Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2021, 69(5), 579-594 | DOI: 10.11118/actaun.2021.052

What Factors Increase the Impact of the SAO's Audit Activity and the Amount of Audited Expenditures Within the Mandate of the SAI?

Jan Buček1
1 Department of Public Finance, Faculty of Finance and Accounting, University of Economics, Prague, nám. Winstona Churchilla 1938/4, 130 67 Praha 3-Žižkov, Czech Republic

This study within the Czech Supreme Audit Office found that a relatively greater media impact had audits of the Czech Supreme Audit Office in which a criminal notification was filed. It was further found that notifications to the tax authorities were relatively more frequent for audits that focused on a longer period of time and that proportion of audit reports referring to Act No. 563/1991 Coll., Act on Accounting, is decreasing. The analysis of the Czech Supreme Audit Office also revealed that the audits for which the government imposed a remedial measure were not more expensive than those for which no government remedies were imposed. The author recommends the Czech Supreme Audit Office to continue to step up its efforts to reduce audits of formal deficiencies and to establish an independent advisory body for the evaluation of objections to audit protocols. Both content analysis and regression analysis were used as scientific methods here. The regression models were focused on variables increasing the amount of audited expenditure under the mandate of 115 Supreme Audit Institutions.

Keywords: SAI, SAO, audit action, audit report, impact of audit activity, impact of audit activity on media

