CEO Turnover and Audit Pricing

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua-Wei Huang ◽  
Robert J. Parker ◽  
Yun-Chia Anderson Yan ◽  
Yi-Hung Lin
Keyword(s):  
Voluntary Turnover ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Ceo Turnover ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Predictor Variables ◽  
Audit Pricing ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Relationship

SYNOPSIS This study examines the relationship between CEO turnover in client companies and the fees charged by their audit firms. We propose that forced CEO turnover (such as dismissals) pose higher business and audit risks for the audit firm than voluntary turnover (such as retirements); further, greater risk leads to higher audit prices. We develop a regression model of audit fees that includes, as predictor variables, type of CEO turnover and control variables identified in prior studies (e.g., ROA, total assets, and corporate governance). Results reveal that companies with forced CEO turnover have significantly higher audit fees than companies with either voluntary turnover or no turnover. Further, we find no difference in audit fees between firms with voluntary turnover and firms without turnover. Data Availability: The data used in this study are publicly available.

The Effect of Supply Chain Knowledge Spillovers on Audit Pricing

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jengfang Chen ◽  
Hsihui Chang ◽  
Hsin-Chi Chen ◽  
Sungsoo Kim
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Knowledge Spillovers ◽  
National Level ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Audit Pricing ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Office Level

ABSTRACT We present evidence on the effect of audit firms' supply chain knowledge spillover on audit pricing. Analyzing data from Audit Analytics and Compustat for the seven-year period from 2003 to 2009, we find that audit firms' supply chain knowledge has a negative effect on audit fees. Specifically, an audit firm with more supply chain knowledge charges lower audit fees to its clients when the firm also audits its clients' major buyers. In addition, we find that the fee discount is greater when the audit firm possesses major buyer-related supply chain knowledge at the office level compared to the national level. Our findings are consistent, albeit weaker, to an expanded sample of companies that voluntarily disclose their major buyers. Data Availability: The data are publicly available.

Characteristics of Managerial Tone Priced by Auditors: Evidence Based on Annual Letters to Shareholders of Large U.S. Firms

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-161
Author(s):  
Adam Greiner ◽  
Lorenzo Patelli ◽  
Matteo Pedrini
Keyword(s):  
Source Credibility ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Change Analysis ◽  
Audit Pricing ◽  
Client Risk ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Jel Classifications ◽  
Corporate Disclosures

SUMMARY We examine the relationship between audit pricing and managerial tone as a proxy of source credibility. Prior research shows that source credibility influences auditors' perceptions of client risk. Textually analyzing annual letters to shareholders, we find that characteristics of managerial tone that reflect impaired source credibility are associated with higher audit fees. Additional tests, including a change analysis and controls for other managerial characteristics, future client performance, and aggressive accounting choices, corroborate and build on our inferences that managerial tone proxies for source credibility. Our study extends literature that uses corporate disclosures to measure managerial characteristics by showing that auditors price source credibility reflected in managerial tone. These findings are important because they empirically confirm that source credibility affects auditors' assessments of engagement risk and that analysis of tone can inform researchers, auditors, and investors who seek to enhance effectiveness and objectivity in assessing source credibility based on managerial tone. JEL Classifications: G21; G34; M41. Data Availability: The data in this study are available from public sources indicated in the paper.

Auditor Industry Specialization and Audit Pricing and Effort

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gil Soo Bae ◽  
Seung Uk Choi ◽  
Jae Eun Lee
Keyword(s):  
Production Efficiency ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Audit Pricing ◽  
Firm Level ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Industry Specialization ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Audit Production ◽  
Industry Expertise

SUMMARY We find that auditor industry expertise is both a firm-level and partner-level phenomenon, which suggests that industry expertise captured by accounting firms is dispersed among engagement partners through knowledge sharing and transfers within audit firms. We also find that the higher audit fees by expert auditors are due to more hours and not higher rates. While spending more hours allows expert auditors to extract higher fees in total, the finding that expert firms/partners exert greater effort does not support the suggestion that expert auditors are in general more efficient in audit production. However, we find weak evidence that audit hours for expert auditors are lower in industries and companies with homogenous operations and comparable accounting than in other industries and companies. This finding suggests that knowledge transfers more likely take place in homogeneous and comparable industries, leading to production efficiency that moderates the increase in audit hours charged by experts. JEL Classifications: M4; M42. Data Availability: All data are available from the identified sources.

