IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

La réglementation de l'audit est-elle dans l'intérêt public : quelques enseignements du modèle français

  • C. Piot

    (CERAG - Centre d'études et de recherches appliquées à la gestion - CNRS : UMR5820 - Université Pierre Mendès-France - Grenoble II)

  • A. Schatt

    (LEG - Laboratoire d'Economie et de Gestion - CNRS : UMR5118 - Université de Bourgogne)

Cet article s'appuie sur les travaux académiques des dix dernières années pour évaluer les effets de la réglementation française visant à accroître l'indépendance des auditeurs. Pour les sociétés cotées en bourse, l'obligation de recourir à deux auditeurs se solde notamment par une moindre concentration du marché de l'audit : les Big Four détiennent une part de marché plus faible. Pour autant, les honoraires ne sont pas plus faibles, en raison vraisemblablement, d'une part, des coûts de coordination entre les deux auditeurs qui excèdent les bénéfices escomptés résultant d'un marché plus concurrentiel, d'autre part, de l'impossibilité de changer d'auditeur pendant la durée légale de six ans. Par ailleurs, la plus grande indépendance supposée, induite par cette réglementation spécifique, ne se traduit pas par une moindre gestion des résultats par les dirigeants français, malgré l'interdiction de facturer des honoraires de conseil. Ces constats empiriques nous conduisent à avancer que des assouplissements réglementaires du marché de l'audit pourraient s'avérer bénéfiques pour les actionnaires des entreprises françaises

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.

File URL: http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/53/47/58/PDF/cr_2010_09_E2.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by HAL in its series Post-Print with number halshs-00534758.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00534758
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00534758/en/
Contact details of provider: Web page: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Rafael LaPorta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, . "What Works in Securities Laws?," Working Paper 19491, Harvard University OpenScholar.
  2. Nathalie Gonthier-Besacier & Alain Schatt, 2006. "Determinants of Audit Fees for French Quoted Firms," Working Papers CREGO 1060301, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
  3. RAFAEL LaPORTA & FLORENCIO LOPEZ-de-SILANES & ANDREI SHLEIFER & ROBERT W. VISHNY, . "Legal Determinants of External Finance,"," CRSP working papers 324, Center for Research in Security Prices, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago.
  4. Bernard Raffournier & Alain Schatt, 2010. "Is European Accounting Research Fairly Reflected in Academic Journals? An Investigation of Possible Non-mainstream and Language Barrier Biases," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 161-190.
  5. Djankov, Simeon & McLiesh, Caralee & Shleifer, Andrei, 2007. "Private credit in 129 countries," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 299-329, May.
  6. Ivana Raonic & Stuart McLeay & Ioannis Asimakopoulos, 2004. "The Timeliness of Income Recognition by European Companies: An Analysis of Institutional and Market Complexity," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1-2), pages 115-148.
  7. Yuan Ding & Herve Stolowy, 2006. "Timeliness and conservatism: Changes over time in the properties of accounting income in France," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 92-107, May.
  8. Joseph P. H. Fan & T. J. Wong, 2005. "Do External Auditors Perform a Corporate Governance Role in Emerging Markets? Evidence from East Asia," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 35-72, 03.
  9. Geraldine Broye & Laurent Weill, 2008. "Does leverage influence auditor choice? A cross-country analysis," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(9), pages 715-731.
  10. Ball, Ray & Kothari, S. P. & Robin, Ashok, 2000. "The effect of international institutional factors on properties of accounting earnings," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-51, February.
  11. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silane & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 1998. "Agency Problems and Dividend Policies Around the World," NBER Working Papers 6594, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Bushman, Robert M. & Piotroski, Joseph D., 2006. "Financial reporting incentives for conservative accounting: The influence of legal and political institutions," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 107-148, October.
  13. Apostolos Ballas & Irene Fafaliou, 2008. "Market Shares and Concentration in the EU Auditing Industry: the Effects of Andersen’s Demise," International Advances in Economic Research, International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 14(4), pages 485-497, November.
  14. Vander Bauwhede, Heidi & Willekens, Marleen & Gaeremynck, Ann, 2003. "Audit firm size, public ownership, and firms' discretionary accruals management," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 1-22.
  15. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1998. "Law and Finance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(6), pages 1113-1155, December.
  16. Charles Piot, 2001. "Agency costs and audit quality: evidence from France," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 461-499.
  17. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 1999. "Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1882, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  18. Leuz, Christian & Nanda, Dhananjay & Wysocki, Peter D., 2003. "Earnings management and investor protection: an international comparison," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 505-527, September.
  19. Jeong, Seok Woo & Rho, Joonhwa, 2004. "Big Six auditors and audit quality: The Korean evidence," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 175-196.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00534758. 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: (CCSD)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.