IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jbfnac/v26y1999i3-4p451-475.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Auditor Concentration: A Replication and Extension for the UK Audit Market 1991–1995

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher K.M. Pong

Abstract

This paper examines the issue of auditor concentration in the UK during the period from 1991 to 1995. It shows that in 1995 the Big Six held 75% of the total number of audits and collectively earned 92% of the total audit fees. There was only a small increase in auditor concentration during the five year period, resulting from companies switching from small audit firms to Big Six and newly listed companies choosing a Big Six firm. The paper also examines auditor concentration within industries. Finally, the study assesses the measurement methods most commonly used in auditor concentration studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher K.M. Pong, 1999. "Auditor Concentration: A Replication and Extension for the UK Audit Market 1991–1995," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3‐4), pages 451-475, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jbfnac:v:26:y:1999:i:3-4:p:451-475
    DOI: 10.1111/1468-5957.00263
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5957.00263
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1468-5957.00263?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Derek Matthews & Michael Peel, 2003. "Audit fee determinants and the large auditor premium in 1900," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 137-155.
    2. Michael Firth & Thomas Lau, 2004. "Audit pricing following mergers of accounting practices: evidence from Hong Kong," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 201-213.
    3. Vivien Beattie & Alan Goodacre & Ken Pratt & Joanna Stevenson, 2001. "The determinants of audit fees—evidence from the voluntary sector," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 243-274.
    4. 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.
    5. Dirk Simons & Nicole Zein, 2016. "Audit Market Segmentation -- The Impact of Mid-tier Firms on Competition," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 131-154, May.
    6. Michael Peel & Roydon Roberts, 2003. "Audit fee determinants and auditor premiums: evidence from the micro-firm sub-market," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(3), pages 207-233.

    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:26:y:1999:i:3-4:p:451-475. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.