Main Article Content
Research aim: This study investigated the level of Key Audit Matters (KAM) reporting in the annual reports of companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) from 2016 to 2018, and examined the factors influencing KAM reporting.
Design/ Methodology/ Approach: Using annual reports from 2016 to 2018, 450 annual reports of 150 companies from the SET were sampled. Content analysis by word count and checklist was used to quantify the KAM reporting, while descriptive analysis, independent sample t-test, and multiple regression were used to analyse the data.
Research finding: The KAM reporting was 756.686 average words within 1.958 issues in corporate annual reports during the study period. There were significantly different levels of KAM reporting between SET100 and Non-SET100 companies as well as between audit rotation and non-audit rotation. Moreover, there was a significant positive influence of firm size and complexity on the level of KAM reporting, while profitability had a negative influence on the level of KAM reporting.
Theoretical contribution/ Originality: As the first longitudinal study of KAM reporting in Thailand, the study sheds light on the factors influencing mandatory KAM reporting.
Practitioner/ Policy implication: Investors can approach decision-making from the corporate characteristics affecting KAM reporting.
Limitation/ Implication: External audit characters are not included when considering the influence on KAM reporting.
Type of article: Research paper
Keywords: KAM reporting, Annual reports, Thailand Stock Exchange
JEL Classification: M40, M42
The Asian Journal of Accounting Perspectives (AJAP) articles are published under a licence equivalent to the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (CC BY-NC-ND). The licence allows users to copy, distribute, and transmit an article as long as the author is attributed. The article is not used for commercial purposes. The work is not modified or adapted in any way.
Authors are required to sign the Exclusive License to Publish agreement upon publication in the AJAP. The agreement grants the Publisher (Faculty of Business and Accountancy, Universiti Malaya) to publish and disseminate the articles.
Articles published in the AJAP are digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Article Processing Charge
Articles publish in AJAP is free submission, production and publication charges. However, all accepted articles are required for language editing. The AJAP officially appointed and outsourced proofreader will conduct this process, and the authors will cover the cost. AJAP does not profit from this process and transaction.
Boonlert-U-Thai, K., Srijunpetch, S., & Phakdee, A. (2019). Key audit matters: what they tell. Journal of Accounting Profession, 15(45), 5-25. https://doi.nrct.go.th//ListDoi/listDetail?Resolve_DOI=10.14456/jap.2019.1
Boonyanet, W., & Promsen, W. (2018). Key Audit Matters: Just Little Informative Value to Investors in Emerging Markets? Chulalongkorn Business Review, 41(2), 153–183. https://doi.nrct.go.th//ListDoi/listDetail?Resolve_DOI=10.14456/cbsr.2019.6
Branco, M.C., & Rodrigues, L.L. (2008). Factors influencing social responsibility disclosure by Portuguese companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 685-701. https://doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9658-z
Brown, H.S., DeJong, M., & Levy, D.L. (2009). Building institutions based on information disclosure: lessons from GRI’s sustainable reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(3), 571-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.12.009
Bushman, R., Chen, Q., Engel, E., & Smith, A. (2004). Financial accounting information, organizational complexity and corporate governance systems. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 37(2), 167-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2003.09.005
Cowen, S.S., Ferreri, L.B., & Parker, L.D. (1987). The impact of corporate characteristics on social responsibility disclosure: a typology and frequency-based analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(2), 111-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(87)90001-8
Choi, J.S. (1999). An investigation of the initial voluntary environmental disclosures made in Korean semi-annual financial reports. Pacific Accounting Review, 11(3), 73-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(12)00059-7
De Villiers, C., & Van Staden, C.J. (2006). Can less environmental disclosure have a legitimizing effect? Evidence from Africa. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(8), 763-781. https://doi: 10.1016/j.aos.2006.03.001
Deegan, C. (2002). Introduction: the legitimacy effect of social and environmental disclosures: a theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.03.001
Federation of Accounting Profession (FAP) of Thailand. (2016). Auditor’s view on key audit matter. Retrieved from http://www.tfac.or.th/
Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: a review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47-77. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579510146996
Gunno, P., & Penawuthikul. P. (2018). Factors affecting disclosure quality on key audit matters in auditor’s report in Thailand. Journal of MCU Nakhondhat, 5(3), 926-942. https://www.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JMND/article/view/141713/119111
International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2011). Enhancing the value of auditor reporting: exploring options for change (Consultation Paper). Retrieved from https://www.ifac.org/
Ishak, Z., & Abidin, S. (2018). The Impact of Enhanced Communication Requirement and other Determinants on Audit Fees. Knowledge Management International Conference (KMICe) Malaysia, 223-228. http://repo.uum.edu.my/id/eprint/25228
Islam, M., & Deegan, C. (2010). Media pressures and corporate disclosure of social responsibility performance information: a study of two global clothing and sports retail companies. Accounting and Business Research, 40(2), 131-148. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2010.9663388
Joshi, P.L., & Gao, S.S. (2009). Multinational corporate social and environmental disclosures (CSED) on websites. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 19(1), 27-44. https://doi.org/10.1108/10569210910939654
Krippendorf, K. (1980). Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. Sage, New York.
