Search results

Despite extensive research on the determinates of audit report timeliness, there is limited empirical evidence on the effect of auditor locality on audit report timeliness. Therefore, this study aims to examine the relationship between auditor locality and audit report timeliness. Furthermore, this study investigates the moderating roles of audit committee, corporate governance and auditor quality in this relationship.

In this study, the information of 157 companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange during the period 2013–2019 has been collected. Moreover, multivariate linear regressions were used to test the hypotheses.

Findings show that in general, there is no significant relationship between auditor locality and audit report timeliness. However, empirical evidence suggests that in companies with specialized audit committees, strong corporate governance and high-quality auditors, auditor locality improves audit report timeliness.

Overall, the results indicate that there are some circumstances in which auditor locality affects the audit report timeliness. Specifically, the association of auditor locality and audit report timeliness is conditional to audit committee, corporate governance and auditor quality.

Purpose – This study examines the relationship between Big Four audit firm country-level market shares and audit fees across a sample of nine emerging economies: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Hong Kong, Israel, Korea, Mexico, South Africa, and Taiwan.

Design/methodology/approach – First, auditor market share is calculated as a percentage of client sales based on all publicly traded companies in each of the sample countries during the period 2002–2005. Next, Audit Analytics is used to obtain audit fee data for a set of foreign companies listed on a primary U.S. exchange. A final sample of 483 client-year observations is included in the audit fee regression analysis.

Findings – After controlling for other factors related to audit pricing, Big Four auditors with dominant country-level market shares earn a fee premium of approximately 27% over competitor firms.

Originality/value – These results suggest that individual Big Four firm reputations, as measured by fee premiums, are not homogeneous across countries. Rather, it appears the largest audit firms are associated with quality-differentiated services and thus earn higher fees. Although accounting research tends to classify large international accounting firms into a pool of the “Big Four,” these findings indicate that it is important to consider each firm's market share in specific geographic locations when examining questions related to auditor reputation and pricing.

The purpose of this paper is to study whether auditor independence reforms introduced in 2004 led to an enhancement in earnings quality in the post-reform era.

This study predicts that as the cost of compliance will vary based on a firm's existing corporate governance regime and the level of external scrutiny (monitoring) it faces, we compare the earnings quality of a sample of “established” (S&P/ASX 100) to a sample of “emerging” (S&P/ASX Small Ordinaries Index) firms. The paper examines the reporting behaviour of the two groups of listed entities, covering the regulatory change period 2003-2006. The paper uses regression modelling to test the associations between increased audit independence, earnings quality and corporate governance mechanisms over the pre- and post-regulatory period.

The paper's results confirm that earnings quality for the established firms was enhanced in the post-reform period; while this was not the case for emerging firms. The evidence also suggests that corporate governance mechanisms of board independence and board financial skill are associated with higher earnings quality; while the higher the concentration of insider firm ownership is associated with lower earnings quality.

This study provides policy makers with evidence as to changes in reporting behaviour following law reform aimed at strengthening auditor independence.

The studies on earnings quality are informed by the US market practices. Australia provides a unique setting through its auditor independence reforms to examine the impact of reform choices. This study also investigates two specific subsets of the market: established firms and emerging firms.

This study aims to investigate the implications of audit industry specialization on auditor’s retention and growth within an emerging economy. Factors such as whether the firm is a Big 4, a firm with international affiliation, a local firm and the type of industry were studied to analyse the reasons behind audit firm retention and growth.

This research is based on a field study related to audit firms providing services to listed companies in an emerging economy. The sample includes the top 100 publicly held companies’ in the Egyptian stock market during 2006-2011 for which their annual reports are analysed to determine the audit firms’ retention and growth. An assessment of the continuity of the auditors and the increase in the number of audit clients were also measured.

The results confirm that industry specialization has an important effect on the auditor’s retention, especially for industries where capital investment is significant such as buildings, construction, financial services, housing and real estate. Big 4 audit firms retained their clients because of their industry specialization and brand name. Evidence was found that good knowledge of accounting and auditing standards resulted in audit firms with international affiliation competing with the Big 4 for clients’ retention and growth.

