See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/331997548

EFFECT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION, GROWTH COMPANIES, QUALITY AUDIT

AND AUDIT OPINION AUDIT OPINION ON THE PREVIOUS YEAR GOING
CONCERN (Manufacturing companies listed on the stock excha...

Article · March 2019

DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VTQ3C

CITATIONS READS

0 314

1 author:

Dirvi Surya Abbas

Universitas Muhammadiyah Tangerang
39 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Dirvi Surya Abbas on 27 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 EFFECT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION, GROWTH COMPANIES, QUALITY
AUDIT AND AUDIT OPINION AUDIT OPINION ON THE PREVIOUS YEAR
GOING CONCERN
(Manufacturing companies listed on the stock exchange Indonesia in 2011-2013)

Dirvi Surya Abbas

Program Studi Akuntansi, Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis
Universitas Muhammadiyah Tangerang
abbas.dirvi@gmail.com

This study aims to investigate the influence of several factors affecting the
going-concern audit opinion given the independent auditor on the financial
statements is made the client or auditee. This study is the causal or studies that the
one variable affects the other variable. Variables that affect the so-called
independent variables that dalampenelitianiniyaitukondisikeuangan, growth,
quality audit, the audit opinion of the affected sebelumnya.Variabel called and the
dependent variable in this study is a going concern audit opinion in the current
year.
Methods of sampling using purposive sampling and logistic regression was
used as a test tool that digunakanya penelitian.Sampel the companies listed in
BEI.Hasil of the data selection using purposive sampling method states that the
sample used in this study as many as 71 companies and due to the use 3-year study
period, the number of samples contained 213 samples.
The results of this study indicate that the financial condition of a significant
negative effect on the going concern audit opinion, the company's growth negative
effect and no significant effect on going concern audit opinion, audit quality has a
positive effect and not significant to the going concern audit opinion and the audit
opinion the previous year's positive influence and significant going concern audit
opinion.

Keywords: financial condition, growth, quality audit, the audit opinion the
previous year, and going concern audit opinion.

PRELIMINARY financial statements will determine

The rapid development of the
business world today, triggering
increased competition among
businesses, as shown by the
increasing demand of the financial
statements, plus the economic
conditions in Indonesia that is
unstable or is always changing.
The financial report is a
fundamental tool for companies to
communicate performance to
outsiders, especially investors. Rate
investors against the issuer's
1
the investment policy making
(Akiko, 2013). And the financial
statements prepared by management
was not separated from the interests
of the management company
motivated to enrich themselves. For
that dibutukan an independent third
party as a mediator on the principal
relationship with the management,
the third party is used to monitor the
behavior of management, whether it
is acting in accordance with the
wishes of the principal. Auditor is a
third party which is considered

capable of bridging the interests of
the principal by management in
managing the finances of the
company.
Auditor ascertain whether the
company is able to maintain the
continuity of their business or not.
Going concern audit opinion very
useful for investors to establish
investment decisions. The role of the
auditor is required to assess the
fairness of the report of the
company, so using the audited
financial statements users of
financial statements to make
decisions with benar.Auditor have a
role to provide assurance to
investors in selecting companies for
investment.
Enron, Lehman Brothers and
others really hit the public
accounting profession. This is
understandable because the auditor
is the most vulnerable of
responsibility in assessing the
fairness of the financial statements
perusahaan.Atas the basis of the
number of cases, the AICPA
(American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants) requires that the
auditor should express explicitly
whether the company's clients will
be able to maintain the continuity his
life until a year later after reporting
(Dewayanto, 2011).
The financial condition of the
company is a real company's
soundness. The statement was
supported by research conducted by
Dewayanto (2011) where the results
show the financial condition and
significant positive effect on the
going concern audit opinion, and
reinforced by the results of research
conducted by pratama (2013). In
contrast to the results of research
conducted Prima (2011) that
2
negatively affect the financial
condition.
The higher the ratio the sales
growth of the company, the less
likely the auditor to issue a going
concern audit opinion. This
statement is supported by research
conducted by Kartika (2012) in
which the results showed that the
growth of the company and
significant positive effect on the
going concern audit opinion. In
contrast to the results of research
Ulkri (2013) which showed a
significant negative effect, and
reinforced by the results of research
Daughter (2013) which states that
the company's growth and
significant negative effect
Quality information can only be
provided by a qualified auditor as
well. This is in agreement with the
results Anjelina (2012), which states
that the size of the firm influence in
the provision of audit opinion.
Auditor large scale can provide a
better audit quality than small scale
auditor, including in revealing
problems going concern. This
statement is supported by the
research of Dura and Nuryatno
(2015) states that the audit quality
and significant positive effect on the
going concern audit opinion. But in
contrast to the research conducted
Anjelina (2012) reported a
significant negative effect.
1. Literature
a. Theory Agency
The agent will act in the best
interest of the principal. Principals
will give a reward for the work
done agents. Authority and
responsibility as well as the
principal agent stipulated in the
employment contract together.

