IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v67y2024i5p943-966.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the green credit policy improve audit fees? Evidence from Chinese firms

Author

Listed:
  • Ziming Qian
  • Shanyong Wang
  • Haidong Li
  • Jian Wu

Abstract

Using panel data for Chinese listed firms from 2009 to 2015, this research examines the impact of the green credit policy on the audit fees of heavily polluting firms by adopting a difference-in-difference (DID) model. The results show that the green credit policy increases the audit fees of heavily polluting firms, suggesting that auditors can perceive the risks imposed by the green credit policy on heavily polluting firms. Mechanism tests reveal that the implementation of the green credit policy increases audit fees by increasing the financing cost and reducing the loan maturity. Further research shows that the positive effect is more significant in regions with stronger regulatory environments and higher trust, and among firms without political connections and audited by the top-ten domestic audit firms. The Chinese government should actively encourage third-party financial institutions to participate in firms’ environmental governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziming Qian & Shanyong Wang & Haidong Li & Jian Wu, 2024. "Does the green credit policy improve audit fees? Evidence from Chinese firms," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 67(5), pages 943-966, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:67:y:2024:i:5:p:943-966
    DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2022.2142905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09640568.2022.2142905
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640568.2022.2142905?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.

    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:jenpmg:v:67:y:2024:i:5:p:943-966. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    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.