This study contributes to the existing literature, as it is among the first to provide empirical evidence on auditor retention, growth and auditor’s dominance in an emerging economy such as Egypt.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of corporate governance on auditor quality choice by IPO companies in an emerging market setting. It seeks to identify whether efficiency or opportunism is the driving force behind the choice of auditors in Bangladeshi firms going public. We try to see whether ownership concentration in the hands of a owner‐CEO wins over foreign shareholders in the contest of ensuring financial reporting quality.

Multivariate analysis has been carried out on all IPOs made during 1990 to 2005 whose financial statements were available. Logistic regression tool has been used to identify client's corporate governance attributes affect their choice of auditors. In total, three corporate governance attributes – CEO‐Chair duality, retained ownership, and foreign equity participation – were used to test the impact of ownership structure on auditor choice.

Our findings from logistic regression suggest that CEO‐Chair duality and the degree of foreign equity participation are significant determinants of auditor choice while proportion of board ownership is not. In addition, issuer size and whether the issuer is a green field operation also influence auditor choice while the length of a firm's operating history does not seem to matter. The findings support agency theory prediction that (at least one category of) principals (foreign shareholders in this case), are likely to trade‐off higher monitoring costs (of hiring a higher quality auditor) with agency costs arising from asymmetric information, primarily borne by absentee owners.

The work is based on empirical data directly from company financial statements. It uses audited financial statements and makes objective analysis of auditor choice dynamics in a frontier market that demonstrated significant growth of IPO activity in recent years.

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.

The study examines the changes in audit market concentration, auditor choice and audit quality in Russia following International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption. Scholars have called for further examination of the effects of IFRS adoption on auditors, with an emphasis on the importance of analyzing emerging markets that are characterized by enforcement challenges and lack of proper infrastructure. It focuses on a unique feature of Russian companies – dual audits under Russian Accounting Standards (RAS) and IFRS – and investigates changes in audit concentration and audit quality for the two audit markets.

The authors rely on the audited financial statements of Russian public companies and perform pre-/post-IFRS adoption estimation using a logit regression to ascertain whether public firms change auditors from local firms with limited IFRS expertise to those with global reputation, namely Big 4 audit firms. Further, they examine whether the change in audit market concentration post-2012 affects audit quality as proxied by companies' propensity to receive a modified audit opinion and discretionary accruals. Auditor attributes were hand-collected from audited financial statements and matched with financial variables from Datastream.

The IFRS audit market was dominated by the Big 4 audit firms prior to 2012, and there is strong evidence that audit market share (concentration) increases for IFRS reports but not for RAS reports. In addition, companies are more likely to choose a Big 4 audit firm for an RAS audit, conditional upon a Big 4 firm conducting the IFRS audit. The authors do not find evidence of decrease in the probability of audit firms issuing a modified audit opinion under either RAS or IFRS, indicating that, in the Russian setting, increased auditor concentration post-IFRS adoption does not lead to enhanced risk or decline in audit quality. Moreover, they find that discretionary accruals decline post-2012. Overall, the findings indicate that the concern of global regulators regarding audit market concentration is not justified.

The Russian reporting environment is unique and generally characterized by significant agency problems, and the study’s estimation sample is not large, compared to prior studies conducted predominantly in Western jurisdictions. Nevertheless, the authors shed light on the audit concentration phenomenon within emerging markets, for which empirical evidence is scarce. Future research could explore the impact of other capital market events and exogenous shocks, not limited to IFRS adoption, on the characteristics of Russia's audit market.

The IFRS reporting regime is commonly associated with enhanced reporting quality and improved information transparency among public companies. Yet, impairment of audit quality as a result of IFRS-driven increase in audit market share of Big 4 can potentially negate these capital market effects. This study shows that the concerns of global regulators are not valid and that audit quality does not change with increased share of Big 4 post-IFRS adoption.

Dual audits, whereby companies must prepare two sets of financial statements per the IFRS mandate, are not unique to Russia, and the evidence of IFRS reporting on the structural changes in the audit market and implications for audit quality under a dual regime is scarce. Accordingly, the study's findings are important and timely and are expected to aid regulators of countries that have announced or are contemplating the adoption of IFRS for public reporting purposes.

