Estimating Audit Fees Post-SOX

2008 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. A9-A18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise E. Dickins ◽  
Julia L. Higgs ◽  
Terrance R. Skantz

SYNOPSIS: This article discusses the findings of structured interviews with audit practitioners with a goal of increasing our understanding of the audit fee estimation process and how that process has changed following the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). The data provide practicing auditors with information that may be helpful in the development or revision of their own audit fee pricing practices. The data are also relevant to audit committee members as they seek to better understand the audit fee pricing process and how potential risk areas or other matters may impact audit fees. Researchers may also find the results of the interviews useful for the enhancement of audit fee pricing models, whether to more-closely align estimation models with the reported fee estimation process, or to revise models to reflect post-SOX economic and regulatory changes.

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. A1-A22 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C. Hay

SUMMARY Audit fees are related to important ethical issues for auditors. There has been increasing research on audit fees recently, including research on potential ethical risks regarding audit fees, which helps to illuminate some of these professional issues. The International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants (IESBA) is very interested in this area and asked me to prepare a paper reviewing the relevant research. This summary reviews research that became available from 2006 to 2016 on four issues related to audit fees—fee level, dependence, non-audit fees, and firms that have a significant non-audit services business. Examining the research shows consistent evidence about two issues, namely that audit fees for new engagements are lower and that non-audit services affect independence in appearance. There are two further issues about which there is some concern. First, there are occasional studies reporting evidence that non-audit services provided by an auditor are associated with a loss of independence indicated by lower audit quality, even though most research does not support this conclusion. Second, there has been recent concern about growth in non-audit services to non-audit clients and there is some preliminary evidence that audit quality is lower in firms that have more extensive non-audit businesses. In general, although audit fee research does not convey a message that there are widespread ethical problems, the body of research shows that there are some risk areas.


2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-110
Author(s):  
Songtao Mo ◽  
Yifan Shi ◽  
Yajing Wang

An understanding of changing auditing regulatory environment is vital in preparing students for the challenges in the accounting profession. The revised requirements for audit committees are one of the significant changes after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Presenting a case history of regulatory changes for audit committees, this study requires students to critically analyze information and to conduct research on auditing topics. Meanwhile, integrating further discussion on corporate governance into auditing class can enrich students learning experience by stimulating critical thinking.


2022 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-99
Author(s):  
Nova Kharlinda ◽  
Iskandar Muda ◽  
Keulana Erwin

This study analyzes the factors influencing the number of audit fees in manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2013 – 2019. The number of audit fees depends on several factors that influence it. The Indonesian Institute of Certified Public Accountants has determined the minimum standard of audit fees charged to auditee companies but does not include a substantial total cost and tends to fluctuate and vary. This study uses the audit committee, audit report lag, and firm size as independent variables, the type of public accounting firm as the moderating variable, and audit fee as the dependent variable. This study uses causal associative as the research design. The data was collected by collecting data on the company's financial statements from 2013 to 2019. The study population was 176 manufacturing companies whose samples were taken using the purposive sampling method. The number of research samples was 20, with 140 observations. The data analysis technique uses Studio R's panel analysis regression model as the test tool. The results showed that the Audit Committee, audit report lag, and firm size each had a significant positive effect on the audit fee's value and jointly had a significant impact on the audit fee. The type of public accountant office is not a moderating variable. Keywords: audit fee, audit committee, audit report lag, firm size, public accountant office.


1970 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-52
Author(s):  
Sarah Cosgrove ◽  
M. Scott Niederjohn

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was intended to improve corporate governanceand increase the transparency of financial audits. The legislation also could havesignificant effects on the public accounting industry. This study finds evidence ofhigher audit fees across all firms resulting from compliance with the law. However,after accounting for self-selection of auditors, we do not find evidence that thesize of the audit firm affects the magnitude of the audit fee increase.


2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 400-409
Author(s):  
Balachandran Muniandy ◽  
Muhammad Jahangir Ali

The purpose of our study is to examine how share ownership concentration and political connection determine audit fees in Malaysia. These two determinants, ownership concentration and political connection, are very important, especially, in the context of Malaysia where many companies have very high share ownership concentration and are politically connected. We examine 162 companies listed on the Malaysian Stock Exchange and employ cross-sectional regression analysis to determine the relationship between ownership concentration, political connection and audit fees. We observe that highly concentrated share ownership firms are able to influence priorities of the board to focus on the provision of resources rather than monitoring. Our results suggest a negative association between audit fees and politically connected firms. We also find that higher proportion of independent directors on the audit committee of politically connected firms demand auditors to put additional efforts on the politically connected firms which leads to an increment in the audit fee charged. This suggests that regulators should encourage companies to form an effective audit committee for high quality audit services to ensure that firm is able to minimize the risk exposure. The findings of the study are appealing to literature of political connection and audit fees.


