Joint Audits: Does the Allocation of Audit Work Affect Audit Quality and Audit Fees?

References

• André, P., Broye, G., Pong, C., & Schatt, A. (2016). Are joint audits associated with higher audit fees? European Accounting Review, 2, 245–274. doi: 10.1080/09638180.2014.998016
   Google Scholar
• Antle, R., Gordon, E., Narayanamoorthy, G., & Zhou, L. (2006). The joint determination of audit fees, non-audit fees, and abnormal accruals. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 27, 235–266. doi: 10.1007/s11156-006-9430-y
   Google Scholar
• Ashbaugh, H., & Warfield, T. D. (2003). Audits as a corporate governance mechanism: Evidence from the German market. Journal of International Accounting Research, 2, 1–21. doi: 10.2308/jiar.2003.2.1.1
   Google Scholar
• Audousset-Coulier, S. (2015). Audit fees in a joint audit setting. European Accounting Review, 24, 347–377. doi: 10.1080/09638180.2014.892787
   Google Scholar
• Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF). (2011). Etude relative aux honoraires versés aux commissaires aux comptes et à leur réseau autitre de la période 2010 par les groupes du CAC 40, de l’eurostoxx 50 et d’un échantillon de 42 sociétés des compartiments b et c d’eurolist [Survey of fees paid to statutory auditors and their networks for 2010 by CAC 40 and Eurostoxx 50 companies and by a sample of 42 companies in the B and C compartments of Eurolist]. Retrieved from http://www.amf-france.org/Publications/Rapports-etudes-et-analyses.html
   Google Scholar
• Becker, C., DeFond, M., Jiambalvo, J., & Subramanyam, K. R. (1998). The effect of audit quality on earnings management. Contemporary Accounting Research, 15, 1–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1998.tb00547.x
   Google Scholar
• Benford, F. (1938). The law of anomalous numbers. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 78, 551–572.
   Google Scholar
• Brinn, T., Peel, M. J., & Roberts, R. (1994). Audit fee determinants of independent & subsidiary unquoted companies in the UK – an exploratory study. The British Accounting Review, 26, 101–121. doi: 10.1006/bare.1994.1009
   Google Scholar
• Bureau van Dijk. (2016). Diane. Retrieved from https://diane.bvdep.com/. Downloaded on 15.02.2016
   Google Scholar
• Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2010). Microeconometrics using Stata (rev. edn). College Station, TX: Stata Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carslaw, C. A. P. N. (1988). Anomalies in income numbers: Evidence of goal oriented behavior. The Accounting Review, 63, 321–327.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, P., Ezzamel, M., & Gwilliam, D. (1993). Determinants of audit fees for quoted UK companies. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 20, 765–786. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5957.1993.tb00292.x
   Google Scholar
• Chaney, P. K., Jeter, D. C., & Shivakumar, L. (2004). Self-selection of auditors and audit pricing in private firms. The Accounting Review, 79, 51–72. doi: 10.2308/accr.2004.79.1.51
   Google Scholar
• Choi, J.-H., Kim, J. B., Liu, X., & Simunic, D. A. (2008). Audit pricing, legal liability regimes, and Big 4 premiums: Theory and cross-country evidence. Contemporary Accounting Research, 25, 55–99. doi: 10.1506/car.25.1.2
   Google Scholar
• Craswell, A. T., & Francis, J. R. (1999). Pricing initial audit engagements: A test of competing theories. The Accounting Review, 74, 201–216. doi: 10.2308/accr.1999.74.2.201
   Google Scholar
• DeAngelo, L. E. (1981a). Auditor independence, ‘Low balling’, and disclosure regulation. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3, 113–127. doi: 10.1016/0165-4101(81)90009-4
   Google Scholar
• DeAngelo, L. E. (1981b). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3, 183–199. doi: 10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1
   Google Scholar
• Dechow, P. M., Hutton, A. P., Kim, J. H., & Sloan, R. G. (2012). Detecting earnings management: A New approach. Journal of Accounting Research, 50, 275–334. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-679X.2012.00449.x
   Google Scholar
• Dechow, P. M., Sloan, R. G., & Sweeney, A. P. (1995). Detecting earnings management. The Accounting Review, 70, 193–225.
