Search results

This study aims to examine whether firms that appear to exhibit high sustainable outputs are more likely to pay higher audit fees than firms without such outputs.

The sustainability outputs are measured using a sustainable product portfolio consisting of four products: clean energy products, eco-design products (EDP), environmental products (EP) and sustainable building projects (SBP). The audit fee variable is measured by the natural logarithm of the total amount of audit fees. The study tests two models of the association between these outputs and audit fees; Model 1 tests this association in the absence of the moderating variable (sustainability committee), and Model 2 tests the association in the presence of the moderating variable.

An analysis of data on 261 European firms from the Refinitiv Eikon database from 2010 to 2019 shows that high sustainability outputs are significantly and positively associated with audit fees. More importantly, this association is moderated by the presence of a board-level sustainability committee, suggesting that this type of committee reflects a factor considered by auditors in their audit risk assessment practices. The findings indicate that in Model 1, one (EP) out of four variables has a significant and positive association with audit fees, while in Model 2 and in the presence of sustainability committee, two variables (EP and EDP) have a significant and negative association with audit fees. However, the robust analysis shows that three variables (EP, EDP and SBP) have significant and negative associations with audit fees.

The study findings have important implications for policymakers, auditors and firms’ managers. For policymakers, the findings provide support for the argument that sustainable attitudes incentivise firms to manage sustainable product profiles more effectively. As such, policymakers should incentivise firms to establish a sustainability committee and regulate its role and responsibilities. Auditors should coordinate with the sustainability committee to facilitate audit efforts and reduce audit fees.

Understanding the relationship between sustainable products and audit fees will allow firms to improve their portfolio of sustainable products. In addition, other social implications of this study relate to improving relationships with society by establishing a sustainability committee that is responsible to communicate with that society.

The results support the argument that firms should manage sustainable product portfolios more effectively. In addition, the results of the study highlight the importance of a new variable as a moderator, the sustainability committee, which has not been examined before.

The literature on the influence of audit committees (AC) and cosmetic accounting (CA) is scarce. AC plays a unique and vital role in boosting earnings reliability in countries with weaker application of accounting standards or weaker legal protection for investors. AC, therefore, are considered to be one of the essential tools available to directors in supervising management decisions regarding financial reporting. This paper aims to examine the influence of AC characteristics (ACC) on CA and how this relationship is moderated by the audit fee.

This study used probit regression to analyze 1,218 firm-year observations of listed companies in Tehran Stock Exchange from 2014 to 2020.

The results show that AC financial accounting expertise, AC independence, female AC membership and AC tenure were negatively related to CA. The negative relationship is highly pronounced when a firm incurs higher audit fees, and audit fees moderate the relationship between ACC and CA. Results for the robustness checks show that only AC independence was significant, and the results of other characteristics were not significant.

This research was conducted in an Iranian setting where the formation of ACs is on the verge of regulation; therefore, the data used for the study only contains the seven-year period of ACs’ statutory activity. In addition, a lack of consensus on the precise measures of an AC’s effectiveness could be considered as a restrictive factor.

The findings provide an initial insight into the effect AC on CA and moderating effect of audit fee on the relationship between ACC and CA.

This study aims to investigate the association between executives with foreign backgrounds and the audit fees paid by the Chinese-listed firms over the period from 2010 to 2020.

To examine the association between executives’ foreign experience and audit fees, this study constructs the following empirical model: Lnfee_i,t = β₀ + β₁Foreign background_i,t + ∑β_j Control_i,t + YearFE + IndFE + ε_i,t (1).

This study finds that auditors charge higher fees for firms hiring more executives with foreign backgrounds. The results are robust to a battery of robustness checks, including fixed effects, alternative measures of independent variable, controlling for other characteristics of executives and auditors and entropy balancing method.

This study sheds light on how executives’ foreign backgrounds affect audit fees, enriching the literature on executive heterogeneity and audit fees and providing important implications for audit practitioners.

This study aims to examine how woman leadership (i.e., woman board chairperson, woman chief executive officer (CEO) and board gender diversity) affects audit fee and also ascertained the interactive effect of woman leadership and gender diversity on audit committee on audit fee.

The study applied ordinary least square and fixed-effect estimators on the data of 21 universal banks in Ghana for the period 2010–2021 to estimate the empirical results.

