Abstract:Purpose –The current study utilizes an advanced machine learning method and aims to investigate whether auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based as less risky. More specifically, the study explores the association between principles-based accounting standards and audit pricing and between principles-based accounting standards and the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion.Design/methodology/approach – The study employs an advanced machine-learning method to understand the role of principles-based accounting standards in predicting audit fees and going concern opinion. The study also uses multiple regression models defining audit fees and the probability of receiving going concern opinion. The analyses are complemented by additional tests such as economic significance, firm fixed effects, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, change analysis, yearly regression results, and controlling for managerial risk-taking incentives and governance variables. Findings – The paper provides empirical evidence that auditors charge less audit fees to clients whose financial statements are more principles-based. The finding suggests that auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based less risky. The study also provides evidence that the probability of receiving a going-concern opinion reduces as firms rely more on principles-based standards. The finding further suggests that auditors discount the financial numbers supplied by the managers using rules-based standards. The study also reveals that the degree of reliance by a US firm on principles-based accounting standards has a negative impact on accounting conservatism (both conditional and unconditional), the risk of financial statement misstatement, accruals, and the difficulty in predicting future earnings. This suggests potential mechanisms through which principles-based accounting standards influence auditors' risk assessments.Research limitations/implications – The authors recognize the limitation of this study regarding the sample period. Prior studies compare rules vs. principles-based standards by focusing on the differences between US GAAP and IFRS or pre and post-IFRS adoption, which raises questions about differences in cross-country settings and institutional environment and other confounding factors such as transition costs. This study addresses these issues by comparing rules vs. principles-based standards within the US GAAP setting. However, this limits the sample period to the year 2006 because the measure of the relative extent to which a US firm is reliant upon principles-based standards is available until 2006.Originality/value – The study has major public policy suggestions because it demonstrates the value of principles-based standards. The study responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information as business transactions and investor needs continue to evolve globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks like climate change. The study fills the gap in the literature that auditors perceive principles-based financial statements as less risky and further expands the literature by providing empirical evidence that the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion is increasing in the degree of rules-based standards.

Auditor Reporting under Section 404: the Association Between the Internal Control and Going Concern Audit Opinions

Internal control deficiencies and the issuance of going concern opinions

Do SOX 404 Control Audits and Management Assessments Improve Overall Internal Control System Quality

Internal Control Weaknesses and Information Uncertainty

Audit Report on Internal Control:The Dishonest Signal and Its Discrimination:A Contextualizing Research

Auditors' Internal Control over Financial Reporting Decisions: Analysis, Synthesis, and Research Directions

Audit Committee Quality and Internal Control: An Empirical Analysis

Auditor Choice and Its Implications for Group-Affiliated Firms

Internal control in accounting research: A review

Former Audit Partners on the Audit Committee and Internal Control Deficiencies

The Effect of SOX Internal Control Deficiencies on Firm Risk and Cost of Equity

Internal Control Quality: The Role of Critical Audit Matters Reporting

The impact of internal control, external assurance, and integrated reports on market value

The Influence of Auditor and Client Section 404 Processes on Remediation of Internal Control Deficiencies at All Levels of Severity

Rational Thinking on Accounting Firms' Assurance of Corporate Internal Control Reports

Principles Based Accounting Standards, Audit Fees and Going Concern: Evidence Using Advanced Machine Learning

GOING CONCERN AUDIT OPINION: IS IT AFFECTED BY BUSINESS RISK AND INTERNAL CONTROL?

Does Audit Committee Accounting Expertise Help to Promote Audit Quality? Evidence from Auditor Reporting of Internal Control Weaknesses

The Effect of the Internal Control Regulation on Reporting Quality in China

The Role of Internal Control Disclosure in Financial Reporting Precision and the Quality of Audited Financial Reports