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.

The principle of prudence in public sector accounting—a comparative analysis of cautious and asymmetric prudence

Implementation of the international public sector accounting standards in Europe. Variations on a global theme

International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSASs): A systematic literature review and future research agenda

Public sector accounting contexts in the EPSAS change: a comparative study of Italy and Sweden

The IPSAS implementation and the use and usefulness of accounting information: a comparative analysis in the Iberian Peninsula

Public sector accounting education: A structured literature review

Accrual Accounting at Different Levels of the Public Sector: A Systematic Literature Review

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

Accounting for Pension Obligations in the European Union: A Case Study for EPSAS and Transnational Budgetary Supervision

A contingency theory perspective on the analysis of central government accounting disclosure under International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS)

Implementing the International Public Sector Accounting Standards for consolidated financial statements: facilitators, benefits and challenges

Public sector accounting reforms and the quality of governance

Culture, language, and accounting reform: a new perspective on IPSAS implementation

Time to rethink public sector accounting education? A practitioner’s perspective

Enterprise resource planning system reforms of European Union member states in association with central government accrual accounting and IPSAS adoption

The role of public-sector accounting in controlling corruption: an assessment of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries

Adoption of the International Public Sector Accounting Standards in emerging economies and low-income countries: a structured literature review

Institutional and Economic Factors Affecting the Adoption of International Public Sector Accounting Standards

Editorial: PMM CIGAR theme: Public sector accounting—educating for reform challenges

A consistent bottom-up approach for deriving a conceptual framework for public sector financial accounting

The future of public sector accounting research. A polyphonic debate