It is revealed that under the leadership of women (woman CEO and board gender diversity), higher external audit quality is ensured as higher audit fee is paid. Interestingly, it was found that with the presence of women on the audit committee, the integrity of internal controls and internal audit procedures are enhanced, which leads to quality financial reporting, calls for lower audit effort, hence lower audit fee.

The result indicates that firms can rely on the leadership of women in ensuring quality external audit and quality financial reporting, which ultimately helps to minimize the information risk to all stakeholders.

The paper contributes to extant literature by establishing that, under the leadership of women in banking entities from a developing country context, external audit quality and financial reporting are achieved.

This study aims to examine the effect of family ownership on audit fees and whether political connections moderate the causal relationship. Indonesia, as emerging countries, arguably offers appropriate research setting for this research because most Indonesian firms are family owned and exhibit weak investor protection. The authors predict that family ownership positively affects audit fees, and political connections strengthen this influence.

This study uses 98 listed manufacturing firms on Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) in 2018–2020, resulting in 279 firm-year observations. Panel data regression used to test the hypothesis. Family ownership is divided into direct and indirect ownership while audit fees are measured by the natural logarithm of audit fees paid by the firms.

The results show that the greater total and direct family ownerships imply lower audit fees, while indirect family ownership does not affect audit fees. The finding is contrary to the alleged hypothesis. Further, political connections only strengthen direct family ownership's negative impact on audit fees.

This study's findings support the alignment effect hypothesis arguing that controlling shareholders, in this case, families, align their interests with non-controlling shareholders. These findings provide a different perspective from various empirical studies conducted in Asian countries where the majority of companies are also controlled.

This study investigates the consequences of the key audit matter (KAM) disclosure requirement by considering two salient audit proxies: audit fees and audit report lag. This investigation is relevant because most auditors worldwide are required to expand their audit report including discussion on key matters faced in the audit engagement. However, the emerging literature on the implications of KAM is inconclusive.

Using a distinctive dataset of 601 year-observations for firms listed on the Omani capital market over 2012–2019, this study employs pooled panel data regression with robust standard error.

Results indicate that auditors increased their fees considerably during the period of KAM but substantially shortened audit report lag. Conversely, using the KAM period as a sample, the authors find marginal or insignificant evidence for the effect of the number of KAM on both proxies. In additional analyses, this study shows that entity-level risk KAM is associated with higher fees and shorter audit report lag, while KAM related to account-level risk does not have the same effect. Interestingly, it is observed that KAM disclosure is strongly associated with higher fees and high-quality audit even when the auditors issue their report in a shorter time.

This study contributes to the limited research examining the consequences of KAM in emerging markets. It is also the first to show that KAM is associated with shorter audit report lag.

This study aims to investigate whether gender diversity in audit committees affects the purchase of nonaudit services in China. Results from family and nonfamily firms are compared and the critical mass participation of females are further examined.

The sample comprises 1,834 Chinese listed companies from 2012 to 2021, among which 910 are family firms. The Heckman (1979) two-stage model is used to mitigate the potential endogeneity issue in the selection of gender diversity. Propensity score matching is also used to further alleviate the endogeneity problem in relation to family firms.

Results show a significant and negative correlation between the gender diversity in audit committees and nonaudit service fees. This association is more apparent in nonfamily than in family firms. Findings are consistent and robust to endogeneity tests and sensitivity analyses. The analysis of critical mass and symbolic participation shows that three female directors can more significantly restrain nonaudit fees than one to two females on the board.

This study contributes to literature on resource dependence theory, which posits that audit committees help enterprises establish contact with auditors, improve the company legitimacy, assist in communication and provide relevant expertise. This study also relates to agency theory, which holds that differences in the severity of types I and II agency problems between family and nonfamily firms lead to differences in auditor selection and related costs.

Extending from previous research on the relation between the gender diversity in audit committees and nonaudit fees, the present study delves into this connection within the context of China, an emerging economy. As a result, this investigation offers novel insights and expands upon current knowledge. In addition, the correlation between the gender diversity of audit committees and nonaudit fees is explored for family and nonfamily firms.

This paper aims to examine the perspectives of auditors, regulators and financial report preparers on the effects of key audit matters (KAMs) reporting on audit effort, fees, quality and report transparency.

