IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jbfnac/v23y1996i1p13-28.html

Audit Fees And Auditor Change; An Investigation Of The Persistence Of Fee Reduction By Type Of Change

Author

Listed:
  • Alan Gregory
  • Paul Collier

Abstract

Despite concern expressed over ‘low‐balling’ or competitive price reduction in the market for audit services, the only empirical investigation of the relationship between initial audit fees, fee recovery and auditor change which has been carried out is by Simon and Francis (1988) using US cross‐sectional data, although Pong and Whittington (1994, forthcoming) examine the impact on first year fees. We investigate the impact of auditor change on cross‐sectional UK data for 1991 with the aim of discovering whether there is any evidence of price cutting and subsequent price recovery in a European, rather than a US context. We find that there is evidence of such a phenomenon, and investigate further to see whether this effect is robust with respect to the definition used of ‘auditor change’, and whether the effect varies according to whether the old auditor was a ‘Big Six’ or ‘non‐Big Six’ firm. We find that the largest reductions (controlling for auditor size) are experienced by firms changing to ‘Big Six’ firms. We further show that involuntary changes (by auditor acquisition) are associated with positive (although statistically insignificant) increases in fees, whereasvoluntary changesare associated with negative (andsignificant) feereductions. These effects are shown to be robust with respect to model specification. This suggests that fee reductions cannot be ascribed to economies of scale or scope, but is consistent with a ‘low‐balling’ model of behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Alan Gregory & Paul Collier, 1996. "Audit Fees And Auditor Change; An Investigation Of The Persistence Of Fee Reduction By Type Of Change," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 13-28, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jbfnac:v:23:y:1996:i:1:p:13-28
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5957.1996.tb00399.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5957.1996.tb00399.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1468-5957.1996.tb00399.x?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. Philip Chan & Mahmoud Ezzamel & David Gwilliam, 1993. "Determinants Of Audit Fees For Quoted Uk Companies," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(6), pages 765-786, November.
    2. C.M. Pong & G. Whittington, 1994. "The Determinants Of Audit Fees: Some Empirical Models," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 1071-1095, December.
    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. Breusch, T S & Pagan, A R, 1979. "A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1287-1294, September.
    5. Daniel B. Thornton & Giora Moore, 1993. "Auditor Choice And Audit Fee Determinants," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 333-349, April.
    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. Iftekhar Hasan & Joseph A. Micale & Qiang Wu, 2024. "Disentangling stock return synchronicity from the auditor's perspective," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(5-6), pages 1467-1507, May.
    2. Lasse Niemi & W. Robert Knechel & Hannu Ojala & Jill Collis, 2018. "Responsiveness of Auditors to the Audit Risk Standards: Unique Evidence from Big 4 Audit Firms," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 33-54, January.
    3. Matthew Grosse & Tom Scott & Zeting Zang, 2024. "Aligning disclosure requirements for managerial assessments of going concern risk: Initial evidence from New Zealand," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 64(2), pages 1525-1547, June.
    4. Karla M. Johnstone & Jean C. Bedard & Michael L. Ettredge, 2004. "The Effect of Competitive Bidding on Engagement Planning and Pricing," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 25-53, March.
    5. Michael E. Bradbury & Gary Monroe, 2017. "Large audit firm premium and audit specialisation in the public sector," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 57(3), pages 657-679, September.
    6. Christopher Pong, 2004. "A descriptive analysis of audit price changes in the UK 1991-95," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 161-178.
    7. Philip Chan & Mahmoud Ezzamel & David Gwilliam, 1993. "Determinants Of Audit Fees For Quoted Uk Companies," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(6), pages 765-786, November.
    8. Shreya Biswas, 2021. "Do Audit Fees Adjust Quickly?—Evidence from India," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 22(5), pages 1301-1318, October.
    9. Laurence Kranich & Andrés Perea & Hans Peters, 2005. "Core Concepts For Dynamic Tu Games," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 43-61.
    10. 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.
    11. Onundur Pall Ragnarsson, 2025. "A Hedonic Housing Model for Macroprudential Policy," Economics wp99, Department of Economics, Central bank of Iceland.
    12. Mehzabin Tuli, Farzana & Mitra, Suman & Crews, Mariah B., 2021. "Factors influencing the usage of shared E-scooters in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 164-185.
    13. Hideki Murakami & Yukari Matsuse & Koji Mukaigawa & Yushi Tsunoda, 2013. "Product lifecycle and choice of transportation modes: Japan' s evidence of import and export," Discussion Papers 2013-28, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
    14. Michele Fratianni & Francesco Marchionne, 2011. "The Limits to Integration," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Tadashi Kikuchi, 2014. "Vietnamese Inter – regional labor migration: system approach to the modeling 1989, 1999, 2009," EcoMod2014 6998, EcoMod.
    16. Pinto, Inês & Morais, Ana Isabel & Quick, Reiner, 2020. "The impact of the precision of accounting standards on the expanded auditor’s report in the European Union," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    17. Jean-Paul Azam & Catherine Bonjean, 1995. "La formation du prix du riz : théorie et application au cas d'Antananarivo (Madagascar) ," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 46(4), pages 1145-1166.
    18. Smith, Deborah Drummond & Gleason, Kimberly C. & Kannan, Yezen H., 2021. "Auditor liability and excess cash holdings: Evidence from audit fees of foreign incorporated firms," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    19. Nathaniel Geiger & Bryan McLaughlin & John Velez, 2021. "Not all boomers: temporal orientation explains inter- and intra-cultural variability in the link between age and climate engagement," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-20, May.
    20. Vittorio Nicolardi, 2009. "The effects of the new 1995 ESA methodologies of estimation on the structural analysis of Italian consumption," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 18(1), pages 125-149, March.

    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:jbfnac:v:23:y:1996:i:1:p:13-28. 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: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0306-686X .

    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.