我国会计师事务所分级分类监管研究

发布时间：2018-05-29 03:37

本文选题：会计师事务所 + 因子分析法　；参考：《福州大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：本文从监管者的角度出发对传统的监管制度进行了创新,在评价会计师事务所综合质量的基础上,划分不同类别并开展分类综合监管。会计师事务所分类监管是指监管者对事务所的整体质量开展综合评价分类,并根据评价结果的不同来实施差别化的监管措施,对于内控措施完善、执业质量良好的事务所,可以提供宽松的监管环境和有利的政策支持,而对内控措施缺失和执业质量低下的事务所,可以实施更为严厉的监管措施促使事务所完善内部治理,化解执业风险。这一方面有利于缓解快速发展的CPA行业和有限的监管资源之间的矛盾,使监管者突出监管重点、合理分配监管资源、提高监管效率；另一方面有利于扶优限劣机制作用的发挥,使合格事务所得到更多的政策支持和市场资源并发展壮大。对事务所的整体质量进行综合评价并划分类别是开展分类监管的基础。我国目前仅由中注协每年按照《会计师事务所综合评价办法》对事务所进行综合评价并公布前百家事务所信息。前百家事务所排名的客观性、公正性和权威性获得社会大众、监管部门、审计市场普遍认可的同时,也存在指标体系中事务所分类的依据和标准不明确、业务收入指标权重过大、综合评价的指标体系有待进一步完善等不足。因此,分类监管的前提是要对中注协会计师事务所综合评价方法进行改进和完善,并划分类别。同时,本文使用因子分析法对前百家会计师事务所2013年度业务收入指标(事务所本身业务收入指标、与事务所统一经营的其他执业机构业务收入指标)、注册会计师人数指标、综合评价其他指标、处罚和惩戒指标等四个层面5项指标进行综合评价并重新排序,以克服中注协会计师事务所综合评价办法中的不足之处。分类监管的最终目标是建立起科学完善、规范有效的分类监管制度体系,即在对事务所的整体质量进行科学全面的综合评价和分类评级的基础上,对不同评价结果的事务所确立宽严相济的监管模式。本文进一步从日常监管和政策支持两个维度对不同类别事务所如何实施差异化的监管方式进行了回答。分类监管总的指导思想是：对合格事务所应立足于事务所自我约束,采取宽松的监管环境和优惠的行业政策给予扶持,对不合格事务所应立足于外部管制,积极推进事务所内生自我约束机制的完善,及时防范和化解执业风险。
[Abstract]:This paper innovates the traditional supervision system from the perspective of the supervisor. On the basis of evaluating the comprehensive quality of the accounting firm, it divides different categories and carries out the classified comprehensive supervision. The classified supervision of accounting firms refers to the comprehensive evaluation and classification of the overall quality of the firms by the regulators, and the implementation of differential supervision measures according to the different evaluation results. For firms with perfect internal control measures and good practice quality, It can provide a loose regulatory environment and favorable policy support, while for firms lacking internal control measures and low quality of practice, more stringent regulatory measures can be implemented to encourage firms to improve internal governance and resolve the practice risks. On the one hand, it is helpful to alleviate the contradiction between the rapidly developing CPA industry and the limited regulatory resources, so that the regulators can give prominence to the supervision focus, allocate the supervision resources rationally, and improve the supervision efficiency; on the other hand, it is advantageous to give full play to the role of the mechanism of helping the superior and restricting the bad. To enable qualified firms to receive more policy support and market resources and grow stronger. Comprehensive evaluation and classification of the overall quality of the firm is the basis for carrying out classified supervision. At present, China only makes a comprehensive evaluation of the accounting firms according to the Comprehensive Evaluation methods of Accounting firms and publishes the information of the top 100 firms. While the objectivity, impartiality and authority of the top 100 firms are generally recognized by the public, the regulatory authorities and the audit market, there is also a lack of clarity on the basis and criteria of the classification of firms in the index system. The business income index weight is too large, the comprehensive evaluation index system needs to be further improved and so on. Therefore, the premise of classified supervision is to improve and perfect the comprehensive evaluation method of CPA firms and classify it. At the same time, this paper uses factor analysis method to analyze the business income index of the top 100 accounting firms in 2013 (the business income index of the firm itself, the business income index of other practicing institutions operating uniformly with the firm, and the number of certified public accountants). Comprehensive evaluation of other indicators, punishment and punishment indicators of the four levels of five indicators for comprehensive evaluation and reorder, in order to overcome the deficiencies in the comprehensive evaluation method of accounting firms. The ultimate goal of classified supervision is to establish a scientific and perfect, standardized and effective classification supervision system, that is, on the basis of comprehensive evaluation and classification of the overall quality of the firm, Establish a regulatory model of leniency and severity for firms with different evaluation results. This paper further answers how different types of firms implement differentiated supervision from the perspectives of daily supervision and policy support. The general guiding ideology of classified supervision is: the qualified firms should be based on the firm self-restraint, adopt a loose regulatory environment and preferential industry policies to support, and non-qualified firms should be based on external control, Actively promote the improvement of internal self-restraint mechanism, and timely prevent and resolve the practice risks.
【学位授予单位】：福州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：F233

【相似文献】