Evidence on (the lack of) audit-quality differentiation in the private client segment of the belgian audit market
This paper contributes to the empirical audit-quality literature and provides evidence on (the lack of) audit-quality differentiation in the private client segment of the Belgian audit market. Auditor size is used as audit-quality proxy. Prior evidence on audit-quality differentiation between Big Six and non-Big Six auditors in the private client segment of the Belgian audit market is mixed. In this paper we investigate whether these mixed results stem from the inability of the dichotomous Big Six/non-Big Six variable to capture auditor-size differences in a less concentrated audit market. To that end we examine whether alternative continuous measures of audit-firm size (i.e. auditor market share, number of audit-firm clients, number of partners in the audit firm, total assets and operating profit of the audit firm) have a constraining impact on earnings management in a large sample of privately held Belgian companies (n = 1,302). Overall, we do not find evidence that is supportive of quality differentiation in the private client segment of the Belgian audit market.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 13 (2004)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/REAR20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/REAR20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:euract:v:13:y:2004:i:3:p:501-522. 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: (Michael McNulty)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.