IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/rqfnac/v52y2019i2d10.1007_s11156-018-0714-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fee competition among Big 4 auditors and audit quality

Author

Listed:
  • Sharad Asthana

    (The University of Texas at San Antonio)

  • Inder Khurana

    (University of Missouri)

  • K. K. Raman

    (The University of Texas at San Antonio)

Abstract

Both the GAO (Public accounting firms: mandated study on consolidation and competition. GAO, Washington, 2003; Audits of public companies: continued concentration in audit market for large public companies does not call for immediate action. GAO, Washington, 2008) and the US Treasury (Advisory committee on the auditing profession: final report, 2008. http://www.tres.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/docs/final-report.pdf ) have implied that the Big 4 dominated US audit market lacks competition. More recently, the PCAOB has expressed a somewhat different concern, i.e., that because audit committees may be primarily interested in negotiating a lower audit fee (rather than championing higher audit quality) for their clients, fee competition in the US audit market could pressure the incumbent auditor to compromise on audit quality (Doty in Keynote address: the reliability, role and relevance of the audit: a turning point, 2011. www.pcaobus.org ). We utilize the notion of counterfactual fees chargeable by auditors to assess fee competition and investigate competing views on the relation between fee competition among Big 4 auditors and audit quality in US local audit markets. To operationalize fee competition at the client-level in the context of each local audit market, we compute a separate counterfactual audit fee that would be charged by every other Big 4 auditor for that particular engagement and use the minima of the counterfactuals. We validate our audit fee competition metric by showing a positive relation with the incumbent auditor’s switching risk. Collectively, our findings suggest that fee competition is useful as a mechanism for improving audit quality in the highly concentrated US audit market, albeit only in local audit markets where the incumbent auditor has below-median market power and only for higher quality clients. Overall, our findings speak to the interplay between fee competition and auditor incentives and are of potential interest to regulators such as the PCAOB concerned about competition in US audit markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Sharad Asthana & Inder Khurana & K. K. Raman, 2019. "Fee competition among Big 4 auditors and audit quality," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 403-438, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:52:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11156-018-0714-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11156-018-0714-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11156-018-0714-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11156-018-0714-9?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy B. Bell & Wayne R. Landsman & Douglas A. Shackelford, 2001. "Auditors' Perceived Business Risk and Audit Fees: Analysis and Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 35-43, June.
    2. Linda Myers & Jaime Schmidt & Michael Wilkins, 2014. "An investigation of recent changes in going concern reporting decisions among Big N and non-Big N auditors," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 155-172, July.
    3. Rick Antle & Elizabeth Gordon & Ganapathi Narayanamoorthy & Ling Zhou, 2006. "The joint determination of audit fees, non-audit fees, and abnormal accruals," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 235-266, November.
    4. David F. Larcker & Scott A. Richardson, 2004. "Fees Paid to Audit Firms, Accrual Choices, and Corporate Governance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 625-658, June.
    5. Caitlin Ruddock & Sarah J. Taylor & Stephen L. Taylor, 2006. "Nonaudit Services and Earnings Conservatism: Is Auditor Independence Impaired?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(3), pages 701-746, September.
    6. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    7. Butler, Marty & Leone, Andrew J. & Willenborg, Michael, 2004. "An empirical analysis of auditor reporting and its association with abnormal accruals," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 139-165, June.
    8. Paul Hribar & Daniel W. Collins, 2002. "Errors in Estimating Accruals: Implications for Empirical Research," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 105-134, March.
    9. Scott Whisenant & Srinivasan Sankaraguruswamy & K. Raghunandan, 2003. "Evidence on the Joint Determination of Audit and Non‐Audit Fees," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 721-744, September.
    10. Dye, Ronald A., 1991. "Informationally motivated auditor replacement," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 347-374, December.
    11. DeFond, Mark L. & Jiambalvo, James, 1994. "Debt covenant violation and manipulation of accruals," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1-2), pages 145-176, January.
    12. Dichev, Ilia D. & Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2013. "Earnings quality: Evidence from the field," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 1-33.
    13. Numan, Wieteke & Willekens, Marleen, 2012. "An empirical test of spatial competition in the audit market," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 450-465.
    14. Mark L. DeFond & K. Raghunandan & K.R. Subramanyam, 2002. "Do Non–Audit Service Fees Impair Auditor Independence? Evidence from Going Concern Audit Opinions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 1247-1274, September.
    15. Lennox, Clive & Li, Bing, 2012. "The consequences of protecting audit partners’ personal assets from the threat of liability," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 154-173.
