IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/jaarpp/v13y2012i2p100-121.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple large ownership structure, audit committee activity and audit fees: Evidence from the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Ismail Adelopo
  • Kumba Jallow
  • Peter Scott

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of multiple large ownership structure (MLS) and audit committee activity (ACA) on audit pricing for a sample of UK listed companies. Design/methodology/approach - One way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and cross sectional multiple regression analysis of a sample of UK listed companies showed statistically significant differences in the audit fees, firm size and audit committee activities of these firms when they are categorised based on the number of MLS. Findings - The study finds a significant negative relationship between audit fees and number of MLS, but a surprising positive relationship with ACA. The findings confirm the beneficial effects of more active institutional investors’ monitoring, but also show that increasing monitoring by audit committees is associated with increase in audit fees. Research limitations/implications - The results reported in this research are based on cross sectional data. It is likely that the result may be different if the issue is examined over a relatively longer period. Practical implications - The study showed that monitoring intensity of the large shareholders can be captured through their number and not simply through their shareholding. It also confirms the suggestion in previous studies that audit committees’ members protect themselves from depletion in human capital, litigation and reputational risk by buying more audit related services from their auditors. Originality/value - The study empirically examined the impact of multiple large ownership structure on audit pricing and thereby extends the practical and theoretical understanding on the monitoring roles of large shareholders as well as the audit committees.