The Effect of Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation on Audit Quality and Audit Fees: Empirical Evidence from the Korean Audit Market

2014 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 167-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soo Young Kwon ◽  
Youngdeok Lim ◽  
Roger Simnett
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Discretionary Accruals ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Mandatory Rotation ◽  
Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation

SUMMARY: Using a unique setting in which mandatory audit firm rotation was required from 2006–2010, and in which both audit fees and audit hours were disclosed (South Korea), this study provides empirical evidence of the economic impact of this policy initiative on audit quality, and the associated implications for audit fees. This study compares both pre- and post-policy implementation and, after the implementation of the policy, mandatory long-tenure versus voluntary short-tenure rotation situations. Where audit firms were mandatorily rotated post-policy, we observe that audit quality (measured as abnormal discretionary accruals) did not significantly change compared with pre-2006 long-tenure audit situations and voluntary post-rotation situations. Audit fees in the post-regulation period for mandatorily rotated engagements are significantly larger than in the pre-regulation period, but are discounted compared to audit fees for post-regulation continuing engagements. We also find that the observed increase in audit fees and audit hours in the post-regulation period extends beyond situations where the audit firm was mandatorily rotated, suggesting that the introduction of mandatory audit firm rotation had a much broader impact than the specific instances of mandatory rotation. Data Availability: Most of the financial data used in the present study are available from the KIS Value Database. The data for audit hours and fees were drawn from statements of operating results filed with the Financial Supervisory Services (FSS) in Korea.

The Effect of Office Changes within Audit Firms on Clients' Audit Quality and Audit Fees

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-99
Author(s):  
Carl W. Hollingsworth ◽  
Terry L. Neal ◽  
Colin D. Reid
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Additional Analysis ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Audit Partner Rotation

SUMMARY While prior research has examined audit firm and audit partner rotation, we have little evidence on the impact of within-firm engagement team disruptions on the audit. To examine these disruptions, we identify a unique sample of companies where the audit firm issuing office changed but the audit firm did not change and investigate the effect of these changes on the audit. Our results indicate that companies that have a change in their audit firm's issuing office exhibit a decrease in audit quality and an increase in audit fees. In additional analysis, we partition office changes into two groups—client driven changes and audit firm driven changes. This analysis reveals that client driven changes are more likely to result in a higher audit fee while audit quality is unchanged. Conversely, audit firm driven changes do not result in a higher audit fee but do experience a decrease in audit quality.

Hiring Auditors with a Part II Quality Control Report: An Opportunity for Increased Earnings Management or Lower Audit Fees?

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-93
Author(s):  
Jared Eutsler ◽  
D. Kip Holderness ◽  
Megan M. Jones
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Fiscal Year ◽  
The Public ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Public Company ◽  
General Demand ◽  
Systemic Quality

ABSTRACT The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board's (PCAOB) Part II inspection reports, which disclose systemic quality control issues that auditors fail to remediate, signal poor audit quality for triennially inspected audit firms. Auditors that receive a Part II inspection report typically experience a decrease in clients, which demonstrates a general demand for audit quality. However, some companies hire auditors that receive Part II inspection reports. We examine potential reasons for hiring these audit firms. We find that relative to companies that switch to auditors without Part II reports, companies that switch to auditors with Part II reports have higher discretionary accruals in the first fiscal year after the switch, which indicates lower audit quality and a heightened risk for future fraud. We find no difference in audit fees. Our results suggest that PCAOB Part II inspection reports may signal low-quality auditors to companies that desire low-quality audits. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.

