Search results

This paper aims to examine whether firms retaining industry-specialist auditors receive better price and non-price terms for bank loans.

Based on a sample of companies retaining big N auditors during the 2000-2010 period, this paper constructed six proxies for auditor industry expertise and tested three major loan terms: loan spreads, number of general and financial covenants and requirements for collateral.

It was found that companies retaining industry-specialist auditors receive lower interest rates and fewer covenants. Banks are also less likely to demand secured collateral. These findings are supported by several sensitivity tests.

The findings suggest that auditor industry expertise provides incremental value to creditors and that bank loan cost is one economic benefit for companies hiring specialist auditors.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to investigate the impact of auditor industry expertise on the cost of private debts.

The purpose of this paper is to examine external auditors' perceptions of the impact of audit committee financial expertise and industry expertise on the mediating role played by the committee in resolving auditor‐client disagreements.

The study is a 2×2 between subjects experimental design, using 61 Malaysian auditors as participants. The authors manipulate audit committee financial expertise and industry expertise at high and low levels.

It is found that external auditors perceive that audit committees play a greater mediating role and use mediating techniques to a greater extent when committee members' financial and industry expertise is high compared to when expertise is lower.

This is the first paper to examine the importance of audit committee expertise on the mediating role of the audit committee. The major contribution of the paper is the finding that auditors believe the audit committee's role as a mediator is strengthened not only by the committee members' accounting and auditing expertise but also by their industry expertise. The paper's findings have implications for practitioners and regulators who are concerned with the role of the audit committee in enhancing the integrity of the financial reporting and audit process.

This study aims to examine the effect on audit efficiency of outsourced internal audit function (IAF) providers with industry and/or firm-specific expertise. Drawing on relevant studies from external and internal audit literature, the authors assume that such IAF providers are associated with greater audit efficiency as proxied by audit report lag and audit fees.

Based on a sample of firms listed on the Omani capital market during 2005–2019, the pooled regressions are used to test the developed hypotheses. The authors use the market share approach to identify outsourced IAF industry expertise providers and tenure to measure the firm-specific expertise of outsourced IAF providers.

The authors find that industry outsourced IAF providers are not associated with shorter audit report lag and lower audit fees. The authors also find that firm-specific expertise outsourced IAF providers are associated with a greater reduction in audit report lag and audit fees. These conclusions are robust under a battery of analyses. The significant contribution of firm-specific expertise outsourced IAF providers to audit efficiency is incremental when abnormal audit report lag and audit fees analysis is conducted.

The results are the first to attest to the contribution of outsourced IAF with firm-specific expertise. They also show that industry expertise held by outsourced IAF providers does not contribute to audit efficiency.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of a client's potentially conflicting needs for privacy and industry expertise on auditor concentration.

The method examines the distribution of auditor concentration assuming that auditor choice occurs randomly. It then examines the observed distribution within the random assignment to consider whether the privacy or expertise motive dominates.

The main finding is that at the client industry level, clients in a dominant firm industry structure prefer privacy; whereas clients in a competitive market structure prefer expertise.

An implication of this paper is that an increase in the number of large auditors may change auditor concentration in client industries that prefer privacy, an auditor different from its competitor.

Policy makers should note that auditor concentration is not only a function of the number of auditors, but also of the client industry structure.

The results provide a new measure for industry specialists and provide additional insight regarding auditor choice when privacy is relevant.

This study aims to examine whether national industry expertise in Italy is more dominant than local expertise. Prior studies from Australia, USA and UK show that audit fees for industry experts are priced at a higher premium at the local level than the national level. These countries have voluntary audit firm rotation, while Italy has mandatory audit firm rotation (MAFR). The authors predict that Italy has a stronger national than local level of industry expertise, to better retain and transfer industry expertise.

The authors compare audit fee premiums of national industry experts to local levels, using quantitative (multivariate tests) and qualitative (interviews) methodology.

Using hand-collected audit fees, the authors find that the audit fee premium for industry expertise is greater at the national level than the local level. The authors find corroborating results with audit hours. To provide further support, the authors conduct analysis for a neighboring country that does not have audit firm rotation. Using hand-collected data from Germany, the authors find that audit fee premiums from national industry expertise are no different from local industry expertise.

The present study study has theoretical and practical implications, for European Union countries, which recently adopted MAFR and for countries considering adoption in the future.

This study aims to explore the relationship between audit partner and firm industry specialization and board of director independence on the decision by Taiwanese firms to use International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) flexibility concerning reporting interest income and expense and dividends received in different sections of the statement of cash flows. This flexibility existed in Taiwan for the first time in 2013, the year that Taiwan switched from its own generally accepted accounting principle to IFRS.

Using 2013 data for a sample of 1,227 firms, 354 of whom changed their reporting classification, this study examined the interaction effect of board independence and partner-level and firm-level auditor industry specialization on the cash flow reporting decision using logistic regression.

The results show there is a substitute relationship between board independence and partner-level industry specialization on the change in cash flow reporting classification, but a complementary relationship between board independence and firm-level auditor specialization. Further, both partner-level and firm-level auditor industry specializations have a complementary (but negative) relationship with board independence as to whether the firm is likely to report interest expense paid in the operating or financing activities sections.

