IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/acctfi/v66y2026i1p178-194.html

Regulatory Price Restrictions, Audit Fees and Audit Outcomes: Evidence From Audit Fee Regulation No. 196 in China

Author

Listed:
  • Zhili Tian
  • Yiye Liu
  • Yixuan Zhang

Abstract

This paper examines the effect of audit fee regulation on audit fees and audit outcomes. Leveraging the staggered introduction of audit fee restrictions in different Chinese provinces, we find that audit fee regulation is effective in curbing lowballing behaviours and improving audit quality. The increased audit independence and audit efforts are the main mechanisms. The relation between audit fee regulation and audit quality is more pronounced (1) when client firms have more external monitoring (2) when firms have pre‐regulation lowballing behaviours. Overall, our findings offer plausibly causal evidence that curbing low‐price competition in the audit market leads to improved audit outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhili Tian & Yiye Liu & Yixuan Zhang, 2026. "Regulatory Price Restrictions, Audit Fees and Audit Outcomes: Evidence From Audit Fee Regulation No. 196 in China," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 66(1), pages 178-194, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:acctfi:v:66:y:2026:i:1:p:178-194
    DOI: 10.1111/acfi.70100
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.70100
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/acfi.70100?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lennox, Clive & Wang, Zi-Tian & Wu, Xi, 2018. "Earnings management, audit adjustments, and the financing of corporate acquisitions: Evidence from China," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 21-40.
    2. Joseph H. Zhang, 2018. "Accounting Comparability, Audit Effort, and Audit Outcomes," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 245-276, March.
    3. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    4. Richard C. Hatfield & Christopher P. Agoglia & Maria H. Sanchez, 2008. "Client Characteristics and the Negotiation Tactics of Auditors: Implications for Financial Reporting," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 46(5), pages 1183-1207, December.
    5. Wen He & Baljit Sidhu & Stephen Taylor, 2019. "Audit quality and properties of analysts’ information environment," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3-4), pages 400-419, March.
    6. Dye, Ronald A., 1991. "Informationally motivated auditor replacement," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 347-374, December.
    7. 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, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(1), pages 35-72, March.
    8. Giora Moore & William R. Scott, 1989. "Auditors' legal liability, collusion with management, and investors' loss," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), pages 754-774, March.
    9. Jiang, Guohua & Lee, Charles M.C. & Yue, Heng, 2010. "Tunneling through intercorporate loans: The China experience," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 1-20, October.
    10. Mark L. DeFond & K. Raghunandan & K.R. Subramanyam, 2002. "Do Non–Audit Service Fees Impair Auditor Independence? Evidence from Going Concern Audit Opinions," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(4), pages 1247-1274, September.
    11. K. Hung Chan & Kenny Z. Lin & Phyllis Lai-lan Mo, 2006. "A Political–economic Analysis of Auditor Reporting and Auditor Switches," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 21-48, March.
    12. Baker, Andrew C. & Larcker, David F. & Wang, Charles C.Y., 2022. "How much should we trust staggered difference-in-differences estimates?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 370-395.
    13. Scott N. Bronson & Aloke (Al) Ghosh & Chris E. Hogan, 2017. "Audit Fee Differential, Audit Effort, and Litigation Risk: An Examination of ADR Firms," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(1), pages 83-117, March.
    14. DeFond, Mark L. & Wong, T. J. & Li, Shuhua, 1999. "The impact of improved auditor independence on audit market concentration in China," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 269-305, December.
    15. Coady Wing & Seth M. Freedman & Alex Hollingsworth, 2024. "Stacked Difference-in-Differences," NBER Working Papers 32054, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Wang, Qian & Wong, T.J. & Xia, Lijun, 2008. "State ownership, the institutional environment, and auditor choice: Evidence from China," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 112-134, September.
    17. Michael Gibbins & Steven Salterio & Alan Webb, 2001. "Evidence About Auditor–Client Management Negotiation Concerning Client’s Financial Reporting," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(3), pages 535-563, December.
    18. Lennox, Clive & Wu, Xi & Zhang, Tianyu, 2016. "The effect of audit adjustments on earnings quality: Evidence from China," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 545-562.
