Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business The Indonesian Journal of Accounting Research
Suyanto Suyanto
Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Gadjah Mada
Economics, Econometrics & Finance

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Fraudulent Financial Statement: Evidence from Statement on Auditing Standard No. 99 Suyanto Suyanto
Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business Vol 11, No 1 (2009): January - April
Publisher : Master in Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Gadjah Mada

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (89.022 KB) | DOI: 10.22146/gamaijb.5539

Abstract

The goals of this study are to empirically identify fraud risk factors and construct a model to predict the likelihood of financial statement frauds based on SAS No. 99. Employing logistic regression on 143 firms, this research  finds that fraud risk factor proxies for Pressure—net profit/total assets—and Opportunity— inventory/total assets ratio, related party transactions, and Big 4—are significantly associated with fraudulent financial statements, whereas none of the fraud risk factor proxies for Rationalization is significantly associated with fraudulent financial statements. Consistent with prior research, it seems that the likelihood of fraudulent financial statements is easier to be observed publicly using fraud risk factor proxies for Pressure and Opportunity rather than Rationalization. The constructed model can correctly classify firms with a relatively high success rate.
The disappearance of Auditors’ Responsibility for Fraud Detection in Auditing Standards Suyanto Suyanto
The Indonesian Journal of Accounting Research Vol 19, No 2 (2016): IJAR May 2016
Publisher : The Indonesian Journal of Accounting Research

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (1102.826 KB) | DOI: 10.33312/ijar.407

Abstract

Abstract: This paper aims to comprehend the auditor’s responsibility in connection with discovering fraud and discuss the framework adopted in auditing standards. The responsibility for detecting fraud is arguably the most significant issue causing the expectation gap. Although auditors had direct responsibility for fraud detection in earlier periods of the auditing profession, this responsibility disappeared later on audit standards. The disappearance may result from an increase of institutional complexity faced by auditors, and thus standard setters may be finally on the favor of the auditors, compared to wider public interests. Standard setters attempt to help auditors by providing a model of fraud risk identification and assessment to assist with fraud detection in auditing standards. However, numerous empirical studies also find that the model does not help auditors in practice. Notwithstanding the expectation gap, a series of accounting scandals and fraud is a test for the effectiveness of the model. Otherwise, it may need to set back a greater auditors’ responsibility for detecting fraud, which is somehow impossible.Abstrak : Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk memahami tanggung jawab auditor sehubungan dengan menemukan kecurangan dan mendiskusikan kerangka yang diadopsi dalam standar audit. Tanggung jawab untuk mendeteksi penipuan bisa dibilang masalah paling signifikan yang menyebabkan kesenjangan harapan. Meskipun auditor memiliki tanggung jawab langsung untuk mendeteksi penipuan pada periode awal profesi audit, tanggung jawab ini kemudian hilang pada standar audit. Hilangnya dapat terjadi akibat peningkatan kompleksitas kelembagaan yang dihadapi oleh auditor, dan dengan demikian penentu standar pada akhirnya dapat menguntungkan auditor, dibandingkan dengan kepentingan publik yang lebih luas. Penyusun standar berusaha membantu auditor dengan menyediakan model identifikasi dan penilaian risiko penipuan untuk membantu mendeteksi penipuan dalam standar audit. Namun, banyak studi empiris juga menemukan bahwa model tersebut tidak membantu auditor dalam praktiknya. Meskipun kesenjangan harapan, serangkaian skandal akuntansi dan kecurangan adalah ujian untuk keefektifan model. Jika tidak, mungkin perlu menetapkan tanggung jawab auditor yang lebih besar untuk mendeteksi penipuan, yang entah bagaimana tidak mungkin. 
Co-Authors