IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i11p4041-d180495.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Moderating Effects of Agency Problems and Monitoring Systems on the Relationship between Executive Stock Option and Audit Fees: Evidence from Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Sang Cheol Lee

    (College of Business Administration, Dongguk University-Seoul, 30, Pildong-ro 1gil, Jung-gu, Seoul 04620, Korea)

  • Jaewan Park

    (College of Business Administration, Dongguk University-Seoul, 30, Pildong-ro 1gil, Jung-gu, Seoul 04620, Korea)

  • Mooweon Rhee

    (School of Business, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea)

  • Yunkeun Lee

    (College of Business Administration, Dongguk University-Seoul, 30, Pildong-ro 1gil, Jung-gu, Seoul 04620, Korea)

Abstract

Since executive stock options may give rent-seeking incentives to CEOs, CEOs with stock options are likely to misallocate corporate resources to seek personal gains, which in turn may lead to a decrease in firm value. High-quality audit services can reduce the negative impacts of executive stock options on firm value and help firms to ensure sustainable growth. However, while most of the existing accounting literature related to executive stock options (ESO) is mainly focused on earnings management, there are relatively few studies that investigate the relation between ESO and audit fees. At the same time, while previous studies on ESO have been conducted in advanced countries, few studies have identified the relationship between ESO and audit fees in emerging markets. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the effect of ESO under circumstances different from those of developed countries. To fill this gap, we investigated the association between executive stock options and audit fees and examine the moderating effects of agency problems and monitoring systems on the relationship. Using 462 observations from 110 nonfinancial Korean listed companies, for the period of 2000 to 2005, we found that executive stock options are positively related to audit fees. In addition, we found that the effects of executive stock options on audit fees are even higher in firms with high agency problems, effective internal monitoring systems, and major accounting firms. This study can help regulatory agencies to validate audit fee regulations, such as the International Standard on Auditing, that consider ESO a significant risk factor. In addition, these results can help external auditors to set up the specific guidelines for pricing audit fees. Furthermore, the results of this study will contribute to the construction of more desirable corporate governance structure in Korean companies, which in turn would not only enhance firm value but also strengthen the sustainability of companies belonging to the emerging markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Sang Cheol Lee & Jaewan Park & Mooweon Rhee & Yunkeun Lee, 2018. "Moderating Effects of Agency Problems and Monitoring Systems on the Relationship between Executive Stock Option and Audit Fees: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4041-:d:180495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4041/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4041/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scott Whisenant & Srinivasan Sankaraguruswamy & K. Raghunandan, 2003. "Evidence on the Joint Determination of Audit and Non‐Audit Fees," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 721-744, September.
    2. Ball, Ray & Shivakumar, Lakshmanan, 2008. "Earnings quality at initial public offerings," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2-3), pages 324-349, August.
    3. Yongtae Kim & Haidan Li & Siqi Li, 2015. "CEO Equity Incentives and Audit Fees," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(2), pages 608-638, June.
    4. Mahbub Zaman & Mohammed Hudaib & Roszaini Haniffa, 2011. "Corporate Governance Quality, Audit Fees and Non-Audit Services Fees," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1-2), pages 165-197, January.
    5. Ball, Ray & Jayaraman, Sudarshan & Shivakumar, Lakshmanan, 2012. "Audited financial reporting and voluntary disclosure as complements: A test of the Confirmation Hypothesis," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 136-166.
    6. Neil Fargher & Alicia Jiang & Yangxin Yu & Gary Monroe, 2014. "How do auditors perceive CEO's risk-taking incentives?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 54(4), pages 1157-1181, December.
    7. Stijn Claessens & Simeon Djankov & Joseph P. H. Fan & Larry H. P. Lang, 2002. "Disentangling the Incentive and Entrenchment Effects of Large Shareholdings," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(6), pages 2741-2771, December.
    8. David F. Larcker & Scott A. Richardson, 2004. "Fees Paid to Audit Firms, Accrual Choices, and Corporate Governance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 625-658, June.
