Comparative analysis of the adoption of the new european legislation in slovenia, germany, great britain and slovakia

Revidiranje je posebna gospodarska dejavnost, ki jo izvajajo za to specializirane gospodarske družbe oziroma posebej za to izobraženi in specializirani posamezniki, ki delujejo bodisi v okviru omenjenih družb bodisi kot samostojni subjekti. Revizorji tako preverjajo in preizkušajo računovodske izkaze gospodarskih družb, ki so zavezane k obvezni reviziji računovodskih izkazov ter tako po opravljeni reviziji podajo mnenje o korektnosti revidiranih računovodskih izkazov. Revizorji z vidika kapitalskega trga igrajo ključno vlogo, saj se delničarji zanašajo na njihove ugotovitve. Z vidika tega zaupanja pa je izrednega pomena, da obstaja regulacija na področju revidiranja. S strani Evropske unije lahko zaznamo prvo večjo regulacijo na področju revidiranja z uvedbo Direktive 2006/43/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta. Omenjena direktiva je odgovor na finančne škandale, kot so na primer dogajanja v povezavi z družbami Enron, WorldCom in Parmalat, ki so zelo oslabila zaupanje javnosti v neodvisnost in nepristranskost revizorjev. Omenjena direktiva daje velik poudarek na etična načela revizorja, kot so na primer nepristranskost, poštenost, zaupnost in podobno, saj lahko le ob upoštevanju teh načel revizor deluje strokovno in neodvisno. Maja 2014 pa sta bila s strani Evropske unije objavljena dva nova dokumenta, ki se nanašata na regulacijo obvezne revizije računovodskih izkazov, to sta Direktiva 2014/56/EU o obveznih revizijah za letne in konsolidirane računovodske izkaze in Uredba (EU) 537/2014 o posebnih zahtevah v zvezi z obvezno revizijo subjektov javnega interesa. Nova evropska reforma na področju revidiranja si tako prizadeva povrniti zaupanje javnosti v neodvisnost in nepristranskost revizorjev, predvsem pa v revizijska mnenja, ki jih prebirajo vlagatelji. Z novo evropsko zakonodajo naj bi se izboljšala sama kakovost revidiranja, prav tako se z evropsko reformo na področju revidiranja uvajajo strožja pravila glede nadzora nad revizorji, na področju sankcij v primeru kršitev, uvaja se tudi obvezna rotacija revizorjev za vse družbe javnega interesa, strožje pa so opredeljene tudi smernice v zvezi s prepovednimi nerevizijskimi storitvami. Države članice EU so tako morale v roku dveh let implementirati nove evropske predpise na področju revidiranja, v okviru te implementacije pa so lahko izbrale različne načine prenosa le teh v svoje nacionalne zakonodaje, prav tako so nekatere države članice bolj, nekatere pa manj podrobneje opredelile zahteve nove evropske reforme na področju revidiranja. Velik razkorak med državami članicami EU lahko tako opazimo pri predpisanih sankcijah, saj nova evropska zakonodaja na področju revidiranja opredeljuje primere, v katerih se kršitelje sankcionira, ne opredeljuje pa same višine in načine sankcij za kršitve. Podobna razhajanja lahko zasledimo tudi pri sodnem varstvu revizorjev. Slovenija je pri implementaciji nove evropske zakonodaje na področju revizije, gledano z vidika opredelitve in višine sankcij za kršitve, zavzela zelo restriktivno stališče. Sankcije so v Sloveniji precej visoke glede na velikost revizijskega trga, večina revizijskih družb v Sloveniji je majhnih, visoke kazni za kršitve pa lahko zelo ogrozijo njihov obstoj. Majhne revizijske družbe se iz leta v leto srečujejo z upadom družb, ki so zavezane k reviziji, iz tega naslova pa si, da bi obdržale svoje naročnike oziroma pridobile še kakšnega novega naročnika, majhne revizijske družbe med sabo konkurirajo s ceno. Z vidika sodnega varstva pa je slovenski zakonodajalec zavzel zelo ohlapno stališče, ta namreč ne zagotavlja ustreznega pravnega varstva revizorjev in revizijskih družb, saj ne predvideva dvostopenjskega organa odločanja o kršitvah.Auditing is a special economic activity that is carried out for these specialized companies, or especially for those educated and specialized individuals who operate either within the aforementioned companies, or as independent entities. The auditors check and test the financial statements of companies that are obliged to a statutory audit of the financial statements and after the audit, the auditors must provide an opinion on the correctness of the audited financial statements. In terms of the capital market, the auditors play a key role, since shareholders rely on their findings in the light of this trust, it is very important that there is a regulation in the field of auditing. The European Union\u27s first major audit regulation can be identified by introducing Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. This directive is a response to financial scandals such as developments in connection with Enron, WorldCom and Parmalat, which have greatly weakened public confidence in the independence and impartiality of auditors. This Directive places great emphasis on the ethical principles of the auditor, such as, for example, impartiality, fairness, confidentiality and the like, since only under these principles the auditor can work professionally and independently. In May 2014, two new documents were published by the European Union concerning the regulation of the statutory audit of financial statements, these are Directive 2014/56/EU on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts and Regulation (EU) 537/2014 on specific requirements regarding statutory audit of public-interest entities. The new European audit reform aims to restore public confidence in the independence and impartiality of auditors, and in particular to restore confidence in audit opinions read by investors. The new European legislation task is to improve the quality of auditing itself, and the European audit reform also introduces stricter rules on auditing auditors, in the area of sanctions in the event of violations, there is also being introduced the obligatory rotation of auditors for all public interest entities, and more stringent guidelines on prohibited non-audit services are also defined. The EU Member States were required to implement the new European regulations in the field of auditing within two years, and within the framework of this implementation, they could choose different ways of transposing them into their national legislation, some Member States define the requirements of the new European reforms in the field of auditing more specifically then others. The large gap between the EU Member States can be observed in the prescribed sanctions, since the new European legislation in the field of auditing defines cases in which the offenders are sanctioned and does not define the height and the methods of sanctions for violations, similar discrepancies can also be found in the judicial protection of auditors. In the implementation of the new European legislation in the area of audit, Slovenia took a very restrictive position in terms of the definition and level of sanctions for violations. The sanctions in Slovenia are quite high in relation to the size of the audit market, while the majority of audit firms in Slovenia are small, so the high penalties for violations can greatly jeopardize their existence. Small audit firms are facing a decline in the companies that are committed to auditing. So in order to maintain their subscribers or to acquire a new subscriber, small auditing companies are competing with each other with low price. From the point of judicial protection view, the Slovenian legislator took a very loose position, because it does not provide adequate legal protection for auditors and audit companies, since it does not provide for a two-tier authority to rule on violations