Non-audit services and auditor independence

The auditor’s agency role has often been scrutinized because various stakeholders believe the joint provision of audit and non-audit services (NAS) is more harmful to auditor independence than the benefits they generate for the client and the audit. Regulators and governance activists tend to ground their belief on a select few cases of audit failures, but have generally failed to demonstrate causality. While the audit profession strongly disagrees with this view and argues that NAS generate synergies, inform audits, and meet the service needs of clients, the profession has also failed to provide unequivocal supporting evidence. The controversy surrounding NAS transcends national boundaries, and in this global realm, convergence on the consequences of NAS remains elusive. As this chapter is an extension of the previous edition of the book, we draw from the same set of academic journals to inform our overview and syntheses of the global empirical archival research on NAS and auditor independence. We begin with a brief historical perspective on NAS and auditor independence followed by a broad brush on current issues surrounding NAS. We then discuss research advances in the paradigm, identify continuing unresolved issues, and suggest potential new sources of controversies and research areas emanating from NAS. We inform regulators, policy makers, capital market participants, the accounting profession, and future researchers.