Agents may be afraid to
disclose information that is not
expected by the owner, so there is
a tendency to manipulate the
financial statements. Based on
these assumptions, it takes an
independent third party, in this
case is a public accountant. Duties
of public accountants (auditors)
provide services to assess the
financial statements made by the
agency, with the end result is the
audit opinion.
Auditor is responsible for
giving an opinion on the fairness of
the financial statements of the
company and reveals the problems
faced by the company's going
concern if auditors doubted the
company's ability to maintain its
viability.
2. Research hypothesis
a. Effect of the company's financial
condition and going concern
audit opinion
Agency theory declare the
soundness of a company gives a
positive signal about the financial
condition of a company by looking
at the auditor's report especially
concerning the survival of the
company. the financial condition of
the agency theory perspective
related to the interests of all
shareholders in the investment
decision is expected to generate
greater profits.
According Kartika (2012)
that the auditor is almost never
give a going concern audit opinion
on the company that is not
experiencing financial difficulties
(financial distress). On the results
of research conducted by
Dewayanto (2011), using logistic
regression showed that the
3
variables of financial condition
The Almant Model proxy with a
positive significant effect on the
going-concern audit opinion. And
strengthened by the results of
research by Prima Goddess (2011)
which stated that the financial
condition also has a positive effect
on the going concern audit opinion.
Referring to research
conducted Arry Pratt (2013), in
this study four bankruptcy
prediction model used to measure a
company's financial condition,
namely The Zmijeski Model, The
Model Altman, Altman Revised
Model and Springate Model.
Several previous studies have
concluded that the bankruptcy
prediction model using ratios -
financial ratios more accurate than
the auditor's opinion in the
grouping of companies go
bankrupt and not bankrupt.
The conclusion from the
above statement that is growing
conditions keuanganmemburuk or
disturbed, the greater the
probability of the company
receiving going concern audit
opinion and vice versa. Based on
agency theory with the results of
previous research hypothesis that
will be asked are as follows:
H1 : The financial condition of
the company positive effect
on the going-concern audit
opinion
b. Effect of Corporate Growth and
Going Concern Audit Opinion
Related agency theory that
companies with negative growth
indicates a greater tendency
towards bankruptcy so that
companies that profit will not face

bankruptcy because the bankruptcy
is one of the basis for the auditor to
give a going concern audit opinion,
the company whose growth
companies that negative will be
higher tendency to receive a going
concern opinion.
According Kartika (2012) the
company's growth is proxied by
the ratio of sales growth, sales
continued to increase from year
auditee will provide opportunities
for increased profits. The higher
the ratio of sales growth auditee
the less likely the auditor to issue a
going concern audit opinion. On
the results of research conducted
by Ulkri (2013) shows the
influence of a negative and
significant correlation between the
growth of the company going
concern audit opinion.
Similarly, strengthened by
the results of research conducted
by Kartika (2014) show a
significant influence and showed a
negative relationship between the
growth of the company on a going
concern audit opinion. Based on
the description with the results of
previous research hypothesis that
will be asked are as follows:
H2: Company Growth negatively
affect acceptance Going
Concern Audit Opinion.
c. Effect of Audit Quality and
Going Concern Audit Opinion
Related agency theory an
auditor is responsible for providing
high quality information that has to
be useful for decision making users
of financial statements. auditors
have a good quality are likely to
issue going concern audit opinion
4
when the client there is a problem
regarding going concern. Auditor
reputation is often used as a proxy
for a lot of quality audits, however,
in many research competence and
independence are still rarely used
to see how big the actual run
private audit quality.
going concern audit opinion
was issued by the auditor's opinion
affect the auditor's reputation for
quality auditor visits by auditors
Traffic in presenting the report. If
the auditor's report issued in
accordance with the conditions of
the company and the auditor is able
to assess the condition of the client
company will increase the quality
of auditors and auditors will gain
the trust of the public and
stakeholders. Audit quality is
determined by two things: the
competence and independence.
In the study conducted by
Dura (2015) shows that there is
significant influence between the
quality of the audit to the going-
concern audit opinion. Likewise
with Anjelina study (2012) showed
a negative correlation and
significant influence on the going
concern audit opinion. Based on
agency theory with the results of
previous research hypothesis that
will be asked are as follows:
H3: Audit quality negatively affect
acceptance Going Concern Audit
Opinion

