Nonlitigation Risk and Pricing Audit Services

2005 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard W. Houston ◽  
Michael F. Peters ◽  
Jamie H. Pratt
Keyword(s):  
Financial Statements ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Litigation Risk ◽  
Business Risk ◽  
Audit Risk ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
Potential Damage ◽  
General Business

In this study we expand the audit fee model introduced by Simunic (1980) and extended by Houston et al. (1999) by adding a third factor, nonlitigation risk, which refers to general business risks and/or opportunities that extend beyond litigation risk or the conduct of the audit (e.g., opportunities for future audit and nonaudit revenues, potential damage to the auditor's reputation from involvement with a client). In an experiment, we ask audit partners and managers to assess various risks and develop an audit plan after reviewing one of four risk-increasing audit scenarios—the discovery of an error, the discovery of a GAAP inconsistency, a client buyout where the audited financial statements are used in the determination of the exchange price, and the loss of a major client customer. We find that, in the error and buyout cases, audit fee increases are explained only by the planned increase in audit investment; in the GAAP inconsistency case, the audit fee increase is explained in part by the planned increase in audit investment, but to a greater extent by residual litigation risk; in the loss of customer case, the audit fee increase is explained by the planned audit investment, residual litigation risk, and nonlitigation risk. These results suggest that business risk is comprised of at least three factors (acceptable audit risk, residual litigation risk, and nonlitigation risk), and that auditors are compensated to act as auditors, provide insurance for investor losses, and bear risks associated with factors that extend beyond the conduct of the audit. We also discuss how nonlitigation risk can clarify the results of previous research and be used in future research.

PENGARUH RISIKO AUDIT DAN LAMANYA WAKTU AUDIT TERHADAP PENETAPAN AUDIT FEE (Survey pada Auditor Kantor AkuntanPublik di Bandung)

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina Hartati Saputri Herma Wiharno Enung Nurhayati
Keyword(s):  
Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Multiple Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Audit Risk ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Accounting Firm ◽  
Verification Methods ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
Positive Effect

The problem is an issue fee of a dilemma because the auditor received a fee from the company (client) to be audited. The purpose of this study to investigate the effect of audit risk and length of time of the determination of audit fee audit either simultaneously or partial. The object of this study is the auditor of public accounting firm in Bandung.This research method using descriptive and verification methods analyst. This study uses 8 public accounting firms and 100 auditors working in 8 shades that have been audited sample. As well as the technique used is purposive sampling analysis techniques, as well as the technique used is the technique of multiple linear regression analysis with the help of SPSS version 20.The results of this study showed that simultaneous Fhitung = 48.382> F table = 3.12 then Ho is rejected and Ha accepted, meaning that the risk of an audit, and the length of time the audit simultaneously significant effect on the determination of the audit fee. In the test Partial obtained the value t = 3.112> table = 1.666 then Ho is rejected and Ha accepted, meaning that audit risk positive and significant impact on the determination of the audit fee, and t = 4.826> table = 1.666 then Ho is rejected and Ha accepted, meaning the length of time the audit positive and significant impact on the determination of the audit fee.From the results of research and discussion can be concluded that simultaneous audit risk and the length of time the audit affect the determination of audit fee survey on auditor Public Accounting Firm in Bandung, then partially, audit risk positive effect on the determination of the audit fee and the length of time the audit positive effect on the determination audit fee.

