations have not been complied with by Arthur Andersen,
which had eventually led to its decline (Yan and Xie 2016).
4. Audit quality and steps to be taken by the auditors:
There is no clear definition of audit quality from the global perspective. However, an
audit program is carried out qualitatively at the time the auditors have complete compliance
with the required auditing standards and guidelines of audit independence when delivering
audit services. There are certain aspects that need to be assured at the time of maintaining the
desired quality of audit. These aspects mainly cover experience and knowledge of the auditors
and their experience and skills (Zager, Malis and Novak 2016). From the statement of Greg
Medcraft, it is evident that Australia might experience similar situations like Enron, if the

11AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
auditors do not bear the accountability of maintaining audit quality that the financial reports of
the organisations are free from material misstatements. This aspect could be accomplished
effectively when the top four Australian audit firms including Deloitte, KPMG, PwC and Ernst
and Young devise out crucial strategies for improving the overall quality pertaining to audit
procedures.
For avoiding situations like Enron, the auditors in the big four audit firms need to carry
out effective auditing of the financial reports of the organisations listed in ASX. In order to
obtain the required evidence that the financial reports of the organisations do not contain
material misstatements, it is necessary for the auditors to adhere to the auditing principles and
standards. As per “Section 2 of APES 110”, the auditors are required to assure fair and accurate
view of the financial statements of the organisations. By using these statements, Greg Medcraft
has laid stress on the situation that the inability of Arthur Andersen in carrying out audit work
had been one of the significant causes behind the collapse of Enron. By taking into
consideration such aspect, audit quality needs to be maintained adequately by carrying out the
same in an accurate and fair way so that the stakeholders could be provided with valuable
financial information (Kassem and Higson 2016).
From the provided article, it has been identified that ASIC has collect key audit samples
of the audit tasks of the top four global audit firms for 18 months up to December 2016. It is
found that the firms have failed to provide the desired assurance that the financial reports are
free from material misstatements in 23% of the cases. This clearly denotes the fact that
professional scepticism is missing among the auditors, which pose serious threats to the

12AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
auditing profession. In addition, fraud has been another auditing issue due to which collapse of
the organisations could be witnessed. Furthermore, the favourable brand image of Arthur
Andersen was affected owing to this specific aspect, since Enron obtained significant help from
the auditors in carrying out the accounting frauds (Bédard and Courteau 2015).
As per the statement of Greg Medcraft, 7,000 surveillance operations are conducted
from the end of ASIC and other numerous examinations over six years. Due to this, 80 people
have been imprisoned, 60 individuals have been banned and the investors have been returned
$1.3 billion (ABC News 2017). The government of Australia as well as the regulatory authority
have decided to enforce financial charges against the accused individuals and civil charges are
imposed on them as well. As a result, it leads to rise in audit independence risk. Due to this
reason, effective audit quality needs to be maintained so that the risks related to audit
independence could be minimised below the danger level.
According to “Section 290.155 of APES 110”, when the organisations have lack of skilled,
knowledgeable and experienced experts, rotating the audit partner could not contribute
towards minimising the risk related to audit independence (Apesb.org.au 2019). However, on a
number of circumstances, the audit authority has imposed restriction on audit partner rotation
and thus, it has been possible for the audit partners to carry out in the form of a key audit
partner for above seven years. However, the requirement is to take into account the safeguards
in such scenarios. In accordance with “Section 100.1 of APES 110”, for carrying out the audit
processes of the audit clients, the auditors are required to act in the best interests of the public.
Moreover, “Section 110 of APES 110” states that the auditors are required to utilise the needed

13AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
safeguards so that the audit threats could be minimised adequately. Hence, the auditors are
required to adhere to the primary consideration of the violation of ethical norms and code of
conduct.
From the provided article, it has been identified that Greg Medcraft has focused on the
ability of the auditors in avoiding situations like the collapse of Enron in Australia. For this, they
have to adhere to the guidelines and standards related to due care and professional
competence. As per these standards, the auditors are needed to have the required skills,
experience and knowledge, since these components are deemed to be necessary so that the
audit quality could be maintained. Moreover, as per “Section 110 of APES 110”, the auditors
need to maintain the aspect of confidentiality of business information of the audit clients
before obtaining consent from the audit clients. Therefore, based on the above discussion, the
Australian auditors need to emphasise on enhancing audit quality at the time of auditing the
books of accounts of big organisations. For this, they are required to comply with the required
auditing standards and it is crucial for the auditors to take the statement of Greg Medcraft
seriously for avoiding future corporate collapses like Enron.
Conclusion:
Based on the above discussion, it could be stated that the auditors are entrusted with
the responsibility of maintaining the independence of the auditors from the audit clients in
order to maintain the principles of objectivity and integrity. In accordance with the evaluation,
the auditors are required to assure effective identification, revelations and adjustments of
material misstatements in the financial reports. This is because the presence of this aspect

14AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
would affect the decision-making process of the major stakeholders of the business
organisations. In addition, it has been observed that the audit independence and
whistleblowing process are associated with each other owing to the fact that whistleblowing
results in identifying the illicit business activities within the firms.
It has been analysed further that the auditors have obtained significant lessons from the
downfall of Enron. If the auditors are not able to identify, disclose and adjust material
misstatements, the effect would be significant on the key stakeholders of the audit clients. This
has mandated the need to enhance the overall auditing and accounting standards. Moreover,
the top four audit firms are required to undertake initiatives so that the audit quality could be
enhanced further. This would aid in restricting the happening of future collapses like Enron.
Finally, the auditors are required to be maintained to the necessary auditing principles and
guidelines.

15AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
References:
ABC News., 2017. Poor auditing could be 'canary in the coal mine' for financial crisis: ASIC.
[online] Available at: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-03/asic-boss-concerned-over-
poor-auditing/9114490 [Accessed 22 Jan. 2019].
Apesb.org.au., 2019. [online] Available at:
https://www.apesb.org.au/uploads/standards/apesb_standards/standard1.pdf [Accessed 22
Jan. 2019].
Asare, S.K., Wright, A. and Zimbelman, M.F., 2015. Challenges facing auditors in detecting
financial statement fraud: Insights from fraud investigations. Journal of Forensic & Investigative
Accounting, 7(2), pp.63-112.
Asic.gov.au., 2019. ASIC Home | ASIC - Australian Securities and Investments Commission .
[online] Available at: https://asic.gov.au/ [Accessed 22 Jan. 2019].
Bédard, J. and Courteau, L., 2015. Benefits and costs of auditor's assurance: Evidence from the
review of quarterly financial statements. Contemporary Accounting Research, 32(1), pp.308-
335.
BHP., 2019. BHP | A leading global resources company. [online] Available at:
https://www.bhp.com/ [Accessed 22 Jan. 2019].

16AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
Bhp.com., 2019. [online] Available at:
https://www.bhp.com/-/media/documents/investors/annual-reports/2018/
bhpannualreport2018.pdf [Accessed 22 Jan. 2019].
Bozkurt, O., 2014. The Effect of Internal Audit Procedures and Auditors’ Responsibilities on the
Independent Audit Decision. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 5(1), pp.26-33.
DeZoort, F.T. and Harrison, P.D., 2018. Understanding auditors’ sense of responsibility for
detecting fraud within organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(4), pp.857-874.
Griffin, J.B., 2014. The effects of uncertainty and disclosure on auditors' fair value materiality
decisions. Journal of Accounting Research, 52(5), pp.1165-1193.
Guiral, A., Rodgers, W., Ruiz, E. and Gonzalo-Angulo, J.A., 2015. Can expertise mitigate auditors’
unintentional biases?. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 24, pp.105-
117.
Kassem, R. and Higson, A.W., 2016. External auditors and corporate corruption: Implications for
external audit regulators. Current Issues in Auditing, 10(1), pp.1-10.
Klassen, K.J., Lisowsky, P. and Mescall, D., 2015. The role of auditors, non-auditors, and internal
tax departments in corporate tax aggressiveness. The Accounting Review, 91(1), pp.179-205.
Libby, R., Rennekamp, K.M. and Seybert, N., 2015. Regulation and the interdependent roles of
managers, auditors, and directors in earnings management and accounting choice. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 47, pp.25-42.

17AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
Litjens, R., Van Buuren, J. and Vergoossen, R., 2015. Addressing Information Needs to Reduce
the Audit Expectation Gap: Evidence from Dutch Bankers, Audited Companies and
Auditors. International Journal of Auditing, 19(3), pp.267-281.
Maroun, W. and Atkins, J., 2014. Whistle-blowing by external auditors in South Africa:
Enclosure, efficient bodies and disciplinary power. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability
Journal, 27(5), pp.834-862.
Maroun, W., 2017. Assuring the integrated report: Insights and recommendations from auditors
and preparers. The British Accounting Review, 49(3), pp.329-346.
Sarwoko, I. and Agoes, S., 2014. An empirical analysis of auditor's industry specialization,
auditor's independence and audit procedures on audit quality: evidence from
indonesia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 164, pp.271-281.
Simnett, R. and Huggins, A., 2014. Enhancing the auditor's report: to what extent is there
support for the IAASB's proposed changes?. Accounting Horizons, 28(4), pp.719-747.
Siriwardane, H.P., Kin Hoi Hu, B. and Low, K.Y., 2014. Skills, Knowledge, and Attitudes Important
for Present Day Auditors.‐ International journal of auditing, 18(3), pp.193-205.
Sirois, L.P., Bédard, J. and Bera, P., 2018. The informational value of key audit matters in the
auditor's report: evidence from an Eye-tracking study. Accounting Horizons.
Tobi, B.A., Osasrere, A.O. and Emmanuel, U., 2016. Auditor’s Independence and Audit Quality:
A Study of Selected Deposit Money Banks in Nigeria. International Journal of Finance and
Accounting, 5(1), pp.13-21.

18AUDITOR’S PUBLIC INTEREST RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDIT QUALITY
Yan, H. and Xie, S., 2016. How does auditors’ work stress affect audit quality? Empirical
evidence from the Chinese stock market. China Journal of Accounting Research, 9(4), pp.305-
319.
Zager, L., Malis, S.S. and Novak, A., 2016. The Role and Responsibility of Auditors in Prevention
and Detection of Fraudulent Financial Reporting. Procedia Economics And Finance, 39, pp.693-
700.