d. Effect of Prior Year Audit
Opinion and Going Concern
Audit Opinion
Related agency theory auditee
receiving going concern audit
opinion on the previous year will
be considered to have a survival
issue, so the greater the possibility
for auditors to issue a going
concern audit opinion on the
current year. Troubled company
will encounter problems such as
the loss of public trust that would
further complicate the management
of the company to overcome the
existing difficulties.
On the results of research
conducted by Kartika (2012)
showed a positive and significant
influence of the previous year's
audit opinion on going concern
audit opinion. Similarly,
strengthened by the results of
research conducted by Alichia
(2013) showed a positive and
significant effect on the prior year's
audit opinion on the Going-
concern audit opinion.
Based on the description with
the results of previous research
hypothesis that will be asked are as
follows:
H4: Prior Year Audit Opinion
positive effect on the
acceptance of Going Concern
Audit Opinion.
3. RESEARCH METHODS
a. Population and Sample
Population is a generalization
region consisting of the object or
subject, which has certain qualities
and characteristics defined by the
researchers to learn and then drawn
conclusions (Sugiyono, 2007). The
5
population of this research are
companies listed on the Indonesian
Stock Exchange (BEI). The study
period covers the years 2011-2013
the data to better reflect current
conditions.
1) The sampling method used is
purposive sampling, the
sampling technique with a
certain consideration (Sugiyono,
2007) .Therefore, the authors
have criteria against which the
sample to be used are:
2) Manufacturing companies listed
in Indonesia Stock Exchange
(BEI) from 2011 through 2013.
3) Manufacturing company
financial statements and annual
reports can be accessed through
the official website of the Stock
Exchange www.idx.co.id during
the observation period, namely
from 2011 until 2013.
4) The manufacturing company
that issued the report of the
independent auditors for the
year 2011 through 2013.
5) Sample manufacturing company
must have the required
completeness of the information
associated with the indicators -
indicator variable calculation
used in this paper.
6) Manufacturing companies that
use the currency.
4. Definitions and Operational
Variables
a. Independent Variables
1) Financial Condition (X1)
In this study using
bankruptcy prediction model to
measure a company's financial
condition, namely the Revised
AltmanModel (1993). The
model developed previously
experienced revisiyang goal is
for use on the model
predictions are not only

manufacturing companies but
also can be used tocompanies
besides manufacturing. Revised
Model Altman is the following.
Source: (Dewayanto, 2011)
Information :
Z '= Model revision Altman/
Altman Z Score.
Z1 = Working capital / total
assets.
Z2 = Retained earnings / total
assets.
Z3 = Earnings before interest and
taxes / total assets.
Z4 = Book value of equity / book
value of debt.
Z5 = Sales / total assets.
2) Company Growth (X2)
The company's growth in
this study is proxied by the
ratio of sales growth. Sales is
the main operating activities of
the auditee. Sales growth ratio
is used to measure the ability of
companies in the growth rate of
sales compared with the
previous year. Sales growth
ratio formula, is as follows.
Source: (Princess, 2013)
Information:
sales bersih t = Current year
net sales
Sales bersih t-1 = the net sales
of the previous
year
3) Quality Audit (X3)
Indonesia Institute of
Accountants (IAI) has
classified the type of KAP
6
based on rngking affiliates.
There are four large public
accounting firms in Indonesia,
namely:
 Purwantoro, Sarwoko,
Sandjaja affiliated with
Ernst & Young (EY)
 Osman Bing Satrio and
Partners affiliated with
Deloitte.
 Siddharta and Widjaja
Kynveld affiliated with
Peat Marwick Goerdeler
(KPMG).
 Haryanto Sahari and
Partners affiliated with
Price Waterhouse Cooper
(PWC).
4) Prior Year Audit Opinion
(X4)
Dura and Nuryatno (2015)
defines as audit opinion
received by the auditee in the
previous year. This variable is
measured using dummy
variables. If the company
received a going concern audit
opinion (GCAO) in the
previous year will be coded 1
whereas if the company
receives non-going concern
audit opinion (NGCAO) will
be coded 0.
b. Dependent Variable
This variable was measured
by using a dummy variable, where
category 1 is given to companies
that received a going concern
audit opinion while category 0 is
given to companies that do not
receive a going concern audit
opinion.

