Introduction It seems to be a cyclical situation regarding transparency and financial quality issues, since after each economic bubble an unusually large number of companies seem to have committed irregularities in the presentation of their financial statements, after From this scenario it emerges that many authorities at different levels of government (and professional bodies) are proposing new legislation, recommendations and higher standards to help reduce the “fog” in financial reporting and increase its quality and transparency. It is possible that some of the measures usually suggested (limiting the duration of audit assignments) are not really useful, but could even be harmful to the proposed purposes. In addition to regulations, it is also useful to identify the usual situations and conditions in which the quality of reporting decreases, as this way auditors (internal and external) can find themselves in a state of heightened alert, when such conditions arise. Brief review of the literature According to Inglese (1999) there are two definitions of Information Quality (which can also apply to financial information), they are intrinsic quality, i.e. understood as data accuracy, the other definition is pragmatic quality, in this case what matters is the usefulness of the data, because if some data is useless, has no pragmatic quality, in our case, it would mean that the financial data released by the company would be of no help to an auditor or an investor to assess the impact of the company's financial situation a business. Transparency of financial information is understood as high accuracy on reported company profits (Sadka, 2011), in the same paper it is proposed that the quality of information could reduce the liquidity beta, which in turn will reduce risk..... . middle of paper...that the financial statements were incorrect, the fact is that sales grew astronomically, but profits remained at the same low levels as before. This could be a red flag that something is wrong with a company's reported revenue. Conclusions: We have seen that we can only consider financial reports to be of high quality if they help investors adequately assess the risks of an investment, we should also be aware that there are many ways in which companies can hide their bad results, therefore it is also necessary for investors and auditors to monitor for warning signs such as complex structures or arrangements, and to be more aware than normal as we approach the end of the period of the economic cycle in which lower quality standards are applied. Furthermore, we can say that there are no easy solutions, as “common sense” measures such as mandatory rotation of auditors can be harmful.