Land, M.H., & Lundholm, R.J. (2000). Voluntary disclosure and equity offerings: reducing information asymmetry or hyping the stock? Contemporary Accounting Research, 17(4), 623-662. https://doi.org/10.1506/9N45-F0JX-AXVW-LBWJ
Maedee, M. (2006). The relationship among auditor tenure, audit firm size, auditor change and going concern audit reports on listed companies in the Stock Exchange of Thailand. Master Thesis of Accountancy Program, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok.
Matheesuwapab, S. (2018). The nature in reporting of the key Audit Matters (KAM): the judgment in writing key audit matter of certified public accountant from big four accounting firms. Suthiparithat Journal, 32(104), 210-222. https://www.dpu.ac.th/dpurc/assets/uploads/magazine/dx8y8jd94xwgskskk.pdf
Ousubcharoenchai, T. (2005). The relationship between earning quality and auditors reports. Master Thesis of Accountancy Program, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok.
Porter, B., Hogartaigh, C.O., & Baskerville, R. (2009). Report on research conducted in the United Kingdom and New Zealand in 2008 investigating the audit expectation-performance gap and users’ understanding of, and desired improvements to, the auditor’s report. Report Prepared for AICPA’s ASB and IAASB. Retrieved from https://www.ifac.org/
Pratoomsuwan, T., & Yolrabil, O. (2018). The key Audit Matters (KAM) practices: the review of first year experience in Thailand. NIDA Business Journal, 23(1), 63-91. http://mba.nida.ac.th/en/books/read/871508c0-ff6c-11e8-a073-0f7c1d912d55
Pries, F., & Scott, S. (2018). Costs and benefits of key audit matter reporting for smaller public entities: The Australian experience. College of Business and Economics, University of Guelph, Canada, 31(2), 1-9.
Salleh, K., & Jasmani, H. (2014). Audit rotation and audit report: empirical evidence from Malaysian PLCs over the period of ten years. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 145(1), 40-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.06.009
Srijunpetch, S. (2017). Key audit matters in an auditor’s report and response of the Stock Exchange of Thailand. Journal of Accounting Profession, 13(38), 22-37. http://doi: 10.14456/jap.2017.11
Suttipun, M. (2018). Association between board composition and intellectual capital disclosure: an evidence from Thailand. Journal of Business Administration, 41(160), 74-97. http://doi: 10.14456/jba.2018.19
Suttipun, M., & Nuttaphon, C. (2014). Corporate social responsibility reporting on websites in Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 35(3), 536-549.
Tangruenrat, C. (2015). The value of new auditor’s report. Journal of Accounting Profession, 11(31), 26-44. http://doi: 10.14456/jap.2015.9
Taylor, D., & Liu, J. (2008). Legitimacy and corporate governance determinants of executives’ remuneration disclosures. Corporate Governance, 8(2), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1108/14720700810853400
The Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET). (2018). Company listed in the Stock Exchange of Thailand. Retrieved from https://www.set.or.th/
Vanstraelen, A., Schelleman, C., Meuwissen, R., & Hofmann, I. (2012). The audit reporting debated seemingly intractable problems and solutions. European Accounting Review, 21(2), 193-215. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2012.687506
Velte, P. (2018). Does gender diversity in the audit committee influence key audit matters’ readability in the audit report? UK evidence. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(3), 748–755. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1491