    16. Zhan Shu, Susan, 2000. "Auditor resignations: clientele effects and legal liability," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 173-205, April.
    17. Bikki Jaggi & Santanu Mitra & Mahmud Hossain, 2015. "Earnings quality, internal control weaknesses and industry-specialist audits," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 1-32, July.
    18. Rick Antle & Elizabeth Gordon & Ganapathi Narayanamoorthy & Ling Zhou, 2002. "The Joint Determination of Audit Fees, Non-Audit Fees, and Abnormal Accruals," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2502, Yale School of Management, revised 02 May 2006.
    19. Patricia M. Dechow & Weili Ge & Chad R. Larson & Richard G. Sloan, 2011. "Predicting Material Accounting Misstatements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 17-82, March.
    20. Mark S. Beasley & Joseph V. Carcello & Dana R. Hermanson & Terry L. Neal, 2009. "The Audit Committee Oversight Process," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 65-122, March.
    21. Jeff P. Boone & Inder K. Khurana & K.K. Raman, 2012. "Audit Market Concentration and Auditor Tolerance for Earnings Management," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 1171-1203, December.
    22. Kevan Jensen & Jin-Mo Kim & Han Yi, 2015. "The geography of US auditors: information quality and monitoring costs by local versus non-local auditors," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 513-549, April.
    23. Timothy B. Bell & Rajib Doogar & Ira Solomon, 2008. "Audit Labor Usage and Fees under Business Risk Auditing," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 729-760, September.
    24. Jones, Jj, 1991. "Earnings Management During Import Relief Investigations," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 193-228.
    25. Oster, Sharon M., 1999. "Modern Competitive Analysis," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 3, number 9780195119411.
    26. Banker, Rajiv D. & Chang, Hsihui & Cunningham, Reba, 2003. "The public accounting industry production function," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 255-281, June.
    27. Sharad Asthana, 2017. "Diversification by the audit offices in the US and its impact on audit quality," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1003-1030, May.
    28. Ettredge, Michael & Fuerherm, Elizabeth Emeigh & Li, Chan, 2014. "Fee pressure and audit quality," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 247-263.
    29. Okeefe, Tb & Simunic, Da & Stein, Mt, 1994. "The Production Of Audit Services - Evidence From A Major Public Accounting Firm," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 241-261.
    30. Paul Hribar & D. Craig Nichols, 2007. "The Use of Unsigned Earnings Quality Measures in Tests of Earnings Management," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 1017-1053, December.
    31. Klein, Benjamin & Leffler, Keith B, 1981. "The Role of Market Forces in Assuring Contractual Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(4), pages 615-641, August.
    32. Kothari, S.P. & Leone, Andrew J. & Wasley, Charles E., 2005. "Performance matched discretionary accrual measures," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 163-197, February.
    33. Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1987. "Competition and the Number of Firms in a Market: Are Duopolies More Competitive than Atomistic Markets?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(5), pages 1041-1061, October.
    34. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    35. Ball, Ray & Jayaraman, Sudarshan & Shivakumar, Lakshmanan, 2012. "Audited financial reporting and voluntary disclosure as complements: A test of the Confirmation Hypothesis," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 136-166.
    36. Gul, Ferdinand A. & Fung, Simon Yu Kit & Jaggi, Bikki, 2009. "Earnings quality: Some evidence on the role of auditor tenure and auditors' industry expertise," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 265-287, June.
    37. Jeff Boone & Inder K. Khurana & K. K. Raman, 2012. "Audit Market Concentration and Auditor Tolerance for Earnings Management," Working Papers 0014, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniel Aobdia & Luminita Enache & Anup Srivastava, 2021. "Changes in Big N auditors’ client selection and retention strategies over time," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 715-754, February.
    2. repec:prg:jnlcfu:v:2021:y:2021:i:4:id:565 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Wuchun Chi & Chien-min Kevin Pan, 2022. "How do auditors respond to accounting restatements? Evidence on audit staff allocation," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 58(2), pages 847-879, February.
    4. Asif Saeed & Ammar Ali Gull & Asad Ali Rind & Muhammad Shujaat Mubarik & Muhammad Shahbaz, 2022. "Do socially responsible firms demand high‐quality audits? An international evidence," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(2), pages 2235-2255, April.
    5. Yu Ling Tsai & Hua-Wei Huang, 2020. "Does Convergent-IFRS Adoption in China Increase Audit Fees?," Review of Pacific Basin Financial Markets and Policies (RPBFMP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(01), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Chan Li & K. K. Raman & Lili Sun & Rong Yang, 2020. "The SOX 404 control audit and the effectiveness of additional audit effort in lowering the risk of financial misstatements," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 981-1009, April.
    7. Saleh F. A. Khatib & Hamid Ghazi H Sulimany & Mohammed Naif Alshareef & Mohd Noor Azli Ali Khan, 2024. "Catalysts of audit excellence: competitive advantage, intellectual capital and auditing quality," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(5), pages 4915-4939, October.
    8. Shao-Huai Liang & Yu-Ting Hsieh & Hsuan-Chu Lin & Hui-Yu Hsiao, 2023. "What underlies key audit matters? Evidence from Taiwan," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 1243-1258, April.
    9. 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.

