IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/afr111/v4y2015i1p42.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of Audit Fees: Evidence from Jordan

Author

Listed:
  • Hassan Yahia Kikhia

Abstract

This study sets out to examine the factors influencing the level of external audit fees paid by firms to their auditors in Jordan. Specific attention is focused on the investigation of the potential influence of auditee size, complexity of client, profitability, client risk, auditor size and auditor tenure on audit fees, by using the Sample which contains 117 non-financial Jordanian companies which listed on Amman Stock Exchang, meet the selection standards and have the applicable and appropriate financial data from 2010 until 2012 (351 observation). The current study strongly reinforces that greatest of prior studies results are also appropriate and applicable to the Jordanian audit market. Moreover, the current study provides further evidence connecting variables such as the auditor tenure effects and auditee risk which have been found to have an inconclusive relationship with the amount of external audit fees in prior studies. However, the auditee size seems to have been the key determinant of external audit fees. Furthermore, financial risk is found to be negatively and significantly associated with the level of external audit fees. On other side, empirical results found that the audit tenure has no significant relationship with audit fees. Finally, the current study is unique because it is the first to empirically examine factors impacting the level of audit fees in Jordan for a total of three years; it revisits the audit fee literature and highlights the important determinants that affect audit fees.

Suggested Citation

  • Hassan Yahia Kikhia, 2015. "Determinants of Audit Fees: Evidence from Jordan," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 4(1), pages 1-42, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:jfr:afr111:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:42
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/afr/article/download/6030/3592
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/afr/article/view/6030
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chris E. Hogan & Michael S. Wilkins, 2008. "Evidence on the Audit Risk Model: Do Auditors Increase Audit Fees in the Presence of Internal Control Deficiencies?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(1), pages 219-242, March.
    2. Aloke Ghosh & Steven Lustgarten, 2006. "Pricing of Initial Audit Engagements by Large and Small Audit Firms," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 333-368, June.
    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. Sharad Asthana & Steven Balsam & Sungsoo Kim, 2009. "The effect of Enron, Andersen, and Sarbanes‐Oxley on the US market for audit services," Accounting Research Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(1), pages 4-26, July.
    2. Mande, Vivek & Son, Myungsoo & Song, Hakjoon, 2017. "Auditor search periods as signals of engagement risk: Effects on auditor choice and audit pricing," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 15-29.
    3. Ghosh, Aloke(Al) & Tang, Charles Y., 2015. "Assessing financial reporting quality of family firms: The auditors׳ perspective," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 95-116.
    4. Calabrese, Kristyn, 2023. "The effects of time pressure on audit fees," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    5. Ahmed Ebrahim, 2010. "Audit fee premium and auditor change: the effect of Sarbanes-Oxley Act," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 25(2), pages 102-121, January.
    6. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    7. Amir Ghafourian Shagerdi & Ali Mahdavipour & Reza Jahanshiri Ariyan Tashakori Baghdar & Mohammad Sajjad Ghafourian Shagerdi, 2020. "Investment Efficiency and Audit Fee from the Perspective of the Role of Financial Distress," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 318-333.
    8. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2013_013 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Wunhong Su & Liuzhen Zhang & Chao Ge & Shuai Chen, 2022. "Association between Internal Control and Sustainability: A Literature Review Based on the SOX Act Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-30, August.
    10. Lawson, Bradley P. & Muriel, Leah & Sanders, Paula R., 2017. "A survey on firms' implementation of COSO's 2013 Internal Control–Integrated Framework," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 30-43.
    11. Jinghui Sun & Liuchuang Li & Baolei Qi, 2022. "Financial statement comparability and audit pricing," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(5), pages 4631-4661, December.
    12. Persakis, Anthony & Iatridis, George Emmanuel, 2016. "Audit quality, investor protection and earnings management during the financial crisis of 2008: An international perspective," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 73-101.
    13. Sezen Uludag, 2016. "The importance of control environment in an organization for an independent auditor to determine nature,timing, and extent of substantive tests: An application in Turkey," Journal of Administrative and Business Studies, Professor Dr. Usman Raja, vol. 2(6), pages 294-303.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Ji, Xu-dong & Lu, Wei & Qu, Wen, 2018. "Internal control risk and audit fees: Evidence from China," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 266-287.
    17. Rajib Doogar & Padmakumar Sivadasan & Ira Solomon, 2010. "The Regulation of Public Company Auditing: Evidence from the Transition to AS5," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 795-814, September.
    18. Fernández Méndez, Carlos & Pathan, Shams & Arrondo García, Rubén, 2015. "Monitoring capabilities of busy and overlap directors: Evidence from Australia," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(PA), pages 444-469.
    19. Steven Lustgarten & John Shon, 2013. "Do abnormal accruals affect the life expectancy of audit engagements?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 443-466, April.
    20. Kam-Wah Lai & Ferdinand A. Gul, 2021. "Do failed auditors receive lower audit fees from continuing engagements?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1159-1190, April.
    21. Hiroshi Uemura, 2014. "Effects of corporate governance reform on the quality of internal controls: Evidence from Japan," Working Papers SDES-2014-4, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Oct 2014.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:jfr:afr111:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:42. 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: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.