Suggested Citation

  • Ismail Adelopo & Kumba Jallow & Peter Scott, 2012. "Multiple large ownership structure, audit committee activity and audit fees: Evidence from the UK," Journal of Applied Accounting Research, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 13(2), pages 100-121, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:jaarpp:v:13:y:2012:i:2:p:100-121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/09675421211254821?utm_campaign=RePEc&WT.mc_id=RePEc
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    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. Mitra, Santanu & Hossain, Mahmud, 2007. "Ownership composition and non-audit service fees," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 348-356, April.
    2. Stuart Turley & Mahbub Zaman, 2007. "Audit committee effectiveness: informal processes and behavioural effects," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 20(5), pages 765-788, September.
    3. Becker, Bo & Cronqvist, Henrik & Fahlenbrach, Rüdiger, 2011. "Estimating the Effects of Large Shareholders Using a Geographic Instrument," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(04), pages 907-942, September.
    4. Kane, Gregory D. & Velury, Uma, 2004. "The role of institutional ownership in the market for auditing services: an empirical investigation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(9), pages 976-983, September.
    5. Agrawal, Anup & Mandelker, Gershon N., 1990. "Large Shareholders and the Monitoring of Managers: The Case of Antitakeover Charter Amendments," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(02), pages 143-161, June.
    6. Tylecote, Andrew & Ramirez, Paulina, 2006. "Corporate governance and innovation: The UK compared with the US and 'insider' economies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 160-180, February.
    7. Xuemin (Sterling) Yan & Zhe Zhang, 2009. "Institutional Investors and Equity Returns: Are Short-term Institutions Better Informed?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(2), pages 893-924, February.
    8. Velury, Uma & Jenkins, David S., 2006. "Institutional ownership and the quality of earnings," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(9), pages 1043-1051, September.
    9. Ruth V. Aguilera & Cynthia A. Williams & John M. Conley & Deborah E. Rupp, 2006. "Corporate Governance and Social Responsibility: a comparative analysis of the UK and the US," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(3), pages 147-158, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    12. Collier, Paul & Gregory, Alan, 1999. "Audit committee activity and agency costs," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(4-5), pages 311-332.
    13. Morck, Randall & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1988. "Management ownership and market valuation," Scholarly Articles 29407535, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    14. Chen, Joseph & Hong, Harrison & Stein, Jeremy C., 2002. "Breadth of ownership and stock returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 171-205.
    15. Richard J. Zeckhauser & John Pound, 1990. "Are Large Shareholders Effective Monitors? An Investigation of Share Ownership and Corporate Performance," NBER Chapters,in: Asymmetric Information, Corporate Finance, and Investment, pages 149-180 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Jaggi, Bikki & Leung, Sidney & Gul, Ferdinand, 2009. "Family control, board independence and earnings management: Evidence based on Hong Kong firms," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 281-300, July.
    17. Pincus, Karen & Rusbarsky, Mark & Wong, Jilnaught, 1989. "Voluntary formation of corporate audit committees among NASDAQ firms," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 239-265.
    18. Luc Laeven & Ross Levine, 2008. "Complex Ownership Structures and Corporate Valuations," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(2), pages 579-604, April.
    19. McConnell, John J. & Servaes, Henri, 1990. "Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 595-612, October.
    20. Brickley, James A. & Lease, Ronald C. & Smith, Clifford Jr., 1988. "Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 267-291, January.
    21. Cornett, Marcia Millon & Marcus, Alan J. & Saunders, Anthony & Tehranian, Hassan, 2007. "The impact of institutional ownership on corporate operating performance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 1771-1794, June.
    22. Roe, Mark J., 1990. "Political and legal restraints on ownership and control of public companies," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 7-41, September.
    23. Short, Helen & Keasey, Kevin, 1999. "Managerial ownership and the performance of firms: Evidence from the UK," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 79-101, March.
    24. Velury, Uma & Reisch, John T & O'Reilly, Dennis M, 2003. "Institutional Ownership and the Selection of Industry Specialist Auditors," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 35-48, July.
    25. repec:bla:joares:v:32:y:1994:i:2:p:241-261 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. Guercio, Diane Del & Hawkins, Jennifer, 1999. "The motivation and impact of pension fund activism," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 293-340, June.
    27. Mikkelson, Wayne H. & Partch, M. Megan, 1989. "Managers' voting rights and corporate control," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 263-290, December.
    28. Maury, Benjamin & Pajuste, Anete, 2005. "Multiple large shareholders and firm value," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(7), pages 1813-1834, July.
    29. Chung, Richard & Firth, Michael & Kim, Jeong-Bon, 2002. "Institutional monitoring and opportunistic earnings management," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 29-48, January.
    30. Menon, Krishnagopal & Deahl Williams, Joanne, 1994. "The use of audit committees for monitoring," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 121-139.
    31. 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.
    32. Santanu Mitra & Mahmud Hossain & Donald Deis, 2007. "The empirical relationship between ownership characteristics and audit fees," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 257-285, April.
    33. Lucian Arye Bebchuk, 1994. "Efficient and Inefficient Sales of Corporate Control," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 109(4), pages 957-993.
    34. Morck, Randall & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1988. "Management ownership and market valuation : An empirical analysis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 293-315, January.
    35. Faccio, Mara & Lang, Larry H. P., 2002. "The ultimate ownership of Western European corporations," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 365-395, September.
    36. Jenny Goodwin-Stewart & Pamela Kent, 2006. "Relation between external audit fees, audit committee characteristics and internal audit," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 46(3), pages 387-404.
    37. Sanjeev Bhojraj & Partha Sengupta, 2003. "Effect of Corporate Governance on Bond Ratings and Yields: The Role of Institutional Investors and Outside Directors," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(3), pages 455-476, July.
    38. Paul Collier & Alan Gregory, 1996. "Audit committee effectiveness and the audit fee," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 177-198.
    39. Clifford G. Holderness, 2009. "The Myth of Diffuse Ownership in the United States," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(4), pages 1377-1408, April.
    40. Kerry Back & C. Henry Cao & Gregory A. Willard, 2000. "Imperfect Competition among Informed Traders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(5), pages 2117-2155, October.
    41. Karpoff, Jonathan M. & Malatesta, Paul H. & Walkling, Ralph A., 1996. "Corporate governance and shareholder initiatives: Empirical evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 365-395, November.
    42. Bradbury, Michael E., 1990. "The incentives for voluntary audit committee formation," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 19-36.
    43. Jay C. Hartzell & Laura T. Starks, 2003. "Institutional Investors and Executive Compensation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(6), pages 2351-2374, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:eme:jaarpp:v:13:y:2012:i:2:p:100-121. 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: (Virginia Chapman). General contact details of provider: http://www.emeraldinsight.com .

    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.