IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/alu/journl/v2y2013i15p14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Particularities Concerning The Beneficiaries Of Audit Services Provided By The Big 4 Companies: Evidence From Romania

Author

Listed:
  • Sorin Romulus Berinde

    (Babes-Bolyai University Cluj-Napoca Romania)

  • Adrian Grosanu

    (Babes-Bolyai University Cluj-Napoca Romania)

Abstract

This study aims to explore some particularities concerning the Romanian auditedentities which are oriented mainly towards contracting audit services from the largest companiesproviding auditing services (Big 4 companies). The assessment criteria taken into consideration forthe differentiation of the beneficiaries of the audit services, at Romanian level are related tocompetitiveness, to the structure of share capital and to the nature of the audited entities‘management. There was taken into consideration the impact differentiation of each indicator, bycoefficients of importance. If at international level, previous results show a supremacy for the Big 4audit services providers, not the same situation confirms at Romanian level. The results show thatonly 18% of the sampled audited entities benefit from audit services provided by the Big 4,irrespective of their level of competitiveness, the structure of share capital or the structure ofmanagement.

Suggested Citation

  • Sorin Romulus Berinde & Adrian Grosanu, 2013. "Particularities Concerning The Beneficiaries Of Audit Services Provided By The Big 4 Companies: Evidence From Romania," Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, Faculty of Sciences, "1 Decembrie 1918" University, Alba Iulia, vol. 2(15), pages 1-14.
  • Handle: RePEc:alu:journl:v:2:y:2013:i:15:p:14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://oeconomica.uab.ro/upload/lucrari/1520132/14.pdf
    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. Dopuch, Nicholas & Holthausen, Robert W. & Leftwich, Richard W., 1986. "Abnormal stock returns associated with media disclosures of `subject to' qualified audit opinions," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 93-117, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Tom Van Caneghem, 2010. "Audit pricing and the Big4 fee premium: evidence from Belgium," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 25(2), pages 122-139, January.
    5. Dan Topor & Ioana Dorin & Alina Putan, 2011. "The Role Of Cost Information In Decision-Making. Case Study," Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, Faculty of Sciences, "1 Decembrie 1918" University, Alba Iulia, vol. 2(13), pages 1-15.
    6. Boone, Jeff P. & Khurana, Inder K. & Raman, K.K., 2010. "Do the Big 4 and the Second-tier firms provide audits of similar quality?," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, pages 330-352.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    audited entities; audit services provider; structure of share capital; structure of management; statistical methods;

    JEL classification:

    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M48 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Government Policy and Regulation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:alu:journl:v:2:y:2013:i:15:p:14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dan-Constantin Danuletiu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.