Analytical Procedures and Audit-Planning Decisions

2000 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven M. Glover ◽  
James Jiambalvo ◽  
Jane Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
Financial Statements ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Audit Risk ◽  
Audit Planning ◽  
Planning Decisions ◽  
Analytical Procedures ◽  
Interim Testing ◽  
Audit Effectiveness

This study examines auditors' decisions to revise preliminary audit plans after analytical procedures performed during interim testing reveal significant, unexpected fluctuations. We examine the effects of two variables on these decisions: (1) the presence or absence of an explicit incentive for management to misstate the financial statements, and (2) the degree to which management's explanation for the fluctuation is independently corroborated. We hypothesize that these two variables interact. Auditors will be more likely to increase their planned tests when there is minimal corroboration of management's explanation for the fluctuation and there is an explicit incentive for management to misrepresent the financial statements. The results of an experiment are consistent with this hypothesis. While our results suggest that auditors are more likely to revise audit plans in these conditions, we also find that a relatively high proportion of auditors do not revise their plans when faced with increased audit risk signaled by significant, unexpected fluctuations. Future research is needed to better understand auditors' reluctance to expand testing and whether this reluctance jeopardizes audit effectiveness.

scholarly journals PENGARUH FEE AUDIT, ROTASI KAP, DAN REPUTASI AUDITOR TERHADAP KUALITAS AUDIT DI BURSA EFEK INDONESIA

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 84
Author(s):  
Bambang Hartadi
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Financial Statements ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Fundamental Analysis ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
Auditor Rotation ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
Taking Action

This study aimed to analysis the effect of audit fee, auditor rotation, and reputation of audit firm. Based on literature revie, it was hypothesized that audit fee, auditor rotation, and Reputation of audit firm have significant effect on audit quality. The data was financial statement from manufacturing firmof LQ-45 from 2004-2010 year. The results of statistical tests using multiple linear regression, there are evidences that Fee audit significant effect on audit quality, while the rotation and the reputation of the audit no significant effect on audit quality. There are several reasons why rotation and reputation did not affect audit quality. First possibility, caused by the reluctance of market participants to explore further whether the auditor who issued the opinion on the audited financial statements had actually experienced the rotation or not. Second possibility, market participants also never pay attention to whether the financial statements audited by an auditor who has a certain reputation or not. There are many things that need to consider for future research. Basically the market in Indonesia was largely considered capital gain, so it is less likely to use fundamental analysis (financial report) for consideration by taking action to sell or buy shares. If the market does not consider fundamental analysis exhibited significantly above, the actual market can also be said to be less attention to the audited (audit opinion).

scholarly journals Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Risiko Perusahaan Dan Kompensasi Terhadap Audit Fee:

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 320-333
Author(s):  
Aulia Baiyuri ◽  
Fefri Indra Arza ◽  
Mayar Afriyenti
Keyword(s):  
Firm Size ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Manufacturing Companies ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
External Auditor ◽  
Client Risk

This study aims to analyze some factors that influence the determination of external auditor audit fees on manufacturing companies listed on Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI). The factors tested in this study are firm size, client risk and compensation. The data used in this study are secondary data and the selection of the sample is using purposive sampling method. The study samples were 18 manufacturing companies listed in the Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI). The result of this research showed that firm size has positive significant relationship on the external auditor audit fees. However client risk and compensation have no relationship on the external auditor audit fees. Future research is expected can add another proxy to measure firm size, client risk and compentation. Future research also needs to consider a wider sample such as covering the entire populations on Indonesia Stock Exchange and extend the time of research.

Auditor Resignation and Risk Factors

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 529-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aloke (Al) Ghosh ◽  
Charles Y. Tang
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Measurement Errors ◽  
Class Action ◽  
Litigation Risk ◽  
Business Risk ◽  
Audit Risk ◽  
Proprietary Information ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Ex Ante ◽  
Auditor Litigation