5. Data collection technique
a. Data Type
The data used in this research
is secondary data. Secondary data
is the data source that do not
directly provide the data to data
collectors such as through a
document.
b. Data Source
Secondary data in this
study were obtained from the
annual financial statements that
have been published are taken
from the data base of the
Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI)
during the observation year 2011
to 2013 which includes the
independent auditor's report and
financial statements of companies
which may be accessed through
the official website of Indonesia
Stock Exchange www.idx.co.id
c. Literature Study
Techniques of data retrieval
by finding and gathering data in
the form of the theory of literartur
related problems examined which
include journals, books, theses or
other scientific work in order to
complete secondary data.
d. Documentation
By relying on the recording
and review of the aspects or
documents, relating to the object
in this study
6. Technical Analysis Data
a. Descriptive Statistics Analysis
Descriptive statistics are
also useful for describing the
variables - variables in this study,
which will provide an overview of
each study variable.
Descriptive statistics were used to
analyze and present quantitative
data with the aim to describe the
7
data. The data will be analyzed is
the image of companies sampled
in this study.
b. Classic assumption test
1) Test Multicollinearity
In a logistic regression
model, only the classical
assumption used is
multicollinearity test relates
only to the independent
variable alone so that they can
be fulfilled in a logistic
regression model. A good
regression model seharusnnya
not happen correlation
between independent
variables.
This test uses correlation
matrix between the
independent variables to see
each other the magnitude of
the correlation between the
independent variables. If the
independent variables are
correlated, then these
variables are not orthogonal.
Orthogonal variable is the
independent variable equal to
zero.
c. Hypothesis testing
1) Overall conformance test
model (Overall Model Fit)
The first step is the overall
fit model, this test is used to
assess the models that have
been hypothesized to be fit or
not the data. Hypotheses to
assess model fit is:
H0: Model hypothesized fit to
the data
HA: Model hypothesized does
not fit with the data
The overall assessment of
regression models using a
 8

value of -2 log likelihood (LL) said to fit). The hypothesis

whereby if a decline in the (Ghozali, 2011).
numbers -2 log likelihood
compared with the second
If the statistic Hosmer and
block of the first block, it can
Lemeshow`s Goodness of fit
be concluded that a good
test is equal to or less than
regression or in other words
0.05, then the hypothesis is
the hypothesized model fits
rejected, which means there is
the data. (Ghazali, 2012)
a significant difference
between the models with
2) Test coefficient of
observations that the value of
determination (R
Goodness fit model is not
Nagelkerke Square)
good because the model can
The coefficient of
not predict the value of his
determination (R2) is a test to
observations. If the value of
measure how far the ability of
the statistic Hosmer and
independent variables in
Lemeshow`s Goodness of Fit
explaining the dependent
Test is greater than 0.05,
variable (Ghozali, 2011). R2
values ranging from 0 to 1. If
4) Classification Matrices Test
the value of R2 small means
Classification matrix shows
the ability of independent
the predictive power of the
variables in explaining the
regression model to predict
dependent variable are very
the likelihood of financial
limited. Whereas if R2 close to
distress by a company. In a
1 means that the independent
logistic regression output this
variable can provide almost all
figure can be seen in Table
the information needed to
Classification.
predict the dependent variable.
For regression by independent
5) Logistic Regression (Logistic
variables more than 2 then
Regression)
used as the coefficient of
determination adjusted R2.
Regression logistic
regression was used to test
3) Feasibility Test Regression
whether the probability of the
Model
dependent variable can be
Feasibility was assessed
predicted by the independent
using a regression model
variable. On logistic
Goodness of Fit Test as
regression analysis techniques
measured by the chi-square at
no longer require normality
the bottom of Hosmer and
test and classical assumption
Lemeshows test. This model
on the independent variable
to test the null hypothesis that
(Ghozali, 2012). Logistic
the empirical data in
regression models were used
accordance with the model
to test the hypothesis of the
(there is no difference
research is as follows:
between the models with the
data so that the model can be
 9

auditgoing
opinion concern
(GCAO), 0 if not
Information:
(NGCAO))
OGC = Going Concern
ε = Residual error.
Opinion proxy
dummy variable
7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
(categories 1 to a. Descriptive Statistics Analysis
Results
auditte with Analysis of descriptive statistics
concern audit performed to determine the
characteristics of the data indicated
opinion and 0 to by value, maximum, minimum,
auditte with non standard deviation of each variable,
both dependent variable is the
going concern acceptance of going concern audit
audit opinion) opinion as well as the independent
variable is the financial condition,
a = Constant growth, quality audit and audit
Z93 = financial condition opinion in previous.
Table 1
proxied by using
descriptive Statistics
four bankruptcy Std.
prediction model. N Minimum maximum mean deviation

SALGR = Ratio of sales OGC 213 0 1 .17 .376

Z93 213 -3187 13 082 2.91559 1.899668
growth auditee
SALGR 213 -1000 1084.850 5.28555 74.322984
ADTR = Quality auditor
ADTR 213 0 1 .44 .497
proxy dummy
PRIOP 213 0 1 .15 .353
variable (1 for Valid N
213
auditors who (listwise)
Source: Data processed in SPSS v23,
joined a large
2016
scale and the large
Based on the above table
scale of 0
regarding descriptive statistical test
untukyang not) results for 213 samples from 71
companies with the observation
PRIOP = audit opinion
period for 3 years from 2011-2013
received in the can be seen that the going concern
audit opinion (OAGC) has a
previous year
minimum value of 0, indicating that
(Category1 when the company did not receive the
audit opinion going concern, the
 10

maximum value of 1, indicating that regression test can be explained as

the company received a going follows (Ghozali, 2012):
concern audit opinion. The mean
value of 0.17, suggesting that as 1) Overall conformance test
many as 17% of companies that get model (Overall Model Fit)
going-concern audit opinion and
83% of companies do not get a going Table 3
concern audit opinion, with standard Assessing Overall Model
deviations of 0.376 or 37.6%. Iteration Historya,b,c,d

