IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nms/untern/10.5771-0042-059x-2016-2-153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Die zeitliche Entwicklung von Abschlussprüferhonoraren in Deutschland – Eine empirische Untersuchung der Jahre 2009 bis 2013

Author

Listed:
  • Laudemann,
  • al.,

Abstract

Since 2005, German audit clients are obliged to publish auditor fees in the notes to their financial statements. The fees have to be differentiated into four categories: audit services, audit-related services, tax advisory services, and other services. Such a disclosure enables stakeholders to evaluate auditor independence. This paper analyses the temporal development of auditor fees as well as their composition for the period 2009-2013. Fees for audit services are by far the highest and decline over time. However, this development is exclusively driven by DAX30 companies. With regard to auditor independence, the share of non-audit fees is critical for DAX30 but also for SDAX companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Laudemann, & al.,, 2016. "Die zeitliche Entwicklung von Abschlussprüferhonoraren in Deutschland – Eine empirische Untersuchung der Jahre 2009 bis 2013," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 70(2), pages 153-186.
    • Handle: RePEc:nms:untern:10.5771/0042-059x-2016-2-153
    DOI: 10.5771/0042-059X-2016-2-153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/0042-059X-2016-2-153
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5771/0042-059X-2016-2-153?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    2. 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.
    3. Seetharaman, Ananth & Gul, Ferdinand A. & Lynn, Stephen G., 2002. "Litigation risk and audit fees: evidence from UK firms cross-listed on US markets," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 91-115, February.
    4. Ettredge, M & Greenberg, R, 1990. "Determinants Of Fee Cutting On Initial Audit Engagements," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 198-210.
    5. Peter J Baldacchino & Justin Borg, 2014. "An Analysis of the Development of Audit Fees in Malta," The IUP Journal of Accounting Research and Audit Practices, IUP Publications, vol. 0(2), pages 27-52, April.
    6. Quick, Reiner & Warming-Rasmussen, B., 2009. "Auditor Independence and the Provision of Non-Audit Services: Perceptions by German Investors," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 39453, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    7. Johnson, Marilyn F. & Nelson, Karen K. & Frankel, Richard M., 2002. "The Relation Between Auditor's Fees for Non-audit Services and Earnings Quality," Research Papers 1696r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    8. E-Sah Woo & Hian Koh, 2001. "Factors associated with auditor changes: a Singapore study," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(2), pages 133-144.
    9. Quick, Reiner, 2006. "Prüfung, Beratung und Unabhängigkeit des Abschlussprüfers : eine Analyse der neuen Unabhängigkeitsnormen des HGB im Lichte empirischer Forschungsergebnisse," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 27532, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    10. Umlauf, S. J., 2013. "Prüfungs- und Beratungshonorare von Konzernabschlussprüfern : Honorardeterminanten und Unabhängigkeitswahrnehmungen auf dem deutschen Kapitalmarkt," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 62150, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    11. Ettredge, Michael & Fuerherm, Elizabeth Emeigh & Li, Chan, 2014. "Fee pressure and audit quality," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 247-263.
    12. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    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. Cao, June & Ee, Mong Shan & Hasan, Iftekhar & Huang, He, 2024. "Asymmetric reactions of abnormal audit fees jump to credit rating changes," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(2).
    2. Shivaram Rajgopal & Suraj Srinivasan & Xin Zheng, 2021. "Measuring audit quality," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 559-619, June.
    3. Knechel, W. Robert & Thomas, Edward & Driskill, Matthew, 2020. "Understanding financial auditing from a service perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    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. Francis, Jere R., 2004. "What do we know about audit quality?," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 345-368.
    6. Arvind Patel & Pranil Prasad, 2013. "Auditor Independence, Audit Fees Lowballing, And Non-Audit Services: Evidence From Fiji," Accounting & Taxation, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 5(2), pages 103-120.
    7. Chen, Long & Krishnan, Gopal V. & Yu, Wei, 2018. "The relation between audit fee cuts during the global financial crisis and earnings quality and audit quality," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 14-31.
    8. 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.
    9. Xingqiang Du, 2019. "Does CEO-Auditor Dialect Sharing Impair Pre-IPO Audit Quality? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 699-735, May.
    10. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    11. Barnes, Paul, 2013. "The effects on financial statements of the litigation cost rule in a civil action for negligence against the auditor," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 170-182.
    12. Muhammad Farhan Malik & Yuan George Shan & Jamie Yixing Tong, 2022. "Do auditors price litigious tone?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1715-1760, April.
    13. Sophie Audousset-Coulier, 2009. "L'utilisation des honoraires d'audit pour mesurer la qualité de l'audit : théorie et évidence," Post-Print halshs-00460230, HAL.
    14. Ray Ball, 2009. "Market and Political/Regulatory Perspectives on the Recent Accounting Scandals," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 277-323, May.
    15. Hope, Ole-Kristian & Hu, Danqi & Zhao, Wuyang, 2017. "Third-party consequences of short-selling threats: The case of auditor behavior," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 479-498.
    16. Chen, Yangyang & Ge, Rui & Zolotoy, Leon, 2017. "Do corporate pension plans affect audit pricing?," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 322-337.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Donelson, Dain C. & Ege, Matthew & Imdieke, Andrew J. & Maksymov, Eldar, 2020. "The revival of large consulting practices at the Big 4 and audit quality," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).

    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:nms:untern:10.5771/0042-059x-2016-2-153. 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: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nomos.de/ .

    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.