   Google Scholar
• DeFond, M., & Park, C. (2001). The reversal of abnormal accruals and the market valuation of earnings surprises. The Accounting Review, 76, 375–404. doi: 10.2308/accr.2001.76.3.375
   Google Scholar
• DeFond, M., & Zhang, J. (2014). A review of archival auditing research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 58, 275–326. doi: 10.1016/j.jacceco.2014.09.002
   Google Scholar
• Deng, M., Lu, T., Simunic, D. A., & Ye, M. (2014). Do joint audits improve or impair audit quality? Journal of Accounting Research, 52, 1029–1060. doi: 10.1111/1475-679X.12060
   Google Scholar
• European Commission (EC). (2010). Green paper – audit policy: Lessons from the crisis. Brussels: European.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission (EC). (2011). Commission staff working paper – impact assessment. Brussels. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/auditing/docs/reform/impact_assesment_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson, A. C., Francis, J. R. & Stokes, D. J. (2006). What matters in audit pricing: Industry specialization or overall market leadership? Accounting and Finance, 46, 97–106. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-629X.2005.00152.x
   Google Scholar
• Francis, J. R. (2011). A framework for understanding and researching audit quality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 30, 125–152. doi: 10.2308/ajpt-50006
   Google Scholar
• Francis, J. R., Richard, C., & Vanstraelen, A. (2009). Assessing France’s joint audits requirement: Are two heads better than one? Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 28, 35–63. doi: 10.2308/aud.2009.28.2.35
   Google Scholar
• Francis, J. R., & Stokes, D. J. (1986). Audit prices, product differentiation, and scale economies: Further evidence from the Australian market. Journal of Accounting Research, 24, 383–393. doi: 10.2307/2491141
   Google Scholar
• French Professional Standards NEP-100. (2011). Audit des Comptes Réalisés par Plusieurs Commissaires aux Comptes [Auditing financial statements with more than One auditor]. Journal Officiel de la République Francaise n° 103 from 3 Mai 2007, modified 3 August 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Gist, W. E. (1992). Explaining variability in external audit fees. Accounting & Business Research, 23, 79–84. doi: 10.1080/00014788.1992.9729863
   Google Scholar
• Gonthier-Besacier, N., & Schatt, A. (2007). Determinants of audit fees for French quoted firms. Managerial Auditing Journal, 22, 139–160. doi: 10.1108/02686900710718654
   Google Scholar
• Gregory, A., & Collier, P. (1996). Audit fees and auditor change: An investigation of the persistence of fee reduction by type of change. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 23, 141–191. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5957.1996.tb00399.x
   Google Scholar
• Guan, L., He, D., & Yang, D. (2006). Auditing, integral approach to quarterly reporting, and cosmetic earnings management. Managerial Auditing Journal, 21, 569–581. doi: 10.1108/02686900610674861
   Google Scholar
• Hay, D. C. (2012). Further evidence from meta-analysis of audit fee research. International Journal of Auditing, 17, 162–176. doi: 10.1111/j.1099-1123.2012.00462.x
   Google Scholar
• Hay, D. C., Knechel, W. R., & Li, V. (2006). Non-audit services and auditor independence: New Zealand evidence. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 33, 715–734. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5957.2006.00602.x
   Google Scholar
• Hay, D. C., Knechel, W. R., & Wong, N. (2006). Audit fees: A meta-analysis of the effect of supply and demand attributes. Contemporary Accounting Research, 23, 141–191. doi: 10.1506/4XR4-KT5V-E8CN-91GX
   Google Scholar
• Holm, C., & Thinggaard, F. (2014). Leaving a joint audit system: Conditional Fee reductions. Managerial Auditing Journal, 29, 131–152. doi: 10.1108/MAJ-05-2013-0862
   Google Scholar
• Holm, C., & Thinggaard, F. (2015). Paying for joint or single audits? The impact of auditor pairings and differences in technology efficiency. International Journal of Auditing, 20, 1–16. doi: 10.1111/ijau.12050
   Google Scholar
• Hoos, F., Pruijssers, J. L. & Lander, M. W. (2017). Who’s watching? Accountability in different audit regimes and the effects on auditors’ professional skepticism. Journal of Business Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10551-017-3603-6
   Google Scholar
• Hribar, P., & Nichols, C. (2007). The use of unsigned earnings quality measures in tests of earnings management. Journal of Accounting Research, 45, 1017–1053. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-679X.2007.00259.x
   Google Scholar
• Ittonen, K., & Peni, E. (2012). Auditor’s gender and auditor fees. International Journal of Auditing, 16, 1–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1099-1123.2011.00438.x
   Google Scholar
• Jones, J. (1991). Earnings management during import relief investigations. Journal of Accounting Research, 29, 193–228. doi: 10.2307/2491047
   Google Scholar
• Kang, S.-H., & Sivaramakrishnan, K. (1995). Issues in testing earnings management and an instrumental variable approach. Journal of Accounting Research, 33, 353–367. doi: 10.2307/2491492
   Google Scholar
• Kermiche, L., & Piot, C. (2016). The audit market dynamics in a mandatory joint audit setting – the French experience. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 31, 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Kothari, S. P., Leone, A., & Wasley, C. (2005). Performance matched discretionary accrual measures. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39, 163–197. doi: 10.1016/j.jacceco.2004.11.002
   Google Scholar
• Lesage, C., Ratzinger-Sakel, N., & Kettunen, J. (2017). Consequences of the abandonment of mandatory joint audit: An empirical study of audit costs and audit quality effects. European Accounting Review, 26, 311–339. doi: 10.1080/09638180.2016.1152558
   Google Scholar
• Matsumoto, D. A. (2002). Management’s incentives to avoid negative earnings surprises. The Accounting Review, 77, 483–514. doi: 10.2308/accr.2002.77.3.483
   Google Scholar
• Menard, S. (1995). Applied logistic regression analysis: Sage university series on quantitative applications in the social sciences (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Möller, M. (2009). Measuring the Quality of Auditing Services with the Help of Benford’s Law? – An Empirical Analysis and Discussion of this Methodical Approach. Working Paper. Switzerland: University of Zurich.
