Feasibility of Model Regression Testing

75 Ln �� 1−�� = -1,718 + 0,640 BOC – 0,182 BOD – 0,037 Comm_Ind – 1,457 Lev + 4,112 PYAO + ε Ha 1 : BOC changes effect the going concern audit opinion Variable changes in the board of commissioners BOC in Table 4.9 shows a positive coefficient of 0,640 with a significant value is 0,473 0,05. That is Ha 1 rejected. Thus, changes in the board of commissioners BOC does not effect the going concern audit opinion. Ha 2 : BOD changes effect the going concern audit opinion Variable changes in the board of directors BOD in Table 4.9 shows a negative coefficient of 0,182 with a significant value of 0,858 0,05. That is Ha 2 rejected. Thus, changes in the board of directors BOD had no significant effect on the going concern audit opinion. Ha 3 : Independent Commissioner effect the going concern audit opinion Variable independent commissioner proxied by the percentage proportion of independent directors in the board of commissioners in Table 4.9 shows a positive coefficient of 0,037 with a significance value of 0,504 0,05, which means Ha 3 rejected. Thus, the independent Commissioner does not effect the going concern audit opinion. 76 Ha 4 : Leverage effect going concern audit opinion Leverage is proxied by total liabilities total assets in Table 4.9 shows a negative coefficient of 1,457 with a significance value of 0,520 0,05. This means Ha 4 rejected. So, leverage does not effect the going concern audit opinion. Ha 5 : Previous year audit opinion effect the going concern audit opinion In Table 4.9, variable audit opinion the previous year showed a positive coefficient of 4,112 with a significance of 0,000 0,05. This means Ha 5 accepted, so the previous years audit opinion effect the going concern audit opinion.

C. Discussion and Interpretation

This research is a study of the spending going concern audit opinion by the auditor to the auditee. This study uses the independent variable changes BOC, BOD changes, independent commissioner, leverage, and the audit opinion the previous year to examine the factors issuing going concern audit opinion. The research was conducted on a sample of 120 sector real estate and property companies in the period 2013 to 2015 using purposive sampling method. Based on the research results, obtained 14 companies 77 gained going concern audit opinion and the remaining of 106 companies did not obtain a going concern audit opinion. Summary results of the fifth hypothesis testing that has been done can be seen in the following table: Table 4.9 Summary of Results Hypothesis No Hypothesis Result 1 Changes on board commissioners effect the going concern audit opinion Rejected 2 Changes in board of directors effect the going concern audit opinion Rejected 3 Independent Commissioner effect the going concern audit opinion Rejected 4 Leverage effect the going concern opinion Rejected 5 Previous year audit opinion effect going concern audit opinion Accepted Source: Secondary data is processed The effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable will be explained as follows: 1. The results of hypothesis testing showed the level of significance BOC changes is 0,473 0,05 so that, it can be concluded that the change of commissioners does not effect the going concern audit opinion with a positive parameter values. This suggests that certain changes Board of