Coefficients
b. Classical Assumption Test Results
1) Test Multicollinearity -2 Log Const SALG ADT
Multikoloniaritas test aims to Iteration likelihood ant Z93 R R PRIOP
test whether the regression model Step 1 1 171.730 -1.281 -.107 .000 .094 1.588
was found between vaiabel
2 164.399 -1.490 -.208 -.001 .167 2.031
korlasi free (independent),
Ghozali (2012). A good 3 164.017 -1.500 -.248 -.002 .193 2.136
regression model is a regression 4 163.994 -1.499 -.251 -.003 .194 2.142
in the absence of a strong
5 163.985 -1.499 -.251 -.004 .195 2.142
correlation between the
symptoms bebasnya.Penguji 6 163.980 -1.499 -.251 -.006 .195 2.142

variable using the correlation 7 163.972 -1.499 -.251 -.009 .195 2.142
matrix between the independent
8 163.820 -1.492 -.248 -.102 .197 2.145
variables to see the magnitude of
the correlation between the 9 163.691 -1.478 -.244 -.289 .201 2.154

independent variables. 1
163.690 -1.478 -.244 -.311 .202 2.158
0
Table 2
1
Test Results Multikoloneritas 163.690 -1.478 -.244 -.311 .202 2.158
1
Correlation Matrix
a. Method: Enter
Constant Z93 SALGR ADTR PRIOP
b. Constant is included in the model.
Step Constant 1.000 -.649 -.082 -.346 -.321
c. Initial -2 Log Likelihood: 193.540
1 Z93 -.649 1.000 -.102 -.151 -.036
d. Estimation terminated at iteration number 11 because
SALGR -.082 -.102 1.000 -.038 -.090 parameter estimates changed by less than .001.
ADTR -.346 -.151 -.038 1.000 .103 Sumber :data diolah SPSS v23
PRIOP -.321 -.036 -.090 .103 1.000
Testing was conducted to
compare values between 2 log
likelihood (-2LL at the start
c. Hypothesis Test Results (Block Number = 0) to the value
Because the dependent variable is a -2log likelihood ((-2LL)
dummy (got a going-concern audit indicate a regression model that
opinion was given the number 1 and better or in other words the
non-going concern given the number hypothesized model fits the
0), then the hypothesis testing is data. The results of these visits
done by using logistic regression. of the initial value is equal
Stages in testing by using logistic 193,540.Setelah -2LL included
 11

four independent variables, then

the value of the final -2LL 3) Feasibility Test Regression
decreased to 37.822. decrease Model
Likelihood (-2LL) regression
model showed good lbih or in Tabel 5
other words the hypothesized Eligibility test model Rgresi
model fits the data.
Step Chi-square Df Sig.
2) Test coefficient of 1 5.145 8 .742
determination (R Nagelkerke
Square) Sumber: output spss

Table 4 The test results with the

coefficient of Determination
Model Summary
-2 log Cox & Snell Nagelkerke R
Step likelihood R Square
1 163.690a .131
a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 11
Because the parameter estimates changed by less
than .001.
Source: processed data v23,
Cox and snell`s R Square is a
measure that seeks to imitate the
size R2 padamultiple regression
based on the likelihood
estimation techniques with a
maximum value of less than 1
(one) so it is difficult to interpret.
Negelker`s R Square is a
modification of the coefficient
Cox and Snell`s to ensure that the
value varies from 0 (zero) to 1
(one). This is done by looking at
the value of the coefficient of
determination in the logistic
regression model indicated by
Nagelkerker R Square. Value
Nagelkerker R Square of 0.219
which means the variability of
the dependent variable explained
by the independent variable is
equal to 2.19%, while the
remaining 97.81% is explained
by other variables outside the
research model.
feasibility of using a regression
model Hosmer and Lemeshow`s
Goodness of Fit Test showed the
Chi-square value amounted to
Square 5,145 with the significance of
.219
0742. The beradasarkanhasil
greater significance because the
value of α = 0.05, H0 can not be
rejected. This indicates that the
regression model deserves to be
used as a model to predict the
observational study.
4) Classification Matrices Test
Tabel 6
Classification matrix
Observed Predicted
OAGC Percentage
0 1 Correct
OAGC 0 170 7 96.0
1 25 11 30.6
Overall Percentage 85.0
Sumber: data diolah SPSS v23,
2016
The predictive power of the
regression model to predict the
likelihood of going concern audit
opinion on the company
amounted to 30.6%. It is shown
that by using a regression model
proposed ada11 companies or
 12

