财务危机预警文献,仅供学习研究
(e.g., Hopwood, McKeown and Mutchler 1989, Sun 2007) find auditors’ opinions are valuable bankruptcy predictors, while others (e.g., Altman and McGough 1974, Koh and Killough 1990) do not. Inconsistency among studies could be due to differences in statistical modeling techniques or sample data used. This calls for additional evidence based upon more advanced statistical techniques and different sources of data, such as non-U.S. data. One part of this study examines the usefulness of auditors’ opinions in predicting bankruptcy, based upon discrete-time hazard models and data from Taiwan. Specifically, five types of modified auditors’ opinions are studied: “going concern”, “consistency”, “contingency” (uncertainty), “long-term investment audited by other auditors” (“other auditor”), and “realized investment income based on non-audited financial statements” (“no auditor”). “Going concern”, “consistency”, “contingency” modified opinions have been studied in prior literature (e.g., Hopwood et al. (1989), Hopwood, McKeown and Mutchler (1994), Sun, Ettredge and Srivatava (2003), Sun (2007)). However, “other auditor” and “no auditor” are novel features investigated in this study. Investment incomes are critical item in income statement in emerging markets, such as Taiwan. In developing countries, the corporate governance and investor protection systems are not as well established as in developed countries. Companies in such less developed economy often invest in their related parties whose financial statements are usually not audited
