The Effect of Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation on Audit Quality, Audit Fees and Audit Market Concentration: Evidence from India

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramaswami Narayanaswamy ◽  
Kannan Raghunandan
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Market Concentration ◽  
Quality Audit ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation

The Effect of Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation on Audit Quality and Audit Fees: Empirical Evidence from the Korean Audit Market

2014 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 167-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soo Young Kwon ◽  
Youngdeok Lim ◽  
Roger Simnett
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Discretionary Accruals ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Mandatory Rotation ◽  
Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation

SUMMARY: Using a unique setting in which mandatory audit firm rotation was required from 2006–2010, and in which both audit fees and audit hours were disclosed (South Korea), this study provides empirical evidence of the economic impact of this policy initiative on audit quality, and the associated implications for audit fees. This study compares both pre- and post-policy implementation and, after the implementation of the policy, mandatory long-tenure versus voluntary short-tenure rotation situations. Where audit firms were mandatorily rotated post-policy, we observe that audit quality (measured as abnormal discretionary accruals) did not significantly change compared with pre-2006 long-tenure audit situations and voluntary post-rotation situations. Audit fees in the post-regulation period for mandatorily rotated engagements are significantly larger than in the pre-regulation period, but are discounted compared to audit fees for post-regulation continuing engagements. We also find that the observed increase in audit fees and audit hours in the post-regulation period extends beyond situations where the audit firm was mandatorily rotated, suggesting that the introduction of mandatory audit firm rotation had a much broader impact than the specific instances of mandatory rotation. Data Availability: Most of the financial data used in the present study are available from the KIS Value Database. The data for audit hours and fees were drawn from statements of operating results filed with the Financial Supervisory Services (FSS) in Korea.

scholarly journals Will mandatory audit firm rotation reduce audit market concentration in South Africa?

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolene Wesson
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
South African ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Market Concentration ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Calculated Concentration ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation

Purpose: Deconcentrating the audit market was one of the stated objectives of the proposed mandatory audit firm rotation (MAFR) ruling in South Africa. With MAFR being a contentious topic, this study aimed to explore the possible effect of MAFR on audit market concentration in South Africa in anticipation of the implementation thereof in 2023.Design/methodology/approach: A sample of 415 South African listed companies was studied for the period 2010–2018. Data were mainly captured from annual reports. Descriptive statistics and significance testing were performed on calculated concentration ratios and identified audit firm rotations.Findings/results: South African audit market concentration mirrored empirical evidence from most developed countries – with Big 4 audit firms dominating the audit market, whilst a monopoly within the Big 4 audit firm grouping was also evident. Based on observed audit firm concentration and audit firm rotation behaviour, it was anticipated that MAFR might further increase audit market concentration. A concerning result was the sheer scale of audit firm rotations to be carried out in anticipation of MAFR in 2023.Practical implications: This study identified the impairment of audit quality and increased costs as possible unintended consequences of MAFR in South Africa.Originality/value: This study contributed to the limited body of knowledge on the possible effect of MAFR in South Africa. This study proposed alternatives to MAFR and recommended areas for future research to support evidence-based decisions on remedies to address audit quality and audit market concentration in South Africa.

Audit Market Concentration, Audit Fees, and Audit Quality: Evidence from China

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ting-Chiao Huang ◽  
Hsihui Chang ◽  
Jeng-Ren Chiou
Keyword(s):  
Indirect Effect ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Earnings Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Market Concentration ◽  
Legal Environment ◽  
Positive Relation ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Lower Likelihood

SUMMARY We investigate the effects of audit market concentration on audit fees and audit quality in China, where competition is intense and the legal environment is relatively weak compared with developed countries. Analyzing 12,334 firm-year observations for the period 2001 to 2011, we find a significant positive relation between concentration and audit fees. Path analysis shows that concentration improves client earnings quality and reduces the need for auditors to issue modified audit opinions through increased audit fees. Additional analysis indicates that the increased audit fees and client earnings quality resulting from increased concentration are associated with a lower likelihood of executives and auditors being sanctioned by regulators for audit failures. Together, our results suggest that concentration improves audit quality indirectly through increased audit fees and this positive indirect effect offsets the negative direct effect of concentration on audit quality. By separating the direct and the indirect effect of concentration on audit quality, our study would explain why previous studies that do not have a separation document mixed evidence. Our findings inform regulators that actions taken to eliminate the indirect effect of concentration, for example restricting the upper bound of audit fees, could produce unintended outcomes such as decreased audit quality.

scholarly journals Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation for Listed Companies: The Effects in the Netherlands

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 937-966
Author(s):  
Bas de Jong ◽  
Steven Hijink ◽  
Lars in ’t Veld
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Listed Companies ◽  
First Year ◽  
Financial Reports ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation

AbstractThe Audit Regulation was adopted in 2014 to address many of the perceived failings in the market for statutory audits. It introduced mandatory audit firm rotation for public-interest entities, including listed companies, as of 17 June 2020/2023. Mandatory audit firm rotation was also considered by the Dutch legislator in 2012. Therefore, many Dutch listed companies had already switched audit firm in anticipation of the national requirement. In this article, we investigate the effects of mandatory audit firm rotation in the Netherlands by examining the financial reports of Dutch listed firms over the financial years 2012–2016 and by conducting a survey among stakeholders. We conclude that there is broad support for mandatory audit firm rotation in the Netherlands. Although mandatory audit firm rotation was seen as controversial at the time of adoption, it is now considered desirable by various stakeholders, including auditors themselves. However, mandatory audit firm rotation appears to have had some adverse effects. Most notably, our study shows a higher probability of errors in first year audits. The discount in audit fees provided by audit firms to lucrative larger public-interest entities for first year audits—the trophy client effect—may exacerbate the negative effect on audit quality. The Audit Regulation’s goals to improve the market for statutory audits have not been met so far.

scholarly journals The relation of auditor tenure to audit quality: Empirical evidence from the German audit market

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Krauß ◽  
Henning Zülch
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Auditor Tenure ◽  
Client Relationship ◽  
Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation

This study investigates whether and how the length of an auditor-client relationship affects audit quality. Using a sample of 1,071 firm observations of large listed companies for the sample period of 2005 to 2011, the study is one of the first to empirically analyze this auditing issue for the German audit market. The empirical results demonstrate that neither short term nor long term audit firm tenure seems to be a significant factor with regard to audit quality in Germany. In the wake of the ongoing discussion in the European Union regarding the optimal audit tenure length for the quality of the conducted statutory audits, our findings do not support the idea of a mandatory audit firm rotation rule.

Audit Market Structure and Audit Pricing

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Daniel Eshleman ◽  
Bradley P. Lawson
Keyword(s):  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Market Concentration ◽  
First Year ◽  
Audit Pricing ◽  
Ongoing Debate ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
The U.S

SYNOPSIS Extant literature finds mixed evidence on the association between audit market concentration and audit fees. We re-examine this issue using a large sample of U.S. audit clients covering 90 metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) spanning 2000–2013. We find that audit market concentration is associated with significantly higher audit fees, consistent with the concerns of regulators and managers. We also find that increases in audit market concentration are associated with fewer initial engagement fee discounts (i.e., reduced lowballing), particularly for non-Big 4 clients. We reconcile our findings with those of prior research and find that our divergent findings are attributable to controls for MSA fixed effects. In supplemental analyses, we find that audit market concentration is associated with higher audit quality. We also find that concentration is associated with higher audit quality for first-year engagements, but only if the auditor does not lowball on the engagement. Our results are relevant to the ongoing debate regarding the consequences of increased concentration within the U.S. audit market (GAO 2003, 2008). JEL Classifications: M41; M42; L13.

The Market Premium for Audit Partners with Big 4 Experience

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandra B. Zimmerman ◽  
Kenneth L. Bills ◽  
Monika Causholli
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Big 4 ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Second Tier ◽  
Market Premium

This study investigates how non-Big 4 firm audit partners’ Big 4 experience is valued by the audit market. The Big 4 audit firms have differentiated themselves as nationally recognized firms for whose services companies are willing to pay a premium. It is unclear, however, whether this reputation follows individual auditors when they move to a non-Big 4 audit firm. We find that audit fees are higher for non-Big 4 audit partners with Big 4 experience with the fee premium ranging from 17 to 26 percent depending on the extent of experience when they are employed by small audit firms but find no evidence of a fee premium for Big 4 experience at the second-tier audit firms. Furthermore, in additional analyses, we do not find strong, consistent evidence that audit quality is higher for clients of non-Big 4 audit partners with Big 4 experience than their counterparts without Big 4 experience.

The Effects of Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation on Client Importance and Audit Industry Concentration

2017 ◽  
Vol 93 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Bleibtreu ◽  
Ulrike Stefani
Keyword(s):  
Market Concentration ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Audit Firm ◽  
Bidding Strategies ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Rotation System ◽  
Economic Forces ◽  
Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation ◽  
Equilibrium Number

ABSTRACT Recently, a system of audit firm rotation has been implemented for the audits of listed companies conducted in the European Union (EU). In the U.S., in contrast, the regulator decided against such rotation. Whereas proponents argue that rotation would strengthen independence and decrease audit market concentration, opponents stress the importance of auditors' learning effects, which would be eliminated by a change in auditors. In extending the market matching model of Salop (1979), we provide an analysis that integrates these contradictory views. We assume that both auditors' industry expertise and their experience in auditing a client decrease audit costs. We investigate the bidding strategies applied to re-acquire clients that were lost due to rotation, auditors' profit contributions, the equilibrium number of auditors (i.e., audit market concentration), and the economic importance of specific clients. Our findings indicate that the regulators' goals of simultaneously decreasing client importance and audit market concentration are in direct conflict and, therefore, the rotation system might have unintended consequences. Our model, thus, suggests how different institutional parameters give rise to economic forces that can support diverging decisions regarding the implementation of MAR.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document