Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Modelling issues in the relationship between audit and non‐audit fees

Modelling issues in the relationship between audit and non‐audit fees Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine modelling issues in the research of the relationship between audit and non‐audit fees by comparing the outcome of a single‐equation model of fees to the results of simultaneous equation model (SEM) of these interactions for a sample of UK listed companies and also by exploring the benefits of using a panel data approach. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is an empirical analysis of audit and non‐audit fees for a sample of 2,072 UK companies. Three types of models, single linear equation, SEM and panel data, are compared and the strengths and weaknesses of each discussed. Findings – The results indicate possible mis‐specification in the single linear equation model and the potential for simultaneous equation basis in the SEM. The panel data analysis confirms the findings of prior literature that there is a relationship between audit and non‐audit fees but statistically insignificant. Research limitations/implications – The implication of these findings is that previously published findings on audit fees, which used single equation, may have overstated the case for a relationship between audit and non‐audit fees due to problems in the econometric models. Practical implications – The issues addressed in this paper are very pertinent to a better understanding of the role of the auditor in the corporate environment. In particular, the findings are relevant to the debate on auditor independence and corporate governance. Originality/value – The study contributes to knowledge of the behaviour of audit fees and non‐audit fees, cross‐sectionally and through time and the most appropriate models for describing that behaviour. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Applied Accounting Research Emerald Publishing

Modelling issues in the relationship between audit and non‐audit fees

Ismail Adelopo
Journal of Applied Accounting Research , Volume 10 (2): 13 – Sep 11, 2009
Download PDF
13 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/modelling-issues-in-the-relationship-between-audit-and-non-audit-fees-ZLX1aLAddF
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0967-5426
DOI
10.1108/09675420910984664
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine modelling issues in the research of the relationship between audit and non‐audit fees by comparing the outcome of a single‐equation model of fees to the results of simultaneous equation model (SEM) of these interactions for a sample of UK listed companies and also by exploring the benefits of using a panel data approach. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is an empirical analysis of audit and non‐audit fees for a sample of 2,072 UK companies. Three types of models, single linear equation, SEM and panel data, are compared and the strengths and weaknesses of each discussed. Findings – The results indicate possible mis‐specification in the single linear equation model and the potential for simultaneous equation basis in the SEM. The panel data analysis confirms the findings of prior literature that there is a relationship between audit and non‐audit fees but statistically insignificant. Research limitations/implications – The implication of these findings is that previously published findings on audit fees, which used single equation, may have overstated the case for a relationship between audit and non‐audit fees due to problems in the econometric models. Practical implications – The issues addressed in this paper are very pertinent to a better understanding of the role of the auditor in the corporate environment. In particular, the findings are relevant to the debate on auditor independence and corporate governance. Originality/value – The study contributes to knowledge of the behaviour of audit fees and non‐audit fees, cross‐sectionally and through time and the most appropriate models for describing that behaviour.

Journal

Journal of Applied Accounting Research – Emerald Publishing

Published: Sep 11, 2009

Keywords: Auditing; Auditor's fees

References

  • The joint determination of audit fees, non‐audit fees, and abnormal accruals
    Antle, R.; Gordon, E.; Narayanmoorthy, G.; Zhou, L.
  • Auditor Independence and Non‐audit Services: A Literature Review
    Beattie, V.; Fearnley, S.
  • Cointegration analysis of audit pricing model: a panel unit root test approach
    Chou, W.L.; Lee, S.Y.L.
  • Auditor independence and fee dependence
    Creswell, A.; Stokes, D.J.; Laughton, J.
  • Auditor independence, lowballing and disclosure regulation
    DeAngelo, L.
  • Competition and choice in the UK audit market
    Department of Trade and Industry and Financial Reporting Council
  • Some empirical evidence from publicly quoted companies on the relationship between the pricing of audit and non‐audit services
    Ezzamel, M.; Gwilliam, D.R.; Holland, K.M.
  • Econometric Analysis
    Greene, W.H.
  • The behaviour of maximum likelihood estimates under non‐standard conditions
    Huber, P.
  • The relationship of audit committee characteristics with endogenously determined audit and non‐audit fees
    Lee, H.Y.; Mande, V.
  • The determinants of the UK big six premium
    McMeeking, K.P.; Pope, P.F.; Peasnell, K.V.
  • Introduction to Econometrics
    Maddala, G.S.
  • Ethical codes, independence and the conservation of ambiguity
    Page, M.; Spira, L.F.
  • The effect of non‐audit services on the pricing of auditing services: further evidence
    Palmrose, Z.V.
  • What determines audit fees? Evidence from Singapore and Malaysia
    Poitras, G.; Young, F.; Talib, A.
  • Auditee incentives for auditor independence: the case of non‐audit services
    Prakash, M.; Venable, C.
  • The pricing of financial audit services: theory and evidence
    Simunic, D.A.
  • Auditing, consulting, and auditor independence
    Simunic, D.A.
  • Evidence on the joint determination of audit and non‐audit fees
    Whisenant, S.; Sankaraguruswamy, S.; Raghunandan, K.
  • A heteroskedasticity‐consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity
    White, H.
  • The effect of client management bargaining power, moral reasoning development, and belief in a just world on auditor independence
    Windsor, C.A.; Ashkanasy, N.M.
  • Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach
    Wooldridge, J.M.