2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. A54-A69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca L. Rosner ◽  
Ariel Markelevich

SUMMARY: A significant number of companies report revised auditor fees (audit, nonaudit services, and total) in subsequent Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings. We find that, on average, revised audit fees and total fees are significantly higher, and nonaudit services (NAS) fees are significantly lower than the originally reported fees. The occurrence of fee revisions decreases significantly after 2006 and does not appear to be concentrated in specific industries. In addition, we find that larger clients are more likely to report fee revisions, while clients of Big 4 auditors and clients that file late are less likely to report fee revisions. We also examine the magnitude of upward and downward fee revisions. The fee revisions likely result from the changes in the SEC's fee disclosure reporting requirements from 2001 to 2003, as well as ambiguity related to the new requirements. In addition, they also may stem from estimated billing by accounting firms prior to filing with the SEC, followed by more precise billing after the filing. Our objective is to alert managers and practitioners to the subtleties of the fee disclosure requirements relative to fees billed/paid, the disparity in fee reporting, and the necessity for reporting revised fees if appropriate. We advise audit committee members, analysts, researchers, and other users of audit fee data to use revised fee numbers and exercise caution when using originally reported fees, as they often are revised.


2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (7) ◽  
pp. 715-730 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin W. Hoffman ◽  
Albert L. Nagy

Purpose This paper aims to investigate whether the expected implementation of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX 404(b)) (the integrated audit requirement) caused auditors to discount their audit fees for non-accelerated filers in anticipation of expected increased future economic rents (DeAngelo, 1981) from those clients. Design/methodology/approach This paper predicts that auditors charged their non-accelerated filer clients lower audit fees during the years 2005-2007 (in anticipation of increased expected future economic rents from the implementation of the SOX 404(b) requirement) compared with the years 2010-2012 (when it had been determined that non-accelerated filers were permanently exempt from complying with SOX 404(b)). The authors use ordinary least squares regression analysis to examine whether audit fees increased significantly for non-accelerated filers after the permanent exemption announcement. Findings The results show a significant positive association between the exemption announcement and audit fees, supporting the theory that auditors discounted their audit fees for non-accelerated filers in the pre-exemption announcement period. This finding is robust when sensitivity tests are used. Practical implications The findings of audit fee discounting literature related to the post-SOX period are mixed. This study adds to this stream of literature by supporting the notion that audit fee discounting is being practiced post-SOX and is a potential unintended consequence of SOX 404 and the exemption. Thus, investors will be interested in the results of this paper when making their investment decisions with regard to non-accelerated filers. Social implications The results of this paper show that, even in the post-SOX environment, auditors will employ the use of audit fee discounting if a change in regulation incentivizes it. This commentary on the present state of the audit pricing market should be of interest to audit pricing policymakers. Originality/value This paper is one of the first to study audit fee discounting outside the realm of initial audit engagements.


2012 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharad C. Asthana ◽  
Jeff P. Boone

SUMMARY This study tests the hypotheses that below-normal audit fees signal important nuances in the balance of bargaining power between the auditor and the client, and that such power may ultimately influence audit quality. We find that audit quality, proxied by absolute discretionary accruals and meeting or beating analysts' earnings forecasts, declines as negative abnormal audit fees increase in magnitude, with the effect amplified as proxies for client bargaining power increase. We find that this effect is dampened in years following the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), suggesting that SOX was effective in enhancing auditor independence.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 61-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Mithu Dey ◽  
Lucy Lim

Purpose Setting audit fees is a persistent source of stress for auditors who must, on one hand, comply with the increasing government regulations that generally cause costs to rise; and on the other hand, respond to client pressures to keep audit fees down. In the post-scandal environment of Enron, WorldCom, and the demise of Arthur Andersen, policy makers have introduced additional costs for auditors by increasing regulations and creating a new industry watchdog – the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). In this environment of constant pricing-cost tension for the auditor, the purpose of this paper is to examine audit fee trends over an extended period, 2000-2014. Design/methodology/approach The authors calculate the unexpected audit fees using the audit fee model. The authors examine audit fee trends while controlling for changes due to inflation, auditor wages, and other audit fee determinants. Findings The key findings indicate that audit fees increased in response to the promulgation of new audit regulations requiring additional audit work, the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act of 2002 and Auditing Standard No. 2 in 2004. Additionally, the authors find that audit fees decreased after new regulations alleviating audit work, namely the passage of Auditing Standard No. 5 in 2007, and remained unchanged when new regulations had a minimal impact on audit work, namely the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010. Practical implications The findings of this research are relevant to audit clients, auditors, and regulators as they weigh the cost and benefits of significant new audit regulations and their impacts on audit fees. Originality/value Using the more recent US data, the results in this paper show how events changed audit fee trends in recent years. The findings indicate that audit fees increased after the passage of new audit regulations such as the SOX Act of 2002, Auditing Standards No. 2 in 2004, and decreased after the passage of Auditing Standards No. 5 in 2007.


Author(s):  
Pedi Riswandi, Et. al.

Introduction: Audit fee is one of the factors that results in reduced audit quality. Audit fees are rewards provided by companies to public accountants for audit services provided. Purpose:  this study to investigate political connection and CEO gender affect the size of audit fee paid to public accountants by the company. Method: This study uses secondary data in the form of the annual report of company going public in 2015-2018 and using a purposive sampling technique with a total of 407 company data companies. The variables used in this study are audit fee as the dependent variable while for the independent variables used in this study are political connection, CEO gender. Analysis techniques data used in this study are multiple linier regressions with classical assumption test Finding: The results show that political connections can increase audit fee Originality: the results show that CEO gender has no effect on audit fees Limitation: Disclosure of audit fees in the annual report is still voluntary, so there are still many companies that do not meet the sample criteria. The variable used is limited to the gender of CEO Directors without involving the gender of the board of commissioners and audit committee.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document