Pengaruh Audit Tenure, Audit Report Lag, dan Opini Audit Tahun Sebelumnya terhadap Opini Audit Going Concern pada Perusahaan Perbankan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2020–2024

Wafiyyah Septiwidya; Wastam Wahyu Hidayat; Uswatun Khasanah

doi:10.55606/jumia.v4i3.4432

Authors

Wafiyyah Septiwidya Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya
Wastam Wahyu Hidayat Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya
Uswatun Khasanah Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55606/jumia.v4i3.4432

Keywords:

Audit Report Lag, Audit Tenure, Banking, Going Concern Audit Opinion, Prior Year Audit Opinion

Abstract

Going concern audit opinions provide important information regarding a company's ability to continue its operations and are influenced by various audit-related factors. This study aims to examine the effects of audit tenure, audit report lag, and prior year audit opinion on going concern audit opinions in banking companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during 2020–2024. A quantitative approach was employed using binary logistic regression analysis. The sample consisted of 44 banking companies with 220 firm-year observations selected through purposive sampling. The results indicate that audit tenure has a significant negative effect on going concern audit opinions, suggesting that longer auditor-client relationships reduce the likelihood of issuing such opinions. Prior year audit opinion has a significant positive effect, indicating that companies receiving a going concern opinion in the previous year are more likely to receive the same opinion in the current year. In contrast, audit report lag does not significantly affect going concern audit opinions. These findings demonstrate that prior audit opinion is the strongest predictor of subsequent going concern opinions, while audit completion time is not an indicator of going concern risk in the banking sector. The study contributes to understanding audit-related determinants of going concern opinions in the Indonesian banking industry.

References

Adnyani, I. A. P. P., & Putri, I. G. A. M. A. D. (2025). Information asymmetry, audit committee, firm growth, and leverage on earnings management. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 35(9). https://doi.org/10.24843/EJA.2025.v35.i09.p19

Apriyani, N., & Rahardjo, S. N. (2021). Pengaruh profitabilitas, solvabilitas, ukuran perusahaan, dan opini audit terhadap audit report lag. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 10(2), 1–10.

Bursa Efek Indonesia. (2024). Indonesian capital market statistics 2024. Bursa Efek Indonesia.

Ghozali, I. (2021). Aplikasi analisis multivariat dengan program IBM SPSS 25. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7

Healy, P. M., & Palepu, K. G. (2003). The fall of Enron. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17(2), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533003765888403

Hendrastuti. (2023). Agency theory: Review of the theory and current research. Jurnal Akuntansi Aktual. https://doi.org/10.17977/um004v10i12023p085

Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia. (2021). Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik. Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia.

Institut Akuntan Publik Indonesia. (2021). Kode Etik Profesi Akuntan Publik. Institut Akuntan Publik Indonesia.

International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. (2021). International Standard on Auditing (ISA) 570 (Revised): Going concern. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board.

International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. (2024). International Standard on Auditing (ISA) 570 (Revised 2024): Going concern. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board.

Jamaluddin, J., & Enre, A. (2023). Konstruksi agency theory untuk meminimalisir asymmetry information dalam teori keuangan syariah. POINT: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Manajemen, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.46918/point.v5i2.2092

Liu, S., & Sickles, R. (2021). The agency problem revisited: A structural analysis of managerial productivity and CEO compensation in large US commercial banks. Empirical Economics, 60, 391–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-020-01982-5

Manalu, D. A., et al. (2024). Perkembangan industri perbankan di era digital. Neraca: Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen dan Akuntansi, 2(8), 233–239. https://doi.org/10.572349/neraca.v2i8.2110

Marhamah, M., & Indriastuti, A. (2024). Opini audit going concern: Mengurai faktor yang mempengaruhi. Jurnal Capital: Kebijakan Ekonomi, Manajemen dan Akuntansi, 6(2), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.33747/capital.v6i2.235

Mutchler, J. F. (1985). A multivariate analysis of the auditor’s going-concern opinion decision. Journal of Accounting Research, 23(2), 668–682. https://doi.org/10.2307/2490832

Sigolgi, H. A., & Djamil, N. (2024). Going concern audit opinion: The effect of audit quality, audit tenure, operating complexity, liquidity, disclosure, and leverage on companies listed in Indonesia in 2020–2022. JAAMTER: Jurnal Audit Akuntansi Manajemen Terintegrasi, 2(1), 369–382. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10866156

Siska, S., & Kurnianingsih, R. (2024). The effect of opinion shopping, company size, and financial performance on going concern audit opinion in banking companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange period 2021–2023. Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Sharia Economics, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.21167/ijise.v8i3.4567

Susilawati, Y., & Leon, H. (2024). Analisis pengaruh audit lag, ukuran perusahaan, dan prior opinion terhadap opini audit going concern. AKUA: Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 4(4). https://doi.org/10.54259/akua.v4i4.5530

Wardoyo, D. U., et al. (2021). Good corporate governance dalam perspektif teori keagenan. EKOMA: Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen, Akuntansi, 1(1), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.56799/ekoma.v1i1.25

Yuniarwati, Y., & Ardana, I. C. (2023). The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on audit quality: The perception of Indonesian auditors. International Journal of Application on Economics and Business, 1(2), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.24843/ijaeb.2023.v01.i02.p05