Received: May 17, 2020; Revised: April 6, 2021; Accepted: October 6, 2021; Published: November 1, 2021  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Buček, J. (2021). What Factors Increase the Impact of the SAO's Audit Activity and the Amount of Audited Expenditures Within the Mandate of the SAI? Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 69(5), 579-594. doi: 10.11118/actaun.2021.052
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. ADI, S. and DUTIL, P. 2018. Searching for strategy: Value for Money (VFM) audit choice in the new public management era. Canadian Public Administration, 61(1): 91-108. Go to original source...
    2. AHONEN, P. and KOLJONEN, J. 2020. The contents of the National Audit Office of Finland performance audits, 2001-2016: An interpretive study with computational content analysis. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 32(1): 49-66. Go to original source...
    3. BLUME, L. and VOIGT, S. 2011. Does organizational design of supreme audit institutions matter? A cross-country assessment. European Journal of Political Economy, 27(2): 215-229. Go to original source...
    4. BONOLLO, E. 2019. Measuring supreme audit institutions' outcomes: current literature and future insights. Public Money & Management, 39(7): 468-477. Go to original source...
    5. BRUSCA, I., MANES ROSSI, F. and AVERSANO, N. 2017. Accountability and Transparency to Fight against Corruption: An International Comparative Analysis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 20(5): 486-504. Go to original source...
    6. BUČEK, J. 2019. Have the Czech SAO's Audits Carried out in the Area of the State Budget Revenues Resulted in a Higher Number of Legislative Changes when Compared to the Audits in the Domain of the State Property Management? The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 12(1): 9-41. Go to original source...
    7. CARLITZ, R. et al. 2009. Budget transparency around the World: Results from the 2008 open budget survey. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 9(2): 19. Go to original source...
    8. CORDERY, C. and HAY, D. 2018. Supreme audit institutions and public value: Demonstrating relevance. Financial Accountability & Management, 35(2): 128-142. Go to original source...
    9. COMMITTEE ON AGRICUTURE OF THE CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES OF THE PARLIAMENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC. 2012. Resolution no. 103/2012.COMMITTEE ON DEFENCE OF THE CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES OF THE PARLIAMENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC. 2014. Resolution no. 48/2014.
    10. CONTROL COMMITTEE OF THE CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES OF THE PARLIAMENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC. 2011-2019. Resolutions on the audit conclusions of the Czech SAO between 2011-2019 (Resolutions no. 83/2011 - Resolution no. 150/2019).35
    11. CZECH REPUBLIC. 1993. Act no. 166/1993 Coll., On the Supreme Audit Office, as amended [in Czech: Zákon č. 166/1993 Sb., Zákon o Nejvyšším kontrolním úřadu, ve znění pozdějších předpisů]. In: Sbírka zákonů České republiky.
    12. CZECH REPUBLIC. 1992. Act No. 517/1992 Coll., Act of the Czech National Council on the Czech Press Office, as amended [in Czech: Zákon č. 517/1992 Sb., Zákon České národní rady o České tiskové kanceláři, ve znění pozdějších předpisů]. In: Sbírka zákonů České republiky.
    13. CZECH REPUBLIC SUPREME AUDIT OFFICE. 2021. Annual reports 2010-2018. NKÚ: Czech Republic Supreme Audit Office [Online]. Available at: https://www.nku.cz/cz/publikace-a-dokumenty/vyrocni-zprava/ [Accessed: 2019, November 10].
    14. CZECH REPUBLIC SUPREME AUDIT OFFICE. 2019. Audit reports and information from Audit actions. NKÚ: Czech Republic Supreme Audit Office.
    15. CZECH REPUBLIC SUPREME AUDIT OFFICE. 2021. EU reports 2010-2018. NKÚ: Czech Republic Supreme Audit Office. [Online]. Available at: https://www.nku.cz/cz/publikace-a-dokumenty/eu-report/ [Accessed: 2019, November 25].
    16. CZECH REPUBLIC SUPREME AUDIT OFFICE. 2021. Final accounts for the year 2010-2015 - Chapter 381. NKÚ: Czech Republic Supreme Audit Office. [Online]. Available at: https://www.nku.cz/cz/publikace-a-dokumenty/zaverecny-ucet/ [Accessed: 2019, December 5].
    17. CZECH REPUBLIC SUPREME AUDIT OFFICE. 2019. Internal SAO monitoring of media response. NKÚ: Czech Republic Supreme Audit Office.
    18. FUKUDA-PARR, S., GUYER, P. and LAWSON-REMER, T. 2011. Does Budget Transparency Lead to Stronger Human Development Outcomes and Commitments to Economic and Social Rights? International Budget Partnerships Working Paper No. 4. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2211584. [Accessed: 2019, August 10]. Go to original source...
    19. GHERAI, D.-S., TARA, I.-G. and MATICA, D.-E. 2016. The Supreme Audit Institution Can Control the Corruption or Not? Annals of Faculty of Economics, 1(2): 465-476.
    20. GONZÁLEZ, B., LÓPEZ, A., GARCÍA, R. 2008. How do Supreme Audit Institutions Measure the Impact of their Work? In: JORGE, S. (Ed.). Implementing Reforms in Public Sector Accounting. Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra. Go to original source...
    21. GOVERNMENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC. 2010-2017. Government decisions - Resolutions on the audit conclusions of the Czech SAO between 2010-2017, Resolutions no. 857/2010 - Resolution no. 782/2017).36
    22. GROENENDIJK, N. S. 2004. Assessing Member States' Management of EU Finance: An Empirical Analysis of the Annual Reports of the European Court of Auditors, 1996-2001. Public Administration, 82(3): 701-725. Go to original source...
    23. HAPPER, C. and PHILO, G. 2013. The Role of the Media in the Construction of Public Belief and Social Change. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 1(1): 321-336. Go to original source...
    24. HARRISON, T. M. and SAYOGO, D. S. 2014. Transparency, participation, and accountability practices in open government: A comparative study. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4): 513-525. Go to original source...
    25. INTOSAI GENERAL SECRETARIAT. 1977. The Lima Declaration of Guidelines on Auditing Precepts. IX INTOSAI in Lima. [Online]. Available at: https://www.nku.cz/assets/about-us/status-and-powers/lima-declaration-mexico-declaration.pdf [Accessed: 2019, December 12].