    19. Santanu Mitra & Donald R. Deis & Mahmud Hossain, 2009. "The association between audit fees and reported earnings quality in pre‐ and post‐Sarbanes‐Oxley regimes," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(3), pages 232-252, August.
    20. Barnes, Paul, 2004. "The auditor's going concern decision and Types I and II errors: The Coase Theorem, transaction costs, bargaining power and attempts to mislead," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 415-440.
    21. Yoon Ju Kang & M. David Piercey & Andrew Trotman, 2020. "Does an Audit Judgment Rule Increase or Decrease Auditors' Use of Innovative Audit Procedures?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 297-321, March.
    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. Pan, Yue & Shroff, Nemit & Zhang, Pengdong, 2023. "The dark side of audit market competition," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1).
    2. Jeffrey Pittman & Baolei Qi & Yi Si & Zi-Tian Wang & Chongwu Xia, 2024. "Individual Auditor Social Responsibility and Audit Quality: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 194(1), pages 119-144, September.
    3. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    4. Liwei Shan & Albert Tsang & Xiaoxue Zhang, 2024. "Transporting Audit Quality Across Countries: Returnee CEOs and Audit Fees," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 192(4), pages 845-874, July.
    5. Knechel, W. Robert & Thomas, Edward & Driskill, Matthew, 2020. "Understanding financial auditing from a service perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    6. Xianjie He & Jeffrey Pittman & Oliver Rui, 2016. "Reputational Implications for Partners After a Major Audit Failure: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 138(4), pages 703-722, November.
    7. Huacheng Wang & Kangtao Ye & Kai Zhong, 2018. "Accounting research in China: commemorating the 40th anniversary of reform and opening up," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-37, December.
    8. Li, Xuelian & Liu, Ming, 2024. "Abnormal audit fees and financial reporting quality: A meta-analysis," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    9. Ku He & Xiaofei Pan & Gary Tian, 2017. "Legal Liability, Government Intervention, and Auditor Behavior: Evidence from Structural Reform of Audit Firms in China," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 61-95, January.
    10. Jianlei Han & Jing He & Zheyao Pan & Jing Shi, 2018. "Twenty Years of Accounting and Finance Research on the Chinese Capital Market," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 54(4), pages 576-599, December.
    11. Minfeng Yu & Yi Si & Gaoliang Tian & Lei Zhang, 2023. "Climate risk and audit fees: An international study," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(5), pages 4989-5025, December.
    12. Barnes, Paul, 2013. "The effects on financial statements of the litigation cost rule in a civil action for negligence against the auditor," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 170-182.
    13. Rajib Doogar & Padmakumar Sivadasan & Ira Solomon, 2015. "Audit fee residuals: Costs or rents?," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 1247-1286, December.
    14. Ting‐Chiao Huang & Yi‐Hung Lin & Daniel Chai & Stephanie Hairston, 2025. "Are auditors insulated to positive client news? Evidence from audit fees and going‐concern opinions," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 65(3), pages 2339-2386, September.
    15. Feng Chen & Songlan Peng & Shuang Xue & Zhifeng Yang & Feiteng Ye, 2016. "Do Audit Clients Successfully Engage in Opinion Shopping? Partner‐Level Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 54(1), pages 79-112, March.
    16. Li Li & Xuejiao Liu & Wenqi Pei & Yifei Xia, 2025. "Air Pollution, Auditors' Affective States, and Audit Quality," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 65(3), pages 3142-3173, September.
    17. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3506 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Li, Wanfu & Pittman, Jeffrey & Wang, Zi-Tian & Zhao, Ziye, 2025. "The importance of information flow within auditors’ client portfolios to audit quality," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    19. 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.
    20. Mark DeFond & Jieying Zhang & Yuping Zhao, 2025. "Do Managers Successfully Shop for Auditors Who Allow Them to Opportunistically Report Positive News? Evidence from Accounting Estimates," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(11), pages 9256-9289, November.
    21. Habib, Ahsan & Muhammadi, Abdul Haris & Jiang, Haiyan, 2017. "Political connections, related party transactions, and auditor choice: Evidence from Indonesia," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19.

    More about this item

    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:bla:acctfi:v:66:y:2026:i:1:p:178-194. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaanzea.html .

    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.