IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jocaae/v7y2011i2p65-81.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Audit fees around dismissals and resignations: Additional evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Griffin, Paul A.
  • Lont, David H.

Abstract

This paper offers new findings about how audit fees vary around auditor dismissals and resignations. For dismissals, we find evidence of lower than normal fees before and after an auditor change, consistent with the view that both incumbent and successor auditors adjust fees downward to retain the client. Our evidence also shows that incumbent and successor auditors charge unusually high fees before and after a resignation. We interpret the higher than normal incumbent fees as an indication that resignation companies reflect unusual levels of audit effort or risk, which the incumbent auditor captures as additional fees. Eventually, however, the additional fees are insufficient, inducing the incumbent to resign. A fee premium by the successor auditor after resignation also supports this view.

Suggested Citation

  • Griffin, Paul A. & Lont, David H., 2011. "Audit fees around dismissals and resignations: Additional evidence," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 65-81.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jocaae:v:7:y:2011:i:2:p:65-81
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jcae.2011.10.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1815566911000142
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jcae.2011.10.001?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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. Zhan Shu, Susan, 2000. "Auditor resignations: clientele effects and legal liability," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 173-205, April.
    3. Bockus, K & Gigler, F, 1998. "A theory of auditor resignation," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 191-208.
    4. Gul, Ferdinand A. & L. Tsui, Judy S., 1997. "A test of the free cash flow and debt monitoring hypotheses:: Evidence from audit pricing," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 219-237, December.
    5. Johnson, W. Bruce & Lys, Thomas, 1990. "The market for audit services : Evidence from voluntary auditor changes," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1-3), pages 281-308, January.
    6. Dye, Ronald A., 1991. "Informationally motivated auditor replacement," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 347-374, December.
    7. Lys, T & Watts, Rl, 1994. "Lawsuits Against Auditors," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32, pages 65-93.
    8. 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.
    9. Simunic, Da, 1984. "Auditing, Consulting, And Auditor Independence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 679-702.
    10. Teoh, Sh, 1992. "Auditor Independence, Dismissal Threats, And The Market Reaction To Auditor Switches," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 1-23.
    11. Palmrose, Zv, 1986. "Audit Fees And Auditor Size - Further Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 97-110.
    12. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    13. 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, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 1247-1274, September.
    14. 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.
    15. Kenneth B. Schwartz & Billy S. Soo, 1996. "The Association Between Auditor Changes and Reporting Lags," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 353-370, March.
    16. Ettredge, M & Greenberg, R, 1990. "Determinants Of Fee Cutting On Initial Audit Engagements," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 198-210.
    17. Tong Lu, 2006. "Does Opinion Shopping Impair Auditor Independence and Audit Quality?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 561-583, June.
    18. Fields, L. Paige & Fraser, Donald R. & Wilkins, Michael S., 2004. "An investigation of the pricing of audit services for financial institutions," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 53-77.
    19. DeAngelo, Linda Elizabeth, 1981. "Auditor independence, `low balling', and disclosure regulation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 113-127, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Karen Benson & Peter M Clarkson & Tom Smith & Irene Tutticci, 2015. "A review of accounting research in the Asia Pacific region," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 40(1), pages 36-88, February.

    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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Timothy B. Bell & Rajib Doogar & Ira Solomon, 2008. "Audit Labor Usage and Fees under Business Risk Auditing," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 729-760, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Ilias G. Basioudis, 2007. "Auditor's Engagement Risk and Audit Fees: The Role of Audit Firm Alumni," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(9‐10), pages 1393-1422, November.
    7. Jeffrey W. Schatzberg & Galen R. Sevcik, 1994. "A Multiperiod Model and Experimental Evidence of Independence and “Lowballing†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 137-174, June.
    8. Ray Ball, 2009. "Market and Political/Regulatory Perspectives on the Recent Accounting Scandals," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 277-323, May.
    9. Stuart, Iris & Shin, Yong-Chul & Cram, Donald P. & Karan, Vijay, 2013. "Review of choice-based, matched, and other stratified sample studies in auditing research," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 88-113.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Siddiqui, Javed & Zaman, Mahbub & Khan, Arifur, 2013. "Do Big-Four affiliates earn audit fee premiums in emerging markets?," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 332-342.
    13. Jeffrey W. Schatzberg & Galen R. Sevcik, 1994. "Modèle à périodes multiples et conclusions empiriques relatives à l'objectivité et à la pratique du ≪ leurre†prix ≫," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 175-221, June.
    14. Bugeja, Martin, 2011. "Takeover premiums and the perception of auditor independence and reputation," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 278-293.
    15. Chee‐Yeow Lim & Hun‐Tong Tan, 2008. "Non‐audit Service Fees and Audit Quality: The Impact of Auditor Specialization," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 199-246, March.
    16. Derek K. Chan, 1999. "“Low†Balling†and Efficiency in a Two†Period Specialization Model of Auditing Competition," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 609-642, December.
    17. Chen, Long & Krishnan, Gopal V. & Yu, Wei, 2018. "The relation between audit fee cuts during the global financial crisis and earnings quality and audit quality," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 14-31.
    18. Brad Badertscher & Bjorn Jorgensen & Sharon Katz & William Kinney, 2014. "Public Equity and Audit Pricing in the United States," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 303-339, May.
    19. Aloke Ghosh & Steven Lustgarten, 2006. "Pricing of Initial Audit Engagements by Large and Small Audit Firms," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 333-368, June.
    20. Chan, Lilian H. & Chen, Kevin C.W. & Chen, Tai-Yuan & Yu, Yangxin, 2012. "The effects of firm-initiated clawback provisions on earnings quality and auditor behavior," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 180-196.

    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:eee:jocaae:v:7:y:2011:i:2:p:65-81. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-contemporary-accounting-and-economics .

    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.