30.6% which is predicted to get a 8. DISCUSSION AND RESULTS

going concern audit opinion from a. Effect of the company's financial
a total of 36 companies that condition and going concern
received a going concern audit audit opinion
opinion. Based on the results of testing
the hypothesis that the financial
The predictive power of the condition variable negative effect
model companies that do not on reception concern.Penelitian
receive a going concern audit audit opinion is supported by
opinion is 96%, which means Primadewi (2011) which says that
that the proposed regression the auditor is almost never issued a
model as many as 170 companies going concern audit opinion on the
or 96% predicted will not accept company that is not experiencing
auditgoing opinion concern of a financial difficulties (financial
total of 177 companies are not distress) , Auditees did not have
receiving going concern audit serious financial problems, not
opinion. Overall strength experiencing liquidity problems,
prediction model by 85%. have sufficient working capital,
and no deficit in equity are
certainly spared from going-
5) Logistic Regression (Logistic concern audit opinion. While
Regression) companies are experiencing
financial problems, the difficulty of
Tabel 7 liquidity, lack of working capital,
Logistic Regression Coefficients as well as the continuous loss ratio
Test Results resulting in lower Z score great
Variables in the Equation opportunity to receive a going
concern opinion.
B S.E. Wald Df Sig. Exp(B)
SteZ93 -.244 .122 3.987 1 .046 .784 But these results do not concur
p SALGR -.311 .596 .273 1 .601 .732 with those of Kartika (2012),
a
1 ADTR Wulandari (2014) and Anjelina
.202 .414 .239 1 .625 1.224
(2012) which states that the
PRIOP 2.158 .446 23.418 1 .000 8.652 financial condition does not affect
Constant -1.478 .406 13.241 1 .000 .228 the going concern audit opinion.
a. Variable(s) entered on step 1: Kondisikeuangan,
Good financial condition is not the
main reason for the auditor to not
Pertumbuhan, KualitasAudit, OATS.
give a going concern audit opinion,
Sumber : data diolah SPSS
which means that the auditor is
v23, 2016
more reliant on its findings in
delivering audit opinion.
The test results of the regression
coefficients produces the following
It can be concluded that the
models:
worse the financial condition of the
company, the more likely the
company will get a going concern
audit opinion, and vice versa.
Because the auditor simply
provides going concern audit

opinion on the company's financial
distress or bankruptcy can be said
for the continuing survival of the
business.
b. Effect of Corporate Growth and
Going Concern Audit Opinion
From the results of logistic
regression coefficient analysis
states that the growth of the
company has no significant effect
on the going-concern audit
opinion. This research was
supported by Alichia (2013),
Primary (2013) and Anjelina
(2012), but contrary to the results
of research conducted Kartika
(2012) who said that the company's
growth affect the going concern
audit opinion.
This showed not guarantee
companies that experienced an
increase in net sales will also
experience an increase in net
profit, showing that the company
can not be separated from the
financial problems that it faces.
And this means that the ratio of
positive earnings growth can not
guarantee the company for not
receiving going concern audit
opinion.
c. Effect of Audit Quality and
Going Concern Audit Opinion
From the results of logistic
regression coefficient analysis
states that the quality of audit does
not have a significant effect on the
going-concern audit opinion. This
research was supported by Kartika
(2012) suggests that the reputation
of a public accounting firms
reflects the quality of the assurance
that it provides, the size of a KAP
does not affect the size of the KAP
possibility to issue a going concern
audit opinion. This is because
13
when the firm already has a good
reputation then it will try to defend
his reputation and avoid yourself
from things that can damage its
reputation, so they will always be
objective about his work.
However, contrary to the
results of research soewiyanto
(2012) which states that audit
quality affect the going concern
audit opinion, the auditor states
large scale have a higher risk to
maintain the existence of the name
of the agency that has a reputation
when compared to small-scale
auditor. So the researchers believe
that large-scale auditors will be
more cautious and careful in
providing audit report and certainly
would not hesitate to give a going
concern audit opinion if auditee
experiencing financial difficulties.
Audit quality is determined by two
things: the competence and
independence.
d. Effect of Prior Year Audit
Opinion and Going Concern
Audit Opinion
Based on the results of testing
the hypothesis that the previous
year's audit opinion variable
positive effect on the acceptance
concern. Research audit opinion is
supported by Wulandari (2014)
which states that the auditor was
very attentive and considerate
concern audit opinion received by
the auditee in the year before.The
this is consistent with the views
expressed by Muthcler (1985) that
the company which received the
going opinion concern pada
previous year were more likely to
receive the same opinion in the
current year. Although back is not
a going concern opinion

