MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416975663 · doi:10.23865/magma.v28.1543

Revisjon som samfunnsinstitusjon: Tillit, proveny og verdiskaping

2025· article· sv· W4416975663 on OpenAlexaff
Sveinung Fjose, Per Fredrik Johnsen

Bibliographic record

VenueMagma · 2025
Typearticle
Languagesv
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditTreasuryRevenuePer capitaStatutory lawDatabase transactionNorwegian

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagmaSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207