   Google Scholar
• Newcomb, S. (1881). Note on the frequencies of use of the different digits in natural numbers. American Journal of Mathematics, 4, 39–40. doi: 10.2307/2369148
   Google Scholar
• Nigrini, M. J., & Mittermaier, L. J. (1997). The use of Benford’s law as an aid in analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 16, 52–67.
   Google Scholar
• Niskanen, J., & Keloharju, M. (2000). Earnings cosmetics in a tax-driven accounting environment: Evidence from Finnish public firms. The European Accounting Review, 9, 443–452. doi: 10.1080/09638180020017159
   Google Scholar
• Peasnell, K. V., Pope, P. F., & Young, S. (2000). Detecting earnings management using cross-sectional abnormal accruals models. Accounting and Business Research, 30, 313–326. doi: 10.1080/00014788.2000.9728949
   Google Scholar
• Piot, C. (2007). Auditor concentration in a joint auditing environment: The French market 1997-2003. Managerial Auditing Journal, 22, 161–176. doi: 10.1108/02686900710718663
   Google Scholar
• Piot, C., & Janin, R. (2007). External auditors, audit committees and earnings management in France. European Accounting Review, 16, 429–454. doi: 10.1080/09638180701391030
   Google Scholar
• Quick, R., Schmidt, F., & Simons, D. (2016). Sind joint audits Sinnvoll? [Are joint audits useful?]. Die Wirtschaftsprüfung, 69, 11–21.
   Google Scholar
• Quick, R., & Wolz, M. (2003). Benford’s Law in deutschen rechnungslegungsdaten [Benford’s Law in German accounting data]. Betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung und Praxis, 57, 208–224.
   Google Scholar
• Ratzinger-Sakel, N., Audousset-Coulier, S., Kettunen, J., & Lesage, C. (2013). Joint audit: Issues and challenges for researchers and policy-makers. Accounting in Europe, 10, 175–199. doi: 10.1080/17449480.2013.834725
   Google Scholar
• Simon, D. T., & Francis, J. R. (1988). The effect of auditor change on audit fees: Test of price cutting and price recovery. The Accounting Review, 63, 255–269.
   Google Scholar
• Simunic, D. A. (1980). The pricing of audit services: Theory and evidence. Journal of Accounting Research, 18, 161–190. doi: 10.2307/2490397
   Google Scholar
• Skousen, C. J., Guan, L., & Wetzel, T. S. (2004). Anomalies and unusual patterns in reported earnings: Japanese managers round earnings. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 15, 212–234. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-646X.2004.00108.x
   Google Scholar
• Teoh, S., Welch, I., & Wong, T. J. (1998). Earnings management and the long-run market performance of initial public offerings. The Journal of Finance, 53, 1935–1974. doi: 10.1111/0022-1082.00079
   Google Scholar
• Thinggaard, F., & Kiertzner, L. (2008). Determinants of audit fees: Evidence from a small capital market with a joint audit requirement. International Journal of Auditing, 12, 141–158. doi: 10.1111/j.1099-1123.2008.00377.x
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, J. K. (1989). Unusual patterns in reported earnings. The Accounting Review, 64, 773–787.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, J., & Zhang, X.-J. (2000). Identifying unexpected accruals: A comparison of current approaches. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 19, 347–376. doi: 10.1016/S0278-4254(00)00016-8
   Google Scholar
• Van Caneghem, T. (2002). Earnings management induced by cognitive reference points. The British Accounting Review, 34, 167–178. doi: 10.1006/bare.2002.0190
   Google Scholar
• Van Caneghem, T. (2004). The impact of audit quality on earnings rounding-up behavior: Some UK evidence. European Accounting Review, 13, 771–786. doi: 10.1080/0963818042000216866
   Google Scholar
• Zerni, M., Haapamäki, E., Järvinen, T., & Niemi, L. (2012). Do joint audits improve audit quality? Evidence from voluntary joint audits. European Accounting Review, 21, 731–765. doi: 10.1080/09638180.2012.678599
   Google Scholar
• Zerni, M., Kallunki, J. P., & Nilsson, H. (2010). The entrenchment problem, corporate governance mechanisms, and firm value. Contemporary Accounting Research, 27, 1169–1206. doi: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.2010.01043.x
   Google Scholar