didasarkan kepada going concern
opinion received in sebelumnya
semata,
9. CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Conclusion
The Research is intended to
determine whether the independent
variables penelitianya the financial
condition, growth, quality audit
and audit opinion the previous year
affect the going concern audit
opinion expressed in the annual
financial statements of companies
listed on the Indonesian Stock
Exchange (BEI) in 2011 to 2013
that have been audited.
The conclusions of this
research involves the effect of the
financial condition, growth, quality
audit and audit opinion the
previous year against the going-
concern audit opinion is as follows:
1) Financial condition variables
affect the tendency of going
concern audit opinion on
manufacturing companies
listed in Indonesia Stock
Exchange (BEI) in accordance
with the criteria of selecting the
sample in this study. This
means that the greater the value
Z'score then the company has
the tendency is undoubtedly
viability of the company (the
going concern)
2) The company's growth does not
affect the going concern audit
opinion. This shows that the
ratio of positive earnings
growth can not guarantee the
company for not receiving
going concern audit opinion.
3) Audit quality does not affect
the going concern audit
opinion. This shows that the
reputation of a public
14
accounting firms reflects the
quality of the assurance that it
provides, the size of a KAP
does not affect the size of the
KAP possibility to issue a
going concern audit opinion.
This is because when the firm
already has a good reputation
then it will try to defend his
reputation and avoid yourself
from things that can damage its
reputation, so they will always
be objective about his work.
4) The audit opinion the previous
year were affected positively to
the going-concern audit
opinion. This indicates that the
auditor was very attentive and
considerate concern audit
opinion received by the auditee
in the previous year.
b. Suggestion
With a variety of research and
analysis that has researchers did, and
by the limitations of the research, it
can be given suggestions as follows:
1) Theoretical advice
a) For researchers to come, can
enter additional variables
such other financial ratios or
other factors which can lead
to variable that significantly
affect the issuance of going
concern audit opinion. For
the next researchers.
b) May extend years of
observation so that they can
see the trend trend publishing
concern audit opinion in the
long term with regard to the
difference between the
monetary crisis period with
the period of normal
economic conditions.
c) Use sectors or the various
sectors within the Stock
Exchange so it can be to see
the trend of publishing

secaraluas going concern
audit opinion.
d) Financial condition variables
that proxy with bankruptcy
prediction model (Z score)
empirically proven to predict
the correct outcome Granting
going concern audit opinion.
This model can be used as a
reference for the auditor in
deciding the company's going
concern status.
2) Practical advice
a) To investors and potential
investors who want to invest
should be careful - careful in
choosing the company and
should not invest in companies
that got going concern audit
opinion.
b) Auditors should be aware of
the conditions for the business
continuity of the auditee and
cautious in giving a going
concern opinion.
c) To the management of the
company should be able to
recognize the early signs of
business bankruptcy by
analyzing the financial
statements so as to take the
policy as soon as possible in
order to overcome these
problems and to avoid
acceptance of a going concern
opinion.
d) For the government should be
able to identify the factors -
factors that affect the going
concern audit opinion that can
be used as a reference in policy
making.
15
10. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agoes, Sukrisno, 2011. Auditing Practical
Accountant Examination By
Public Accountant. Jakarta: Four
Salemba.
Alichia, Yashinta Princess, 2013. Effects
of Company Size, Growth
The Company and Audit Opinion
Audit Opinion years earlier
against
Going Concern (empirical study
of companies listed on
Indonesia stock exchange).
Journals. Padang State
University.
Arsianto, Maydica Rossa and
RahardjoSiddiq Nur, 2013.
Factors Affecting Acceptance
Going Concern Audit Opinion.
Journal Of Accounting. Volume
2, Number 3, Year 2013:
University of Diponegoro.
Aryantika, Ni Putu and Ni Ketut Rasmini,
2015. Profitability, Leverage,
Prior Opinion and Auditor
Competence On Going Concern
Audit Opinion Journal of
Accounting. Udayana University.
Benny, I Made Priyana Benny and AANB
Dwirandra, 2016. Capability
Audit Opinion Moderating
Effects of Prior Year Profitability,
Leverage, Liquidity "Going
Concern Audit Opinion". E-
Journal of Accounting. Udayana
University.
Fahrul, 2014. Influence of Opinion
Shopping, Size and Audit Firm
Tenure on Going Concern Audit
Opinion (empirical study on
companies listed on the Stock
Exchange 2011-2013). Essay.
 16