An important implication is that knowing the levels of audit firm and partner specialization and how independent the board is, is useful for researchers and regulators in investigating auditor-client relationships and understanding the influences of variables investigated here on the outcome(s) of accounting policy and regulatory changes.

This study improved the field’s understanding of the impacts of audit partner and firm specialization, board independence and relevant interactions on cash flow reporting choices.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the association between the cost of debt (COD) and auditor industry expertise using Taiwanese data. Since previous studies (Li et al., 2010) have only examined the relation between industry specialization and COD at the audit firm level in western countries, the authors further examine the association between industry specialization and COD at the individual auditor level in an Asian context.

The authors use the interest rate on the firm’s debt as a proxy variable for the COD (Francis, Khurana and Pereira, 2005). The authors adopt three different methods to measure industry specialization, which consist of the auditors’ market share in terms of client sales and number of clients, and client assets.

The results indicate that the clients of industry specialists at individual auditor levels have a lower COD.

First, the authors extend the research of Li et al. (2010) and find that the clients of individual auditor industry specialists also have a lower COD. Second, the authors also believe the evidence on the effects of industry expertise at the individual auditor level may have policy implications for regulators and public investors. Finally, in contrast to works carried out in the US market, the authors provide empirical evidence for the relation between industry specialization and COD in an Asian market.

This paper aims to examine the association between gender composition of joint auditor pairs and the quality of reported financial information. More specifically, the authors attempt to assess whether and how these gender compositions affect the client firms’ earnings management behavior.

The authors utilized the unique institutional setting of Taiwan, where joint auditors are required by law. They studied the effect of gender in joint auditor pairs on accrual earnings management and real earnings management to achieve financial reporting objectives.

Empirical results indicate that engaging a woman as the lead auditor can constrain accrual earnings management, regardless of whether the joint auditor is male or female. The authors also found that all-male signing auditor pairs with industry expertise can significantly reduce accrual earnings management. The authors also documented that all-female signing auditor pairs and auditor industry expertise could drive clients to engage in real earnings management activities as an alternative to accrual earnings management.

The empirical results demonstrate that gender indeed plays a role in the quality of client’s reported financial information. Female auditors in a lead position and male auditors with industry expertise tend to be more successful in delivering better-quality audits.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the institutional changes accompanying the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) have standardized the audit’s role in the overall financial reporting process, thereby reducing the impact of auditor characteristics on financial reporting quality.

To test this hypothesis, the association between audit quality characteristics (auditor size and industry expertise) and measures of financial reporting quality (analyst earning forecast dispersion and accuracy) are estimated using regression analysis. Results of this analysis are compared across the pre- and post-SOX periods.

The results of the study document a significant relationship between auditor size (Big N vs non-Big N) and financial reporting quality (as proxied by analyst earnings forecast properties) during the pre-SOX period but not in the post-SOX period. Auditor industry expertise is significantly associated with financial reporting quality throughout the entire sample period. Thus, financial reporting quality continues to be dependent on the degree of specialization of an audit firm in both the pre- and post-SOX periods; however, the impact of auditor size as a surrogate for quality has diminished.

The SOX Act of 2002 represented one of the most significant changes in the regulation of audits. This paper adds to the literature by examining the Act’s effects on financial professionals’ perception of the impact of audit firm characteristics on their client’s financial reporting quality.

This paper investigates the application of the product differentiation and shared efficiency approaches to understand the impact of the auditor industry specialisation (IS) on audit fees in relation to Fair Value Disclosures (FVD).

The study uses 1,470 firm-year observations for the period 2005–2018 and is focused on Jordanian financial firms. Two competing theoretical approaches of IS proxied by audit fee-based measures were employed: firstly, the product differentiation approach measured using Market Share-based (MS) measure and secondly, the shared efficiency approach measured using Portfolio Share-based (PS) measure. The paper employs the Ordinary Least Squares regression to test the association between the proportion of fair-valued assets (using fair value hierarchy inputs) and audit fees.

The results suggest that the association between the proportion of fair-valued assets and audit fees is strengthened (weakened) when the client hires specialist auditors identified by MS (PS). This association varied across the fair value inputs. Level 1 assets were found to be only moderated by both scenarios positively (negatively) for MS (PS) experts. The results are robust after controlling the endogeneity of auditor self-selection.

The results provide valuable insights for policymakers into challenges of auditing FVD. These insights present a valuable input for the development of FVD policies and practices as well as providing guidance for updating auditor prices. Additionally, the results provide a foundation for policymakers and regulators to introduce and update fair value auditing practices. The current findings are generalisable to other countries, including the Middle East and North Africa, and are particularly beneficial for those countries which have adopted the fair value model.

This study contributes to the theory by demonstrating the impact of the auditor industry expertise on post-implementation costs of FVD. The novelty of the study lies in introducing principle-based standards requirements of FVD to test the relationship. This approach is based on the IFRS disclosure requirements using data from the Jordanian financial sector to examine this relationship.