IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/raaexx/v27y2020i3p261-279.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corruption and audit market concentration: an international investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Rong-Ruey Duh
  • Chunlai Ye
  • Lin-Hui Yu

Abstract

This paper examines the association between the corruption level of a country and audit market concentration. Using a sample from 78 countries over the 2003–2012 period, we document a positive association between corruption and Big 4 audit market concentration, suggesting that in more corrupt countries, the audit market at the industry level is dominated by one or two Big 4 audit firms rather than shared equally. To provide further understanding about how corruption is associated with Big 4 audit market concentration, we conduct a path analysis and find that corruption has an indirect effect on audit market concentration through collusion. These results are consistent with the notion that corrupt governments do not effectively control collusion and thus decrease market competition, leading to a decrease in the perceived severity of information leakage and a lower concern about sharing a common auditor. Finally, we conduct a battery of sensitivity tests. Our results are robust to change analysis, to controlling for other factors that are likely to influence auditor choices and the market structure, to an alternative measure of concentration, and to alternative samples. Overall, we provide evidence to suggest that country-level corruption plays a role in Big 4 audit market concentration.

Suggested Citation

  • Rong-Ruey Duh & Chunlai Ye & Lin-Hui Yu, 2020. "Corruption and audit market concentration: an international investigation," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 261-279, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:raaexx:v:27:y:2020:i:3:p:261-279
    DOI: 10.1080/16081625.2018.1540942
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/16081625.2018.1540942
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/16081625.2018.1540942?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:raaexx:v:27:y:2020:i:3:p:261-279. 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/raae20 .

    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.