The purpose of this paper is to test the relative strengths of efficiency and opportunistic considerations in making client auditor choice decisions in an emerging audit services market. The authors examine whether the degrees of foreign and institutional shareholdings, audit complexity, industry orientation (i.e. whether the firm belongs to the banking sector), ownership concentration in the hands of domestic sponsor shareholders, state ownership, power concentration in the hands of a CEO who is also the chairperson of the board, and audit risk affect the demand for superior monitoring by Big‐4 auditors.

The authors carry out a multivariate analysis using binary logit regression technique. They test whether efficiency or opportunism rules auditor choice of firms in their sample. Efficiency‐based variables used in the authors' models include foreign shareholding by a multinational parent, institutional shareholding, audit complexity and whether the firm belongs to the banking sector. Opportunism‐based variables include ownership concentration in the hands of domestic sponsor shareholders other than government, government shareholding, power concentration in the hands of a CEO who holds the position of chair as well, and audit risk.

The authors find that opportunistic considerations outweigh efficiency considerations in shaping auditor choice decisions in their sample. Two out of four efficiency arguments (foreign shareholdings in the hands of a multinational parent and institutional shareholding) support efficiency as the main driver of auditor choice while one (client belonging to the banking sector) indicates otherwise. On the other hand, three out of four opportunism arguments (government shareholding, CEO‐chair duality and audit risk) document opportunistic considerations to be the main forces behind auditor choice. The influence of foreign shareholding becomes apparent only when the foreign shareholder is the controlling shareholder.

This paper is the first of its kind to address auditor choice in an emerging market context. No other paper looked at auditor choice using efficiency‐opportunism incentives. The paper contributes to our understanding of auditor choice dynamics in emerging markets. The finding that institutional shareholding is associated with choice of high quality auditors is encouraging. Individual small investors can use institutional investors as a shield to protect their investment through the higher quality auditing linked to the presence of institutional investors.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate a deeper understanding about the reasons behind difference in previous studies’ results in the field of audit quality determinants.

A meta-analysis method is employed in which 52 studies including 40 international studies from authentic scientific articles during the year 2000–2015 and 12 national studies out of authentic national scientific articles from 2001 to 2015 are taken to account as sample studies. Audit firm size, auditor tenure and auditor specialization are set as independent variables and audit quality is the only dependent variable in the current paper.

The results indicate that audit firm size and auditor specialization are positively associated with audit quality. In other words, contracting with larger audit firm and specialized auditor results in delivering higher quality audit services.

The current study is the first study to be conducted in the field of audit quality determinants. The results may be beneficial both for standard setters as well practitioners in a way that it provides evidence that contributes to basis policy and audit-standard makers about domination and determinants of audit quality.

This paper aims to examine various factors affecting the pricing of audit services and the selection of auditors in the Indian audit market. This paper also aims to investigate the impact of financial distress conditions on the audit pricing and auditor choice decisions of a firm, particularly in the context of a developing economy.

The sample comprises 22,644 firm-years for 1,366 Indian firms from 1990 to 2015. The authors adopt ordinary least squares regression technique to model audit fee, and logistic regression technique to model auditor choice as a function of various factors relating to firm attributes and auditor characteristics.

This paper finds that auditors tend to charge an audit fee premium when they are affiliated to a Big 4 auditor, have industry specialization or jointly provide auditing and non-auditing services. Additionally, firms with larger boards, higher proportion of independent board of directors and CEO–Chairman separation are more likely to choose a Big 4-affiliated auditor. The results also suggest that financially distressed firms tend to pay significantly lower audit fees and are more likely to choose non-Big 4 auditors.

This paper is among the few studies which investigate how financial distress impacts the audit pricing and auditor choice decisions of a firm in the context of emerging economies. The findings of this paper raises serious concerns about the credibility of the audited financial statements and corporate governance mechanisms of firms undergoing financial distress. The empirical results of this paper have strong implications for practitioners, regulators and investors.