SYNOPSIS Although auditor litigation risk is considered as a leading explanation for auditor resignations, audit risk and business risk might also trigger resignations. Auditor litigation risk is defined as the risk of the auditor being involved in a lawsuit, audit risk is defined as the risk that the auditor expresses an inappropriate audit opinion when the financial statements are materially misstated and, finally, business risk is defined as the risk associated with the client's survival and profitability. Because the three risk factors are not mutually exclusive, we examine their relevance and incremental importance using measures from the pre- and post-resignation periods. Using summary indices from the pre-resignation period, we find that all of the three ex ante risk indices are incrementally important for resignations, especially when the predecessor auditor is a Big 4 firm. Because the ex ante risk factors are prone to measurement errors and are less likely to capture the auditor's proprietary information about the client, we analyze data from the post-resignation period when the auditor's proprietary information is likely to become publicly known. We find that within a three-year period following an auditor's resignation, clients are more likely to (1) be involved in class-action lawsuits (ex post litigation risk), (2) have internal control problems (ex post audit risk), and (3) to be delisted from a national stock exchange (ex post business risk). Our research demonstrates that auditors consider all three risk factors, and not just litigation risk, in resignation decisions.

Client-Acceptance Decisions: Simultaneous Effects of Client Business Risk, Audit Risk, Auditor Business Risk, and Risk Adaptation

2000 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karla M. Johnstone
Keyword(s):  
Internal Control ◽  
Risk Evaluation ◽  
Business Risk ◽  
Audit Risk ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Risk Characteristics ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
Audit Evidence ◽  
Client Acceptance ◽  
Client Acceptance Decision

Little is known about how audit partners make the client-acceptance decision. In this paper, a model is developed and tested that characterizes the client-acceptance decision as a process of risk evaluation and risk adaptation. The model proposes that auditors will evaluate client-related risks (e.g., financial viability, and internal control) and use that evaluation to determine if the audit firm will suffer a loss on the engagement via a lack of engagement profitability or future litigation. The model proposes that auditors will adapt to the client-acceptance risks by using three strategies: (1) screening clients based on their risk characteristics; (2) screening clients based on the audit firm's risk of loss on the engagement; and (3) more proactively adapting using strategies including adjusting the audit fee, making plans about necessary audit evidence, making plans about personnel assignment, and/or adjusting the amount of data collected during the client-acceptance process. To test the model, an experiment was conducted using 137 highly experienced audit partners as participants. The results show that the partners considered the relationships between client-related risks and used their evaluation of those risks to evaluate the audit firm's risk of loss on the engagement. In terms of risk adaptation, partners screened clients based on the clients' risk characteristics and based on the audit firm's risk of loss on the engagement. Contrary to prediction, the partners did not use more proactive risk-adaptation strategies (e.g., adjusting the audit fee, making plans about necessary audit evidence, etc.) to make less “acceptable” clients more acceptable. It appears that avoiding risk, rather than proactively adapting to risk, is descriptive of how audit partners currently make the client-acceptance decision.

scholarly journals Engagement Risk: Perceptions And Strategies From Audit Partners

2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack R. Ethridge ◽  
Treba Marsh ◽  
Bonnie Revelt
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Moderate Degree ◽  
Fraud Triangle ◽  
Business Risk ◽  
Financial Loss ◽  
Audit Risk ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
General Management ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Potential Damage

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 34.2pt 0pt 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">The audit function creates several important relationships among the various parties.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One of the significant and potentially problematic relationships is between the audit firm and the audit client.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The decision by the audit firm to accept or retain a client is crucial because of the potential risk of being associated with certain clients. The potential damage can range from financial loss and/or loss of prestige to the ultimate demise of the audit firm.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Engagement risk is considered to be composed of three components: entity&rsquo;s business risk, audit risk, and auditor&rsquo;s business risk. This research questioned whether audit firms have significantly changed their views regarding engagement risk and how they evaluate and manage this risk.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>An analysis of the surveys revealed that 83% of the respondents believed their views regarding the importance of engagement risk have changed, but only to a moderate degree.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In evaluating engagement risk, audit partners considered management integrity in general, management integrity toward fraud, and the presence of the elements of the fraud triangle to be the most important factors. Assignment of more experienced audit staff and increased substantive tests of account balances were the most frequently used mitigating strategies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Based upon these results, which were consistent with our previous study, it appears there have not been significant changes in audit partners&rsquo; views regarding the importance of the client acceptance/retention decision.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span></span></span></p>

Does Recent Academic Research Support Changes to Audit Reporting Standards?