The authors conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders (13 Audit Partners, 5 Chief Financial Officers and 3 regulators) and thematically analysed the interviews. They use the frame of “Paradox of Transparency” to explain the findings.

Auditors perceive that the overall quality control of their audits has improved both in the planning and execution stages, and such improvement can mostly be attributed to the coercive pressures from professional bodies and regulators. Nevertheless, audit fee remains unchanged. Auditors disclose industry generic items and descriptions of KAMs, sometimes masking the real problem areas of the clients. Even after improving the performative audit quality, transparency of audit reporting has not improved. Issues that warrant going concern qualifications or audit report modifications are now reported as KAMs. Hence, KAMs reporting might make the audit report less transparent.

Localised audit environments and institutions affect the transparency of KAMs reporting. Without attention to corporate governance and auditors’ independence issues, paradoxically, performative improvement in audit quality (due to the KAMs reporting requirement) does not enhance the transparency of audit reports.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to provide field-level evidence in Bangladesh and other developing countries about the perceptions of auditors, financial report preparers and regulators on the effects of KAMs reporting on audit efforts, fees, quality and report transparency.

The current study uses an advanced machine learning method and aims to investigate whether auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based as less risky. More specifically, this study aims to explore the association between principles-based accounting standards and audit pricing and between principles-based accounting standards and the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion.

The study uses an advanced machine-learning method to understand the role of principles-based accounting standards in predicting audit fees and going concern opinion. The study also uses multiple regression models defining audit fees and the probability of receiving going concern opinion. The analyses are complemented by additional tests such as economic significance, firm fixed effects, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, change analysis, yearly regression results and controlling for managerial risk-taking incentives and governance variables.

The paper provides empirical evidence that auditors charge less audit fees to clients whose financial statements are more principles-based. The finding suggests that auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based less risky. The study also provides evidence that the probability of receiving a going-concern opinion reduces as firms rely more on principles-based standards. The finding further suggests that auditors discount the financial numbers supplied by the managers using rules-based standards. The study also reveals that the degree of reliance by a US firm on principles-based accounting standards has a negative impact on accounting conservatism, the risk of financial statement misstatement, accruals and the difficulty in predicting future earnings. This suggests potential mechanisms through which principles-based accounting standards influence auditors’ risk assessments.

The authors recognize the limitation of this study regarding the sample period. Prior studies compare rules vs principles-based standards by focusing on the differences between US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and international financial reporting standards (IFRS) or pre- and post-IFRS adoption, which raises questions about differences in cross-country settings and institutional environment and other confounding factors such as transition costs. This study addresses these issues by comparing rules vs principles-based standards within the US GAAP setting. However, this limits the sample period to the year 2006 because the measure of the relative extent to which a US firm is reliant upon principles-based standards is available until 2006.

The study has major public policy suggestions as it responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks such as climate change.

The study has major public policy suggestions because it demonstrates the value of principles-based standards. The study responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US SEC, to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information as business transactions and investor needs continue to evolve globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the IASB Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks like climate change. The study fills the gap in the literature that auditors perceive principles-based financial statements as less risky and further expands the literature by providing empirical evidence that the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion is increasing in the degree of rules-based standards.

In this study, the authors investigate a pressing concern: how auditors react to their clients facing repercussions due to environmental violations. More specifically, this study aims to examine how environmental engagements, which carry potential risks and liabilities, influence auditors’ decision-making and fee structure.

This study uses unique, reliable and actual violation data from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) from 2000 to 2015, focusing on clients involved in environmental violations that led to legal prosecution and penalties and those who subsequently engaged in voluntary supplemental environmental projects (SEPs). The authors use the ordinary least squares method to test the authors’ main research question and later use propensity score matching and alternate data source (ASSET4) to check the robustness of the authors’ results.

The authors find that firms with environmental violations are more susceptible to auditor resignation. Moreover, the environmental violator firms that maintain their engagement with auditors pay significantly higher audit fees compared to non-environmental violator firms. Furthermore, these environmental violator firms also face extended audit report delays and take longer to appoint a new auditor.

This study provides an additional consequence of environmental violations, namely, increased chances of auditor resignation and higher audit fees, alongside the penalties imposed by the US-EPA. Moreover, the authors’ findings position environmental violations and participation in SEPs as important factors in auditors’ business risk assessment.