    9. Hamid Mehran & Joseph Tracy, 2001. "The Impact of Employee Stock Options on the Evolution of Compensation in the 1990s," NBER Working Papers 8353, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Core, John & Guay, Wayne, 1999. "The use of equity grants to manage optimal equity incentive levels," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 151-184, December.
    11. Jeong†Bon Kim & Cheong H. Yi, 2006. "Ownership Structure, Business Group Affiliation, Listing Status, and Earnings Management: Evidence from Korea," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 427-464, June.
    12. David C. Hay & W. Robert Knechel & Norman Wong, 2006. "Audit Fees: A Meta†analysis of the Effect of Supply and Demand Attributes," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 141-191, March.
    13. Francis, Jere R., 1984. "The effect of audit firm size on audit prices : A study of the Australian Market," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 133-151, August.
    14. Simunic, Da, 1984. "Auditing, Consulting, And Auditor Independence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 679-702.
    15. Arellano, Manuel & Bover, Olympia, 1995. "Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-51, July.
    16. Luc Laeven & Ross Levine, 2008. "Complex Ownership Structures and Corporate Valuations," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(2), pages 579-604, April.
    17. Robert M. Bushman & Joseph D. Piotroski & Abbie J. Smith, 2004. "What Determines Corporate Transparency?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 207-252, May.
    18. Joseph V. Carcello & Dana R. Hermanson & Terry L. Neal & Richard A. Riley, 2002. "Board Characteristics and Audit Fees," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 365-384, September.
    19. Bergstresser, Daniel & Philippon, Thomas, 2006. "CEO incentives and earnings management," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 511-529, June.
    20. Palmrose, Zv, 1986. "Audit Fees And Auditor Size - Further Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 97-110.
    21. Hamid Mehran & Joseph Tracy, 2001. "The effect of employee stock options on the evolution of compensation in the 1990s," Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, issue Dec, pages 17-34.
    22. Mark A. Clatworthy & Michael J. Peel, 2007. "The Effect of Corporate Status on External Audit Fees: Evidence From the UK," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1‐2), pages 169-201, January.
    23. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    24. Chung, Richard & Firth, Michael & Kim, Jeong-Bon, 2005. "Earnings management, surplus free cash flow, and external monitoring," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(6), pages 766-776, June.
    25. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    26. Mark S. Beasley & Steven E. Salterio, 2001. "The Relationship between Board Characteristics and Voluntary Improvements in Audit Committee Composition and Experience," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), pages 539-570, December.
    27. Craswell, Allen T. & Francis, Jere R. & Taylor, Stephen L., 1995. "Auditor brand name reputations and industry specializations," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 297-322, December.
    28. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
    29. Joseph V. Carcello & Terry L. Neal & Zoe†Vonna Palmrose & Susan Scholz, 2011. "CEO Involvement in Selecting Board Members, Audit Committee Effectiveness, and Restatements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 396-430, June.
    30. Abudy, Menachem & Benninga, Simon, 2013. "Non-marketability and the value of employee stock options," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5500-5510.
    31. Jensen, Michael C & Murphy, Kevin J, 1990. "Performance Pay and Top-Management Incentives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(2), pages 225-264, April.
    32. Cohen, Daniel A. & Zarowin, Paul, 2010. "Accrual-based and real earnings management activities around seasoned equity offerings," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 2-19, May.
    33. Klein, April, 2002. "Audit committee, board of director characteristics, and earnings management," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 375-400, August.
    34. Xie, Biao & Davidson, Wallace III & DaDalt, Peter J., 2003. "Earnings management and corporate governance: the role of the board and the audit committee," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 295-316, June.
    35. Francis, Jr & Stokes, Dj, 1986. "Audit Prices, Product Differentiation, And Scale Economies - Further Evidence From The Australian Market," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 383-393.
    36. Hanlon, Michelle & Rajgopal, Shivaram & Shevlin, Terry, 2003. "Are executive stock options associated with future earnings?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-3), pages 3-43, December.
    37. Joseph P. H. Fan & T. J. Wong, 2005. "Do External Auditors Perform a Corporate Governance Role in Emerging Markets? Evidence from East Asia," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 35-72, March.