    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. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    2. Sharad Asthana, 2017. "Diversification by the audit offices in the US and its impact on audit quality," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1003-1030, May.
    3. Sarowar Hossain & Jenny Jing Wang, 2023. "Abnormal audit fees and audit quality: Australian evidence," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 48(3), pages 596-624, August.
    4. Daniela Hohenfels & Reiner Quick, 2020. "Non-audit services and audit quality: evidence from Germany," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 959-1007, October.
    5. 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.
    6. Tobias Svanstr�m, 2013. "Non-audit Services and Audit Quality: Evidence from Private Firms," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 337-366, June.
    7. Ho, Nam, 2023. "Local competition and auditors' provision of non-audit services," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    8. Brandon Gipper & Luzi Hail & Christian Leuz, 2017. "On the Economics of Audit Partner Tenure and Rotation: Evidence from PCAOB Data," NBER Working Papers 24018, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Yang, Seunghee & Lee, Woo-Jong & Lim, Youngdeok & Yi, Cheong H., 2021. "Audit firm operating leverage and pricing strategy: Evidence from lowballing in audit industry," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    10. Lorenzo Dal Maso & Gerald J. Lobo & Francesco Mazzi & Luc Paugam, 2020. "Implications of the Joint Provision of CSR Assurance and Financial Audit for Auditors' Assessment of Going‐Concern Risk†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 1248-1289, June.
    11. Alzoubi, Ebraheem Saleem Salem, 2018. "Audit quality, debt financing, and earnings management: Evidence from Jordan," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 69-84.
    12. Timothy B. Bell & Monika Causholli & W. Robert Knechel, 2015. "Audit Firm Tenure, Non‐Audit Services, and Internal Assessments of Audit Quality," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 461-509, June.
    13. Knechel, W. Robert & Thomas, Edward & Driskill, Matthew, 2020. "Understanding financial auditing from a service perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    14. Alhababsah, Salem & Alhaj-Ismail, Alaa, 2023. "Does shared tenure between audit committee chair and engagement partner affect audit outcomes? Evidence from the UK," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(2).
    15. Jeroen van Raak & Erik Peek & Roger Meuwissen & Caren Schelleman, 2020. "The effect of audit market structure on audit quality and audit pricing in the private‐client market," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3-4), pages 456-488, March.
    16. Christopher Bleibtreu & Ulrike Stefani, 2012. "The Interdependence Between Audit Market Structure and the Quality of Financial Reporting: The Case of Non-Audit Services," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2012-01, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.
    17. Pan, Yue & Shroff, Nemit & Zhang, Pengdong, 2023. "The dark side of audit market competition," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1).
    18. Shivaram Rajgopal & Suraj Srinivasan & Xin Zheng, 2021. "Measuring audit quality," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 559-619, June.
    19. 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.
    20. Tsipouridou, Maria & Spathis, Charalambos, 2012. "Earnings management and the role of auditors in an unusual IFRS context: The case of Greece," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 62-78.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Big 4 firms; Audit fee competition; Audit quality; PCAOB;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing

    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:kap:rqfnac:v:52:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11156-018-0714-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://springer.com .

    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.