IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/zbw/tuisbw/92011.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Determinanten der Prüfungshonorare von Unternehmen aus der Medienbranche - eine empirische Untersuchung unter Einsatz einer Regressionsanalyse

Author

Listed:
  • Brähler, Gernot
  • Brune, Philipp
  • Göttsche, Max

Abstract

Prüfungshonorare stellen für Unternehmen Kosten dar. Daher ist es für die Unternehmen von großem Interesse, welche Faktoren diese Honorare beeinflussen. Um die Determinanten für deutsche börsennotierte Medienunternehmen zu ermitteln, wird eine empirische lineare Regressionsanalyse durchgeführt. Neben dem Basismodell wurden noch einige Modellerweiterungen geprüft. Es hat sich herausgestellt, dass die Größe der Mandanten die einzige Variable in der verwendeten Stichprobe war, welche einen eindeutigen Einfluss auf die Prüfungshonorare in allen untersuchten Jahren hatte. Die vorliegende Studie leistet somit einen wichtigen Beitrag zum aktuellen Forschungsfeld der Prüfungshonorare.

Suggested Citation

  • Brähler, Gernot & Brune, Philipp & Göttsche, Max, 2011. "Determinanten der Prüfungshonorare von Unternehmen aus der Medienbranche - eine empirische Untersuchung unter Einsatz einer Regressionsanalyse," Ilmenauer Schriften zur Betriebswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre, volume 9, number 92011, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuisbw:92011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/55694/1/667767398.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Dye, Ronald A., 1991. "Informationally motivated auditor replacement," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 347-374, December.
    3. 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.
    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. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    6. 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.
    7. Willekens, Marleen & Achmadi, Christina, 2003. "Pricing and supplier concentration in the private client segment of the audit market: Market power or competition?," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 431-455.
    8. DeAngelo, Linda Elizabeth, 1981. "Auditor size and audit quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 183-199, December.
    9. Michael Peel & Roydon Roberts, 2003. "Audit fee determinants and auditor premiums: evidence from the micro-firm sub-market," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(3), pages 207-233.
    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. Knechel, W. Robert & Thomas, Edward & Driskill, Matthew, 2020. "Understanding financial auditing from a service perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Rewczuk Karol & Modzelewski Piotr, 2019. "Determinants of audit fees: Evidence from Poland," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 6(53), pages 323-336, January.
    4. Ju Ryum Chung & Eun Jung Cho & Ho-Young Lee & Myungsoo Son, 2017. "The impact of labour unions on external auditor selection and audit scope: evidence from the Korean market," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(48), pages 4833-4850, October.
    5. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    6. Hye‐Jeong Nam, 2018. "The Impact of Mandatory IFRS Transition on Audit Effort and Audit Fees: Evidence from Korea," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 28(4), pages 512-524, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Arrunada, Benito & Paz-Ares, Candido, 1997. "Mandatory rotation of company auditors: A critical examination," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 31-61, March.
    9. Kenneth J. Reichelt & Dechun Wang, 2010. "National and Office‐Specific Measures of Auditor Industry Expertise and Effects on Audit Quality," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 647-686, June.
    10. 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.
    11. Rustam, Sehrish & Rashid, Kashif & Zaman, Khalid, 2013. "The relationship between audit committees, compensation incentives and corporate audit fees in Pakistan," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 697-716.
    12. 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.
    13. D'Agosto, Elena, 2007. "Auditing Issues across Countries: an Explorative Approach to the Regulation Framework," MPRA Paper 50989, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. 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).
    15. 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.
    16. Saeed Rabea Baatwah & Adel Ali Al-Qadasi, 2020. "Determinants of outsourced internal audit function: a further analysis," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 10(4), pages 629-659, December.
    17. Ferguson, Andrew & Lam, Peter & Ma, Nelson, 2018. "Market reactions to auditor switches under regulatory consent and market driven regimes," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 197-215.
    18. Markus Widmann & Florian Follert & Matthias Wolz, 2021. "What is it going to cost? Empirical evidence from a systematic literature review of audit fee determinants," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 455-489, April.
    19. Mansour Saaydah, 2021. "Factors Causing Discretionary Auditor Change in the Insurance Industry: Evidence from Jordan," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(2), pages 344-362.
    20. Kevan Jensen, 2005. "A basic study of agency-cost source and municipal use of internal versus external control," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 53-67.

    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:zbw:tuisbw:92011. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwtuide.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.