IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v6y1990i2p295-322.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The jointness of audit fees and demand for MAS: A self†selection analysis

Author

Listed:
  • A. RASHAD ABDEL†KHALIK

Abstract

. This paper has two objectives: (1) providing a method to evaluate directly the costs (benefits) of knowledge spillovers arising from purchasing MAS from the incumbent auditor, and (2) examining the effect of estimates of the cost of auditor change on clients' ability to capture the resulting cost savings. The first is achieved by using self†selection bias parameters estimated from switching regressions. The latter is based on data generated from clients' assessments of auditor change costs and the related economic conditions. For a sample of 84 companies, the results indicate that purchasing MAS from the incumbent auditor does not have a bearing on audit fees. The paper also provides an application of the Heckman†Lee method of correcting for self†selection bias. Résumé. L'auteur vise deux objectifs: 1) présenter une méthode permettant l'évaluation directe des coûts (et des avantages) de la mise à contribution des connaissances acquises découlant du recours aux conseils de gestion du vérificateur en titre et 2) analyser l'incidence de l'estimation des coûts que suppose un changement de vérificateur sur la capacité du client de réaliser les économies qui devraient en résulter. Pour atteindre le premier objectif, l'auteur utilise des paramètres de distorsion d'autosélection estimés à partir de la commutation de régressions. Pour atteindre le second, il se fonde sur des données produites à partir de l'évaluation par les clients des coûts que suppose le changement de vérificateur et sur la conjoncture économique qui s'y rattache. Pour un échantillon de 84 entreprises, les résultats indiquent que le recours aux conseils de gestion du vérificateur en titre n'a pas d'incidence sur les honoraires de vérification. L'auteur applique également la méthode Heckman†Lee de correction de la distorsion d'autosélection pour évaluer les avantages de la mise à contribution des connaissances acquises.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Rashad Abdel†Khalik, 1990. "The jointness of audit fees and demand for MAS: A self†selection analysis," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 295-322, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:6:y:1990:i:2:p:295-322
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1990.tb00760.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1990.tb00760.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1990.tb00760.x?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. Willis, Robert J & Rosen, Sherwin, 1979. "Education and Self-Selection," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(5), pages 7-36, October.
    2. Palmrose, Zv, 1986. "Audit Fees And Auditor Size - Further Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 97-110.
    3. James J. Heckman, 1976. "The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for Such Models," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 5, number 4, pages 475-492, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    5. Palmrose, Zv, 1986. "The Effect Of Nonaudit Services On The Pricing Of Audit Services - Further Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 405-411.
    6. Lee, Lung-Fei, 1978. "Unionism and Wage Rates: A Simultaneous Equations Model with Qualitative and Limited Dependent Variables," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 19(2), pages 415-433, June.
    7. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    8. Heckman, James J, 1974. "Shadow Prices, Market Wages, and Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 42(4), pages 679-694, July.
    9. A. D. Roy, 1951. "Some Thoughts On The Distribution Of Earnings," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 135-146.
    10. Lewis, H Gregg, 1974. "Comments on Selectivity Biases in Wage Comparisons," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(6), pages 1145-1155, Nov.-Dec..
    11. Francis, Jere R., 1984. "The effect of audit firm size on audit prices : A study of the Australian Market," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 133-151, August.
    12. Simunic, Da, 1984. "Auditing, Consulting, And Auditor Independence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 679-702.
    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. Vivien Beattie & Alan Goodacre & Ken Pratt & Joanna Stevenson, 2001. "The determinants of audit fees—evidence from the voluntary sector," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 243-274.
    2. Fleischer, Rouven & Goettsche, Max, 2012. "Size effects and audit pricing: Evidence from Germany," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 156-168.
    3. Karla M. Johnstone & Jean C. Bedard & Michael L. Ettredge, 2004. "The Effect of Competitive Bidding on Engagement Planning and Pricing," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 25-53, March.
    4. Craswell, Allen T. & Francis, Jere R. & Taylor, Stephen L., 1995. "Auditor brand name reputations and industry specializations," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 297-322, December.
    5. James J. Heckman, 2005. "Micro Data, Heterogeneity and the Evaluation of Public Policy Part 2," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 49(1), pages 16-44, March.
    6. Yi-Fang Yang & Lee-Wen Yang & Min-Ning Lee, 2015. "Service Quality, Size, And Performance Of Audit Firms: Consideration Of Market Segments And Business Strategies," The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 9(4), pages 51-66.
    7. David C. Hay & W. Robert Knechel & Norman Wong, 2006. "Audit Fees: A Meta†analysis of the Effect of Supply and Demand Attributes," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 141-191, March.
    8. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2000. "The Scientific Contributions of James Heckman and Daniel McFadden," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2000-2, Nobel Prize Committee.
    9. 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.
    10. Schelleman, C.C.M., 2001. "Determinants of the profitability of audit engagements : an empirical study," Research Memorandum 037, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    11. Schelleman, C.C.M. & Maijoor, S.J., 2000. "Benchmarking the production of audit services: an efficiency frontier approach," Research Memorandum 055, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    12. Ismaël Mourifié & Marc Henry & Romuald Méango, 2020. "Sharp Bounds and Testability of a Roy Model of STEM Major Choices," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(8), pages 3220-3283.
    13. James J. Heckman, 2008. "Econometric Causality," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 76(1), pages 1-27, April.
    14. George Drogalas & Michail Nerantzidis & Dimitrios Mitskinis & Ioannis Tampakoudis, 2021. "The relationship between audit fees and audit committee characteristics: evidence from the Athens Stock Exchange," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 18(1), pages 24-41, March.
    15. Ivan A Canay & Magne Mogstad & Jack Mount, 2024. "On the Use of Outcome Tests for Detecting Bias in Decision Making," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(4), pages 2135-2167.
    16. Abramitzky, Ran, 2009. "The effect of redistribution on migration: Evidence from the Israeli kibbutz," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3-4), pages 498-511, April.
    17. Mark A. Clatworthy & Michael J. Peel, 2007. "The Effect of Corporate Status on External Audit Fees: Evidence From the UK," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1‐2), pages 169-201, January.
    18. Sang Cheol Lee & Jaewan Park & Mooweon Rhee & Yunkeun Lee, 2018. "Moderating Effects of Agency Problems and Monitoring Systems on the Relationship between Executive Stock Option and Audit Fees: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Casey Rothschild & Florian Scheuer, 2013. "Redistributive Taxation in the Roy Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(2), pages 623-668.

    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:wly:coacre:v:6:y:1990:i:2:p:295-322. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.