Muhammadiyah University Opinion on Manufacturing

Tangerang. Company in Indonesia Stock
Exchange. Dynamics of
Ginting, Suriani and Linda Suryana, 2014. Accounting, Finance and
Analysis of Factors Affecting Banking. Journals. Stikubank
Going Concern Audit Opinion on University.
Manufacturing Company in
Indonesia Stock Exchange. Vol. Kristiana, Ira, 2012. Effects of Company
4, No.02, 2014. Size, Profitability, Liquidity,
Ghozali, Imam. 2011, Applications Growth Company, Against Going
Multivariate Analysis with SPSS Concern Audit Opinion In
Program. Manufacturing Companies listed
Diponegoro University. on the Indonesia Stock Exchange.
Semarang. Scientific Journal of Accounting
Students. Vol. 1, No. 1, 2012.
Hardi, Al Azhar A and Satriawan, Ricky
Rushd, 2014. The Audit Lag Krissindiastuti, Monica and Ni Ketut
Effect, Profitability and Quality Rasmini, 2016. Factors Affecting
Audit of the administration of Going Concern Audit Opinion.
Going Concern Audit Opinion In Accounting journal. Vol. 14, No.
the Wholesale and Retail Trade 1, 2016: University of Udayana.
Company Listing In BEI Period
2010-2012. Pekbis Journal, Masyitoh, Oni Currie and Desi Adhariani.
Vol.6, No.2, July 2014. 2010. The Analysis of
Determinants of Going concern
Handhayani, Ni Wayan Surya and Audit Report. Journal of Modern
Budiartha I Ketut, 2015. Effect of Accounting and Auditing. Vol. 6,
Size, 4: 26-37.
Profitability, loan to deposit ratio
and capital adequacy of the Going Maulina, Andini, 2014. Financial
Concern Audit Opinion. Condition and Opinion Shopping
Accounting journal. Udayana towards Acceptance Going
University. Concern Audit Opinion. Essay.
Muhammadiyah University
Indonesian Institute of Accountants. 2001. Tangerang.
Public Accountants Professional
Standards. Jakarta: Four Salemba. Noverio, R., 2011, the Auditor Quality
Impact Analysis, Liquidity,
Jensen, MC and Meckling, WH 1976. The Profitability and Solvency against
Theory Of The Firm, Managerial the Going Concern Audit Opinion
Behavior, Agency Costs and Manufacturing Companies Listed
Ownership Structure. Journal of in Indonesia Stock Exchange,
Financial Economics. Vol 3 Thesis, Department of
October. Pp 305- Accounting, Semarang.
360.www.papers.ssrn.com Diponegoro University.

Kartika, Andi, 2012. Effect of Financial Praptitorini, Mirna Dyah and Indira
and Non Financial Conditions Januarti, 2011. The Audit Quality
Acceptance Of Going Concern Impact Analysis, Debt Default
 17

and Opinion Shopping on Going Venuti, Elizabeth K, 2007. "The Going

Concern Audit Opinion. SNA X.
UNDIP.
Santosa, Arga Dawn and Linda
Kusumaning Wedari. 2007.
Analysis of Factors Affecting
Revenue Trends Going Concern
Audit Opinion. JAAI. Vol. 11,
No. 2, December 2007.
Setiawan, Ferry, 2015. Influence of
Corporate Growth, Profitability,
Liquidity and Leverage on Going
Concern Audit Opinion. Journal
of Accounting Research Science
&, Vol. 4 No. 3 (2015).
Suryani, Lana, 2014. The earnings
management practices, the
company's growth, the price
earnings ratio, the audit report
related lag going concern audit
opinion. E-Journal of Accounting,
University of Udayana.
Concern Assumption Revisited:
Asspssing A Compan's Future
Viability", The CPA Journal
Online.
Wulandari, Soliyah, 2014. Analysis of
Factors Affecting Auditor Giving
Going Concern Audit Opinion. E-
Journal of Accounting. Udayana
University.
Widyantari, P. 2011. Going Concern Audit
Opinion and the Factors that
Influence: Study on
Manufacturing Company in
Indonesia Stock Exchange.
Thesis. Udayana University:
Denpasar.
Wiagustini, Ni Putu luh. 2010. Basic -
Basic Financial Management.
Denpasar. Udayana University
Press. 76-77.

Sulistya, Febri Ayu And Dyan Yaniartha

Sukartha, 2013. Effect of Prior
Opinion, Growth And Corporate
Governance Mechanism
Provision of Audit Opinion On
Going Concer. E-Journal of
Accounting, University of
Udayana.

Sari, Kumala. 2012. Effect Analysis Audit

Tenure, Firm Reputation,
Disclosure, Company Size and
Liquidity Against Acceptance
Going Concern Audit Opinion
(Empirical Study on
Manufacturing Companies listing
on the Stock Exchange in 2005-
2010).

Sugiyono, 2011. Qualitative and

Quantitative Research Methods R
& D. Alfabeta, Bandung.

View publication stats