The relationship between audit components and audit expectation gap in listed companies on the Tehran stock exchange

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 199-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahdi Salehi ◽  
Fariba Jahanbin ◽  
Mohammad Sadegh Adibian
Keyword(s):  
Regression Model ◽  
Multiple Regression ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Listed Companies ◽  
Multiple Regression Model ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Expectation Gap ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose The expectation gap between auditors and users has recently been the topic of many controversies. This paper aims to evaluate the relationship between auditor’s characteristics and audit expectation gap among information users in listed companies on the Tehran stock exchange market. In other words, the study attempts to find whether there is a significant relationship between audit components and the audit expectation gap or not. Design/methodology/approach The multiple regression model is used to test the hypotheses. Research hypotheses are tested using a sample of 78 listed companies on the Tehran stock exchange during 2012-2016, by using integrated data technique of the multiple regression model. Findings The findings show that standard audit fees are not significantly associated with the audit expectation gap. Furthermore, audit fees are negatively associated with the audit expectation gap, which provides that allocated audit price in financial statements gives useful information for external and internal individuals. Predictably, it is recommended that audit opinion significantly determines the level of the audit expectation gap. The authors also find that the independence of the director boards and audit committee members fulfill the expectation gap of individual users. Moreover, finding the negative impact of audit firms ranking on the expectation gap, supports the idea of higher ranked audit firms provide high quality services, and consequently, more reliable information. Finally, the results show that the audit record is positively associated with the audit expectation gap. Originality/value As all recent studies on the expectation gap were qualitative, the present study is the first paper, which measures the expectation gap quantitatively through the statistical method.

Does audit quality mediate the relationship between audit firm size and audit fees

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 279
Author(s):  
Ayman Bader ◽  
Mohammad Ebrahim Nawaiseh ◽  
Halla Noor Nawaiseh
Keyword(s):  
Firm Size ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
The Relationship

scholarly journals RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AUDITORS' FEES AND EARNINGS MANAGEMENT

2017 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 148-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANTONIO LOPO MARTINEZ ◽  
ARQUIMEDES DE JESUS MORAES
Keyword(s):  
Earnings Management ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Perception Of Risk ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The Relationship

ABSTRACT This study investigates the relationship between audit fees and earnings management in the Brazilian market. In response to the research question, we used a sample of 300 firms listed on the BM&FBovespa for which it was possible to identify the amount paid to the auditors, using data gathered from the Economatica® database and the website of the Brazilian Securities Commission (Comissão Brasileira de Valores Mobiliários [CVM]). We analyzed the regressions with the aim of supporting or refuting the hypothesis that audit firms that charge less for their service tend to be more relaxed regarding earnings management by their client companies. The results support this hypothesis. The main contribution of this study is the possibility of stating that more aggressive earnings management occurs predominantly among firms that pay less than expected for audit services. This study evidences the perception of risk by audit firms and how this is reflected in the audit fees charged.

The Relationship between Aggressive Real Earnings Management and Current and Future Audit Fees

2016 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Greiner ◽  
Mark J. Kohlbeck ◽  
Thomas J. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Earnings Management ◽  
Firm Value ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Cash Flows ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Real Earnings Management ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Pricing Behavior ◽  
Reported Earnings ◽  
The Relationship

SUMMARY We examine the relationship between aggressive income-increasing real earnings management (REM) and current and future audit fees. Managers pursue REM activities to influence reported earnings and, as a consequence, alter cash flows and sacrifice firm value. We posit that the implications of REM are considered in auditors' assessments of engagement risk related to the client's economic condition and result in higher audit fees. We find that, with the exception of abnormal reductions in SG&A, aggressive income-increasing REM is positively associated with both current and future audit fees. Additional analyses provide evidence consistent with increased effort combined with increased risk contributing to the current pricing effect, with increased business risk primarily driving the future pricing effect. We, therefore, provide evidence that aggressive income-increasing REM activities have a significant influence on auditor pricing behavior, consistent with the audit framework associating engagement risk with audit fees. JEL Classifications: G21; G34; M41. Data Availability: The data in this study are available from public sources indicated in the paper.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document