The objective of this study is to evaluate the audit mandate, industry specialization and company size and its correlation with reformulations financial. A client's restatements suggest low audit quality because they indicate that the client's financial statements are not in line with GAAP. I analyzed a sample of 250 public company restatements from 2008 to 2012. I collected the data using COMPUSTAT and AuditAnalytics. As for my findings, I found that auditor engagement has a negative correlation with financial restatement. I also found that industry experience has a negative correlation with financial reclassifications. Furthermore, it appears that company size has no correlation with financial reclassifications. In conclusion, it turns out that my findings on auditor tenure and industry specialization are in line with my hypothesis that these two indicators are negatively correlated with financial reformulations. Regarding company size, there is no correlation with company statement reformulations. Sarbanes Oxley Section 404 requires companies to have independent auditors evaluate their internal control systems and financial reporting. These independent auditors must take this into account in their audit report intended for the general public, including the company's investors. While an audit firm may follow generally accepted auditing standards and reflect proper assurance in their audit work, there may be a case where the client still has a financial restatement. As stated previously, restatements are a sign of poor audit quality. They suggest that the financial statements presented contain material errors and indicate an audit failure. According to Chaney and Philipich (2002), audit failure reflects the poor performance of the audit firm and can also be… middle of paper… perfectly explained by this model. Also, as expected, our constant and skill are negative, meaning that any change in the independent variables will produce a negative effect on our dependent variable. The table also shows that the p-value of the regression value is 0.0294. This means that the regression model has a statistical significance confidence level of approximately 95% to represent the redetermination value. Based on this model, we expected reformulations to have a negative relationship with firm size, growth, leverage, EPS, and ROA. Because when all three factors decrease, reclassifications also decrease. The table above shows that the adjusted R square is 0.7569. This is our coefficient of determination and shows a strong correspondence between the actual and fitted values. This means that there are 45.69% of reformulations that can be perfectly explained by this model.