    26. JOHNSEN, Å. 2019. Public sector audit in contemporary society: A short review and introduction. Financial Accountability & Management, 35(2): 121-127. Go to original source...
    27. JOHNSEN, Å., REICHBORN-KJENNERUD, K., CARRINGTON, T., JEPPESEN, K., TARO, K. and VAKKURI, J. 2019. Supreme audit institutions in a high-impact context: A comparative analysis of performance audit in four Nordic countries. Financial Accountability & Management, 35(2): 158-181. Go to original source...
    28. KAUFMANN, D., AART, K. and MASSIMO, M. 2010. The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5430. The World Bank.
    29. LONSDALE, J. 2000. Developments in Value-For-Money Audit Methods: Impacts and Implications. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 66(1): 73-89. Go to original source...
    30. LONSDALE, J. 1999. "Impacts." In: POLLITT, C., GIRRE, X., LONSDALE, J., MUL, R., SUMMA, H. and WAERNESS, M. (Eds.). Performance or Compliance? Performance Audit and Public Management in Five Countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 171-193.
    31. MIR, M., FAN, H. and MACLEAN, I. 2017. Public sector audit in the absence of political competition. Managerial Auditing Journal, 32(9): 899-923. Go to original source...
    32. NEMEC, J., OCHRANA, F., PAVEL, J. and ŠAGÁT, V. 2010. Control in Public Administration [in Czech: Kontrola ve veřejné správě]. 1st Edition. Prague: Wolters Kluwer ČR.
    33. OPEN BUDGET SURVEY. 2017. Questionnaire and Guidelines, Data. International Budget Partnership. [Online]. Available at: https://www.internationalbudget.org/publications/open-budget-survey-2017/ [Accessed: 2019, September 5].
    34. POLLITT, C. 2003. Performance Audit in Western Europe: Trends and Choices. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 14(1-2): 157-170. Go to original source...
    35. POLLITT, C., XAVIER, G., LONSDALE, J., MUL, R., SUMMA, H. and WAERNESS, M. 1999. Performance or Compliance? Performance Audit and Public Management in Five Countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Go to original source...
    36. POLLITT, C. and SUMMA, H. 1997. Reflexive Watchdogs? How Supreme Audit Institutions Account for themselves. Public Administration, 75(2): 313-336. Go to original source...
    37. RAMKUMAR, V. 2009. The State of Budget Transparency Worldwide. International Journal of Government Financial Management, 9(2): 1-14. Go to original source...
    38. REICHBORN-KJENNERUD, K., CARRINGTON, T., JEPPESEN, K. and TARO, K. 2018. A New Organisation of Public Administration: From Internal to External Control. In: Bureaucracy and Society in Transition. Comparative Social Research, Vol. 33. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 225-243. Go to original source...
    39. REICHBORN-KJENNERUD, K., GONZÁLEZ-DÍAZ, B., BRACCI, E., CARRINGTON, T., HATHAWAY, J., JEPPESEN, K. and STECCOLINI, I. 2019. SAIs Work Against Corruption In Scandinavian, South-European And African Countries: An Institutional Analysis. The British Accounting Review, 51(5): 100842. Go to original source...
    40. REICHBORN-KJENNERUD, K. and JOHNSEN, Å. 2015. Performance Audits and Supreme Audit Institutions' Impact on Public Administration: The Case of the Office of the Auditor General in Norway. Administration & Society, 50(10): 1422-1446. Go to original source...
    41. RENZIO, P. D. and MASUD, H. 2011. Measuring and Promoting Budget Transparency: The Open Budget Index as a Research and Advocacy Tool. Governance, An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 24(3): 607-616. Go to original source...
    42. RÍOS, A.-M., BASTIDA, F. and BENITO, B. 2016. Budget Transparency and Legislative Budgetary Oversight: An International Approach. The American Review of Public Administration, 46(5): 546-568. Go to original source...
    43. SEDMIHRADSKÁ, L., HAAS, J. 2012. Budget transparency and fiscal performance: Do open budgets matter? MPRA Paper No. 42260. Available at: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/42260/. [Accessed: 2019, December 30].
    44. SEIFERT, J., CARLITZ, R. and MONDO, E. 2013. The Open Budget Index (OBI) as a Comparative Statistical Tool. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 15(1): 87-101. Go to original source...
    45. STAŠOVÁ, L. H. 2019. The scope of control of the supreme audit office in the Slovak Republic and in the other Visegrad Four countries. Society and Economy, 41(2): 245-262. Go to original source...
    46. SVÄRDSTEN, F. 2019. The 'front stage' of substance auditing: A study of how substance auditing is presented in performance audit reports. Financial Accountability & Management, 35(2): 199-211. Go to original source...
    47. TIRON TUDOR, A. and MOLDOVAN-ROMAIN, R. 2019. What influences disclosure choice in EU Supreme Audit Institutions' performance audit annual reports? Project: Public sector accounting. ACCA Think Ahead.
    48. TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL. 2018. Corruption Perceptions Index 2017. Transparency International Report.
    49. UNION OF PUBLISHERS AND ASSOCIATION OF MEDIA AGENCIES. 2016. Readership research MEDIA PROJECT [in Czech: Výzkum čtenosti tisku Media Projekt]. Unie Vydavatelů. [Online]. Available at: http://www.unievydavatelu.cz/cs/unie_vydavatelu/medialni_data/vyzkum_ctenosti [Accessed: 2019, December 20].
    50. VAN ACKER, W. and BOUCKAERT, G. 2018. The impact of supreme audit institutions and ombudsmen in Belgium and The Netherlands. Financial Accountability & Management, 35(1): 55-71. Go to original source...
    51. VAN ZYL, A., RAMKUMAR, V. and DE RENZIO, P. 2009. Responding to challenges of Supreme Audit Instituions: Can legislatures and civil society help? U4 ISSUE 2009:1. Anti-Corruption Resource Centre. Available at: https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/3287-responding-to-the-challenges-of-supreme-audit.pdf [Accessed: 2019, October 15].
    52. WORLD BANK. 2019. Data. World Bank. [Online]. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org0/ [Accessed: 2019, September 10].
    53. YETANO, A., TORRES, L. and CASTILLEJOS-SUASTEGUI, B. 2019. Are Latin American performance audits leading to changes? International Journal of Auditing, 23(3): 444-456. Go to original source...
    54. ZUCCOLOTTO, R. and TEIXEIRA, M. A. C. 2014. Budgetary Transparency and Democracy: The Effectiveness of Control Institutions. International Business Research, 7(6): 83-96. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content