IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/poicbe/v18y2024i1p2100-2111n1030.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Audit Market Concentration for Listed Entities in Romania and the Impact Following the Latest EU Audit Reform

Author

Listed:
  • Maca Alexandru Ioan

    (University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania)

  • Ionescu Andreea Gabriela

    (University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

The concentration of the audit market has been of interest for several years as the dominance of a few companies has always been an issue of debate. The need or not to address this situation, the reasons that cause it, any possible risks assessed and solutions to reduce them have been addressed by a wide range of studies. Our research seeks to examine the structure of the Romanian Audit Market for listed entities, both before and following the recently adopted European Union Audit Reform. The main purpose is to understand the market structure, identify some of the main factors that influence auditor choice and if there was any impact following the new directive. The analyses focused on 74 listed companies, for the period from 2013 to 2022, for which we collected the relevant data in order to analyze the audit market structure, its evolution following the new audit directive and, using linear regressions models, test the influence that size, share class category, existence of long-term debt, shareholder type, evidence of shareholder direct involvement and auditor office location has on choosing one of the Big 4 auditors or not. Our analysis showed that Big4 auditors ecreased in market share especially after 2016, the date the new audit reform came into effect, from 49% to 41% and that the number of auditor changes increased significantly after this date. We also found that the number of cases where another Big4 auditor was selected decreased from 64%, in the period from 2013-2016, to only 28%, in the period from 2017-2022. These findings support therefore the assumed existence of an impact in the market following the latest European Union audit directive. The linear regression analysis performed showed no significant influence for the variables analyzed, when it comes to choosing a Big4 Auditor, the highest coming from the share class variable (26%) and size (12%). Even though our paper offers some light regarding the audit market for listed companies in Romania and the evolution following the new directive further research is needed to better understand client behavior and what influences auditor choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Maca Alexandru Ioan & Ionescu Andreea Gabriela, 2024. "Audit Market Concentration for Listed Entities in Romania and the Impact Following the Latest EU Audit Reform," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 2100-2111.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:poicbe:v:18:y:2024:i:1:p:2100-2111:n:1030
    DOI: 10.2478/picbe-2024-0177
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/picbe-2024-0177
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/picbe-2024-0177?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. Doogar, Rajib & Easley, Robert F., 1998. "Concentration without differentiation: A new look at the determinants of audit market concentration," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 235-253, June.
    2. E. Johnson & Inder K. Khurana & J. Kenneth Reynolds, 2002. "Audit†Firm Tenure and the Quality of Financial Reports," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 637-660, December.
    3. Aobdia, Daniel & Shroff, Nemit, 2017. "Regulatory oversight and auditor market share," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 262-287.
    4. DeAngelo, Linda Elizabeth, 1981. "Auditor size and audit quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 183-199, December.
    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. Pinto, Inês & Morais, Ana Isabel & Quick, Reiner, 2020. "The impact of the precision of accounting standards on the expanded auditor’s report in the European Union," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    2. Kitto, Andrew R., 2024. "The effects of non-Big 4 mergers on audit efficiency and audit market competition☆," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1).
    3. Pan, Yue & Shroff, Nemit & Zhang, Pengdong, 2023. "The dark side of audit market competition," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1).
    4. Shivaram Rajgopal & Suraj Srinivasan & Xin Zheng, 2021. "Measuring audit quality," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 559-619, June.
    5. Doogar, Rajib, 2001. "Discussion of Fargher, Taylor, and Simon's "The demand for auditor reputation across international markets for audit services"," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 423-428, 012.
    6. Sailendra SAILENDRA & Etty MURWANINGSARI & Sekar MAYANGSARI, 2019. "The Influence of Free Float Shares and Audit Quality on Company Performance: Evidence from Indonesia," The Audit Financiar journal, Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania, vol. 17(154), pages 274-274.
    7. 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.
    8. Knechel, W. Robert & Thomas, Edward & Driskill, Matthew, 2020. "Understanding financial auditing from a service perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    9. Mohamed Khalil & Aydin Ozkan, 2016. "Board Independence, Audit Quality and Earnings Management: Evidence from Egypt," Journal of Emerging Market Finance, Institute for Financial Management and Research, vol. 15(1), pages 84-118, April.
    10. Xingqiang Du & Xu Li & Xuejiao Liu & Shaojuan Lai, 2018. "Underwriter–Auditor Relationship and Pre-IPO Earnings Management: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(2), pages 365-392, October.
    11. Raphael Duguay & Michael Minnis & Andrew Sutherland, 2020. "Regulatory Spillovers in Common Audit Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3389-3411, August.
    12. Persefoni Polychronidou & George Drogalas & Ioannis Tampakoudis, 2020. "Mandatory rotation of audit firms and auditors in Greece," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 17(2), pages 141-154, September.
    13. Tache Marta, 2020. "‘Big 4’ influence on audit market," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 7(54), pages 143-156, January.
    14. Han-Ching Huang & Yung-An Huang, 2023. "The Impact of Industry Specialist on the Relationship between Returns and Future Earnings," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 13(2), pages 1-6.
    15. 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).
    16. Dang, Man & Puwanenthiren, Premkanth & Truong, Cameron & Henry, Darren & Vo, Xuan Vinh, 2022. "Audit quality and seasoned equity offerings methods," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    17. Brian Bratten & Monika Causholli & Thomas C. Omer, 2019. "Audit Firm Tenure, Bank Complexity, and Financial Reporting Quality," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 295-325, March.
    18. Eun Jung Cho & Ju Ryum Chung & Ho-Young Lee, 2019. "The Role of Labor Unions in Corporate Transparency: Focusing on the Role of Governance in Auditor Change Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, May.
    19. Chen, Lihong & Xiao, Tingting & Zhou, Jia, 2023. "Do auditor changes affect the disclosure of critical audit matters? Evidence from China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    20. Aobdia, Daniel, 2019. "Do practitioner assessments agree with academic proxies for audit quality? Evidence from PCAOB and internal inspections," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 144-174.

    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:vrs:poicbe:v:18:y:2024:i:1:p:2100-2111:n:1030. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.