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Bédard ◽  
Paul Coram ◽  
Reza Espahbodi ◽  
Theodore J. Mock
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Financial Statements ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Research Support ◽  
The Public ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
Information Gap ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Reporting Process

SYNOPSIS The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), and the U.K. Financial Reporting Council (FRC) have proposed or approved standards that significantly change the independent auditor's report. These initiatives require the auditor to make additional disclosures intended to close the information gap; that is, the gap between the information users desire and the information available through the audited financial statements, other corporate disclosures, and the auditor's report. They are also intended to improve the relevancy of the auditor's report. We augment prior academic research by providing standard setters with an updated synthesis of relevant research. More importantly, we provide an assessment of whether the changes are likely to close the information gap, which is important to financial market participants and other stakeholders in the audit reporting process. Also, we identify areas where there seems to be a lack of sufficient research. These results are of interest to all stakeholders in the audit reporting process, as the changes to the auditor's report are fundamental. Additionally, our summaries of research on the auditor's report highlight where there is limited research or inconsistent results, which will help academics identify important opportunities for future research.

Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations: Insights from the Management Control Literature

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 117-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krista Fiolleau ◽  
Theresa Libby ◽  
Linda Thorne
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Internal Control ◽  
Management Control ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Fraud Triangle ◽  
Audit Risk ◽  
Research Opportunities ◽  
Dysfunctional Behavior ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Published Research

SUMMARY As the scope of the audit continues to broaden (Cohen, Krishnamoorthy, and Wright 2017), research questions in management control and internal control are beginning to overlap. Even so, there is little overlap between these fields in terms of published research to date. The purpose of this paper is to take a step in bridging the gap between the management control and the internal control literatures. We survey relevant findings from the extant management control literature published between 2003 and 2016 on dysfunctional behavior and the ways in which it might be mitigated. We then use the fraud triangle as an organizing framework to consider how the management control literature might help to address audit risk factors identified in SAS 99/AU SEC 316 (AICPA 2002). The outcome of our analysis is meant to identify and classify the extant management control literature of relevance to research on internal control in a manner that researchers new to the management control literature will find accessible. We conclude with a set of future research opportunities that can help to broaden the scope of current research in internal control.

Earnings Management, Litigation Risk, and Asymmetric Audit Fee Responses

2006 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence J. Abbott ◽  
Susan Parker ◽  
Gary F. Peters
Keyword(s):  
Earnings Management ◽  
High Growth ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Discretionary Accruals ◽  
Litigation Risk ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
Growth Firms ◽  
Price Earnings Ratio ◽  
Year 2000 ◽  
Conservative Bias

This study examines the association between audit fees and earnings management, using publicly available fee data. We hypothesize that, due to asymmetric litigation effects, audit fees decrease (increase) with a client's risk of income-decreasing (increasing) earnings management risk. We also hypothesize that the positive relation between income-increasing earnings management risk and audit fees is heightened for clients that are high-growth firms. We test our hypotheses with a sample of 429 public, non-regulated, Big 5 audited companies, using fee data for the year 2000. We find that downward earnings management risk, as estimated by negative (i.e., income-decreasing) discretionary accruals, is associated with lower audit fees. We also document that upward earnings management risk, as estimated by positive discretionary accruals, is associated with higher audit fees and that the interaction of this risk with an industry-adjusted price-earnings ratio has an incrementally significant, positive effect on fees. We interpret our findings as consistent with a conservative bias on the part of auditors. The conservative bias arises from asymmetric litigation risk in which income-increasing discretionary accruals exhibit greater expected litigation costs than income-decreasing discretionary accruals (Simunic and Stein 1996; Palmrose and Scholz 2004; Palmrose et al. 2004; Richardson et al. 2002; Heninger 2001).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document