Revisjon som samfunnsinstitusjon: Tillit, proveny og verdiskaping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Revisjon har betydelige samfunnseffekter utover den direkte nytten for det enkelte selskap. Basert på empiriske analyser av Skatteetatens kontroller av småbedrifter og makrostudier av tillit finner vi følgende: (1) Basert på Skatteetatens kontroller anslår vi at fraværet av revisjon i små bedrifter er forbundet med et provenytap på inntil 2,5 milliarder kroner årlig. (2) Tillit er en nøkkelfaktor for økonomisk utvikling, og Norge ville anslagsvis hatt om lag 25 prosent lavere BNP per innbygger med søreuropeiske tillitsnivåer. (3) Revisjon fungerer som en investering i samfunnets kollektive tillitskapital – en ressurs som bidrar til lavere transaksjonskostnader, riktigere skatteinngang og bedre rammevilkår for verdiskaping. Artikkelen bygger på rapporten Samfunnseffekter av revisjon er undervurdert, som Menon Economics (2025) har utarbeidet på oppdrag av Revisjonsforeningen. English abstract The Societal Effects of Auditing: Trust, Revenue and the Audit Exemption Scheme Audit has significant societal effects beyond the direct benefits to individual companies. Based on empirical analyses of the Norwegian Tax Administration’s inspections of small enterprises and macro-studies on trust, we find: (1) Drawing on the Tax Administration’s controls, we estimate that the absence of statutory audit in small companies is associated with a revenue loss to the treasury of up to NOK 2.5 billion per year. (2) Trust is a key driver of economic development, and Norway would have had roughly 25 percent lower GDP per capita with Southern European levels of trust. (3) Auditing functions as an investment in society’s collective stock of trust—a resource that contributes to lower transaction costs, more accurate tax collection, and better framework conditions for value creation. This article is based on the report The Societal Effects of Auditing Are Underestimated, prepared by Menon Economics (2025) on behalf of the Audit Association.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.011 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".