IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/euract/v9y2000i3p419-442.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of renewable long-term audit mandates on audit quality

Author

Listed:
  • Ann Vanstraelen

Abstract

Anglo-American countries like the US and the UK allow companies to switch auditors every year. In contrast, some continental European countries restrict auditor switching by allowing only renewable long-term audit mandates. This paper aims to analyse the impact of renewable long-term audit mandates on audit quality. Audit quality is considered from the viewpoint of the external users of the financial statements. It is questioned whether renewable long-term audit mandates have an impact on the auditor's reporting behaviour and on auditor independence. This research is motivated by the lack of consensus in the literature on the impact of the length of the auditor client relationship on audit quality. Moreover, few empirical studies use publicly available secondary data in order to determine whether perceived threats to auditor independence actually compromise auditor independence. Therefore, our research methodology consists in the development of a logistic regression model in which the explanatory variables are measured using publicly available data. The results of the study suggest that long-term auditor client relationships significantly increase the likelihood of an unqualified opinion or significantly reduce the auditor's willingness to qualify audit reports. A significant difference was also found between the auditor's reporting behaviour in the first two years versus the last year of the audit mandate. Auditors are more willing to issue an unqualified audit report in the first two years of their official mandate than in the last year of their mandate. This could be an indication that the decision to renew the auditor's mandate is already taken and known to the auditor before he has issued his last audit report within his current mandate. The policy implications of these findings could be in favour of mandatory auditor rotation to maintain the value of an audit for the external users. However, given recent theoretic evidence on the adverse effects of mandatory auditor rotation, there is a need to develop alternative measures to safeguard auditors' independence.

Suggested Citation

  • Ann Vanstraelen, 2000. "Impact of renewable long-term audit mandates on audit quality," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 419-442.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:euract:v:9:y:2000:i:3:p:419-442
    DOI: 10.1080/09638180020017140
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09638180020017140
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09638180020017140?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. Mutchler, Jf, 1985. "A Multivariate-Analysis Of The Auditors Going-Concern Opinion Decision," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 668-682.
    2. Antle, R, 1984. "Auditor Independence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 1-20.
    3. Okeefe, Tb & Simunic, Da & Stein, Mt, 1994. "The Production Of Audit Services - Evidence From A Major Public Accounting Firm," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 241-261.
    4. Nichols, Dr & Smith, Db, 1983. "Auditor Credibility And Auditor Changes," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 534-544.
    5. Acemoglu, Daron, 1994. "A Dynamic Model of Collusion," CEPR Discussion Papers 1027, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Gietzmann, M. B. & Quick, R., 1998. "Capping auditor liability: The German experience," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 81-103, January.
    7. Palmrose, Zv, 1986. "Audit Fees And Auditor Size - Further Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 97-110.
    8. Ronald A. Dye, 1993. "Discussion: Limiting Auditors' Liability," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(3), pages 435-443, September.
    9. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    10. Melumad, Nd & Thoman, L, 1990. "On Auditors And The Courts In An Adverse Selection Setting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 77-120.
    11. 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.
    12. Arrunada, Benito & Paz-Ares, Candido, 1997. "Mandatory rotation of company auditors: A critical examination," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 31-61, March.
    13. Dye, Ronald A, 1993. "Discussion: Limiting Auditors' Liability," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(3), pages 435-443, Fall.
    14. Carcello, Jv & Palmrose, Zv, 1994. "Auditor Litigation And Modified Reporting On Bankrupt Clients," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32, pages 1-30.
    15. Narayanan, Vg, 1994. "An Analysis Of Auditor Liability Rules," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32, pages 39-59.
    16. Louwers, TJ, 1998. "The relation between going-concern opinions and the auditor's loss function," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 143-156.
    17. Bryan Cloyd, C. & Frederickson, James R. & Hill, John W., 1996. "Motivating factors in lawsuits against independent auditors: Experimental evidence on the importance of causality," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 185-218.
    18. Daron Acemoglu & Miles Gietzmann, 1998. "Auditor independence, incomplete contracts and the role of legal liability," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(3), pages 355-375.
    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. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    2. 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.
    3. Garcia-Blandon, Josep & Argiles, Josep Ma, 2015. "Audit firm tenure and independence: A comprehensive investigation of audit qualifications in Spain," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 82-93.
    4. Karl E. Hackenbrack & Chris E. Hogan, 2002. "Market Response to Earnings Surprises Conditional on Reasons for an Auditor Change," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 195-223, June.
    5. Barnes, Paul, 2013. "The effects on financial statements of the litigation cost rule in a civil action for negligence against the auditor," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 170-182.
    6. Duellman, Scott & Hurwitz, Helen & Sun, Yan, 2015. "Managerial overconfidence and audit fees," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 148-165.
    7. Sharad Asthana & Rachana Kalelkar, 2011. "The Market For Audit Services And S&P 500 Index Clients," Working Papers 0022, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Minjung Kang & Jung‐wha Lee & Mihye Ha & Moon‐Kyung Cho, 2021. "Impact of IFRS adoption on audit pricing: evidence from audit hours and unit audit price in the Korean audit market," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(2), pages 3517-3564, June.
    11. Hubert Tondeur, 2003. "Les déterminants de la qualité des missions de commissariat aux comptes," Post-Print halshs-00582819, HAL.
    12. Owusu-Ansah, Stephen & Leventis, Stergios & Caramanis, Constantinos, 2010. "The pricing of statutory audit services in Greece," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 139-152.
    13. Schelleman, C.C.M. & Maijoor, S.J., 2000. "Benchmarking the production of audit services: an efficiency frontier approach," Research Memorandum 055, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    14. Habib, Ahsan, 2011. "Audit firm industry specialization and audit outcomes: Insights from academic literature," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 114-129.
    15. Yan Luo & Steven E. Salterio, 2021. "Toward an Archival Measure of the Likelihood of Auditor‐Client Management Negotiation: An Exploration of the Audit Lag Measures Conjecture†," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 109-143, March.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Schelleman, C.C.M., 2001. "Determinants of the profitability of audit engagements : an empirical study," Research Memorandum 037, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    19. 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.
    20. Nurul Nazlia Jamil, 2020. "The Power of Political Connections: Review on the Impacts of Audit Committee and Corporate Governance," Journal of Public Administration and Governance, Macrothink Institute, vol. 10(1), pages 333347-3333, December.

    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:taf:euract:v:9:y:2000:i:3:p:419-442. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/REAR20 .

    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.