    38. Mark A. Clatworthy & Michael J. Peel, 2007. "The Effect of Corporate Status on External Audit Fees: Evidence From the UK," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1‐2), pages 169-201, January.
    39. Teoh, Siew Hong & Welch, Ivo & Wong, T. J., 1998. "Earnings management and the underperformance of seasoned equity offerings," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 63-99, October.
    40. Lin Peng & Ailsa Röell, 2008. "Executive pay and shareholder litigation," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 12(1), pages 141-184.
    41. In‐Mu Haw & Bingbing Hu & Lee‐Seok Hwang & Woody Wu, 2004. "Ultimate Ownership, Income Management, and Legal and Extra‐Legal Institutions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 423-462, May.
    42. Baek, Jae-Seung & Kang, Jun-Koo & Suh Park, Kyung, 2004. "Corporate governance and firm value: evidence from the Korean financial crisis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 265-313, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    2. George Drogalas & Michail Nerantzidis & Dimitrios Mitskinis & Ioannis Tampakoudis, 2021. "The relationship between audit fees and audit committee characteristics: evidence from the Athens Stock Exchange," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 18(1), pages 24-41, March.
    3. Bremert, Michael & Voeller, Dennis & Zein, Nicole, 2007. "Interdependencies between Elements of Governance and Auditing : Evidence from Germany," Papers 07-76, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    4. David C. Hay & W. Robert Knechel & Norman Wong, 2006. "Audit Fees: A Meta†analysis of the Effect of Supply and Demand Attributes," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 141-191, March.
    5. Shan, Yuan George & Troshani, Indrit & Tarca, Ann, 2019. "Managerial ownership, audit firm size, and audit fees: Australian evidence," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 18-36.
    6. Armstrong, Christopher S. & Guay, Wayne R. & Weber, Joseph P., 2010. "The role of information and financial reporting in corporate governance and debt contracting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 179-234, December.
    7. Dang, Man & Puwanenthiren, Premkanth & Truong, Cameron & Henry, Darren & Vo, Xuan Vinh, 2022. "Audit quality and seasoned equity offerings methods," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    8. Al-Okaily, Jihad & BenYoussef, Nourhene, 2020. "Audit committee effectiveness and non-audit service fees: Evidence from UK family firms," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    9. Sang Cheol Lee & Mooweon Rhee & Jongchul Yoon, 2018. "Foreign Monitoring and Audit Quality: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    10. Akihiro Yamada & Kento Fujita, 2022. "Impact of Parent Companies and Multiple Large Shareholders on Audit Fees in Stakeholder-Oriented Corporate Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, May.
    11. Jiang, Fuxiu & Ma, Yunbiao & Wang, Xue, 2020. "Multiple blockholders and earnings management," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    12. Sarowar Hossain & Jenny Jing Wang, 2023. "Abnormal audit fees and audit quality: Australian evidence," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 48(3), pages 596-624, August.
    13. Stergios Leventis & Emmanouil Dedoulis & Omneya Abdelsalam, 2018. "The Impact of Religiosity on Audit Pricing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 53-78, March.
    14. Anthony Moung Yin Chan & Guoping Liu & Jerry Sun, 2013. "Independent audit committee members’ board tenure and audit fees," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 53(4), pages 1129-1147, December.
    15. Attig, Najah & Chen, Ruiyuan & El Ghoul, Sadok & Guedhami, Omrane & Kwok, Chuck & Pittman, Jeffrey, 2020. "Are insiders equal? Evidence from earnings management in closely held East Asian firms," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    16. O. J. Ilaboya & M. O. Izevbekhai & G. Ohiokha, 2017. "Determinants Of Abnormal Audit Fees In Nigerian Quoted Companies," Economic Thought and Practice, Department of Economics and Business, University of Dubrovnik, vol. 26(1), pages 65-83, june.
    17. Alhababsah, Salem & Yekini, Sina, 2021. "Audit committee and audit quality: An empirical analysis considering industry expertise, legal expertise and gender diversity," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    18. Kwang Wuk Oh & Seok Woo Jeong & Seon Mi Kim & Seung Weon Yoo, 2017. "The Effect of IPO Risks on Auditors’ Decisions: Auditor Designation Case," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 27(4), pages 421-441, December.
    19. Singh, Harjinder & Sultana, Nigar & Islam, Ariful & Singh, Abhijeet, 2022. "Busy auditors, financial reporting timeliness and quality," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(3).
    20. Dechow, Patricia & Ge, Weili & Schrand, Catherine, 2010. "Understanding earnings quality: A review of the proxies, their determinants and their consequences," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 344-401, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4041-:d:180495. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.