Audit Partner Identification and Characteristics: Evidence from U.S. Form AP Filings

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 71-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenna J. Burke ◽  
Rani Hoitash ◽  
Udi Hoitash
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Information Environment ◽  
Social Connections ◽  
First Year ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Partner Disclosure ◽  
Audit Information ◽  
Partner Gender

SUMMARY This paper investigates the overall impact of and the information made available by the recent audit partner disclosure requirement in the U.S. After a contentious comment period, the PCAOB released Rule 3211, which requires registered public accounting firms to disclose the name of the audit partner for every audit report it issues. In the first year of adoption, we find a significant increase in audit quality and audit fees and a significant decrease in audit delay. We collect information on partner gender, busyness, education, and social connections to explore whether these newly observable characteristics are associated with audit outcomes. We find that several of these characteristics are associated with variations in audit fees and audit delay, but no evidence of an association with audit quality. Overall, our findings suggest that the disclosure of partner name in Form AP enhances the audit information environment, which supports PCAOB motivation for Rule 3211.

An Analysis of Cross-Sectional Differences in Big and Non-Big Public Accounting Firms' Audit Programs

2006 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Blokdijk ◽  
Fred Drieenhuizen ◽  
Dan A. Simunic ◽  
Michael T. Stein
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Big 5 ◽  
Public Accounting Firms ◽  
Audit Approach ◽  
Control Risk

A significant body of prior research has shown that audits by the Big 5 (now Big 4) public accounting firms are quality differentiated relative to non-Big 5 audits. This result can be derived analytically by assuming that Big 5 and non-Big 5 firms face different loss functions for “audit failures” and is consistent with a variety of empirical evidence from studies of audit fees, auditor changes, and the stock price reaction to audited earnings. However, there is no existing evidence (of which we are aware) concerning the underlying production differences between Big 5 and non-Big 5 audits. As a result, existing empirical evidence cannot distinguish between the possibility that Big 5 audits are simply perceived to be different (e.g., by investors) or actually differ in how they are produced. Our research objective is to identify the production characteristics of audit engagements that may explain the differences in expected audit quality between Big 5 and non-Big 5 firms. In this archival study, we examine the total audit effort and the allocation of effort to four audit phases—planning, (control) risk assessment, substantive testing, and completion—for a cross-section sample of 113 audits of Dutch companies in 1998/99 by 14 public accounting firms. We find that, after controlling for client characteristics: (1) both types of auditors exert about the same amount of total audit effort; (2) Big 5 auditors allocate relatively more effort to planning and (control) risk assessment, and relatively less to substantive testing and completion; and (3) client size, use of the business-risk-based audit approach, and reliance on client internal controls affect audit hours differently for the two auditor types. We conclude that the Big 5 firms actually produce a higher audit quality level, and that this quality difference is related to how audit hours are deployed in a more contextual and less procedural audit approach.

scholarly journals Kualitas Audit: Ditinjau dari Fee Audit, Risiko Audit dan Skeptisme Profesional Auditor sebagai Variabel Moderating

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 9
Author(s):  
Muslim Muslim ◽  
Syamsuri Rahim ◽  
Muhammad Faisal AR Pelu ◽  
Alma Pratiwi
Keyword(s):  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Audit Risk ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Professional Skepticism ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Positive Effect

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of audit fees and audit risk on audit quality with auditor professional skepticism as a moderating variable. This research was conducted at 8 public accounting firms in Makassar city with 40 respondents. The analytical method used is multiple regression analysis (Moderated Regression Analysis) which is used to measure the strength of the relationship between two or more variables. The results of this study found that the audit fee variable had a negative and not significant effect on audit quality. These results illustrate that the higher the audit fee received by the auditor, the audit quality will decrease. While audit risk is not a significant positive effect on audit quality. The results of this study illustrate that the higher the audit risk, the audit quality will decrease. The auditor's professional skepticism as a moderating variable is not able to strengthen the effect of audit fees on audit quality. Furthermore, auditor professional skepticism as a moderating variable is also unable to strengthen the effect of audit risk on audit quality

scholarly journals Moderating Role of Audit Fees on the Effect of Task Complexity and Independence towards Audit Judgment

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nur Eny ◽  
Ratna Mappanyukki
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Task Complexity ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Auditor Independence ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Audit Judgment ◽  
Public Accounting Firms

This study examines the effect of task complexity and auditor independence on audit judgment with audit fees as a moderating variable. Samples were obtained from auditors working in public accounting firms in West Jakarta and South Jakarta. Data collection was done using a survey method by distributing questionnaires to 100 auditors as respondents. The method of analysis used was Moderated Regression Analysis. The results show that task complexity hurts audit judgment. Auditor independence has a positive effect on audit judgment. Audit fees can strengthen the effect of task complexity on audit judgment. Besides, audit fees moderate the effect of auditor independence on audit judgment. It is recommended that public accounting firms consider the interaction of variables that affect audit judgment, such as task complexity, independence, and audit fees, to improve audit quality.

PENGARUH FEE AUDIT, DAN MASA PERIKATAN AUDIT TERHADAP KUALITAS AUDIT (SURVEI PADA KANTOR AKUNTAN PUBLIK KOTA BANDUNG)

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabirin, Afif Prasetyo
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
The Public ◽  
Analysis Technique ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
Census Techniques ◽  
The City ◽  
Public Accountant

The purpose of this study is to obtain empirical evidence of the influence of audit fees, and audit engagement period both simultaneously and partially on audit quality at public accounting firms in Bandung. The population in this study is the Public Accountant Office in the city of Bandung which is registered at the IAPI Directorate. The technique of determining the sample using census techniques. The number of samples selected in the study was 60 respondents. The analysis technique uses multiple analysis. The results showed that partially Audit Fee had a positive and significant effect on audit quality. While the engagement period does not affect the audit quality. While simultaneously shows that the Audit Fee, and the Engagement Period, significantly influence the Audit Quality Survey at the Bandung Public Accountant Office.Keywords : Audit Fee, Audit Engagement Period, Audit Quality

The relationship between non-audit fees and audit quality: dealing with the endogeneity issue

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 777-795 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Carmona ◽  
Alexandre Momparler ◽  
Carlos Lassala
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Listed Companies ◽  
Auditor Independence ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Consulting Services ◽  
Public Accounting Firms ◽  
Abnormal Accruals

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore whether the provision of non-audit services (NAS) by public accounting firms undermines audit quality. The study addresses this question by testing for an association between the provision of consulting services and auditor independence in listed companies. Design/methodology/approach – The authors study if the magnitude of non-audit fees explains variations in earnings management by looking at the joint determination of non-audit fees, audit fees, and abnormal accruals using the SURE-regression estimation method. Findings – Evidence from tested models suggests that audit services quality is uncompromised by the provision of NAS. In other words, high non-audit fees do not necessarily result in poor quality financial reporting. Research limitations/implications – A different research methodology and a different sample (e.g. non-listed companies) may lead to differing results. As the paper analyses only one country, generalizability of the results might be a limitation. There is no need to increase legal restrictions on the provision of consulting services by public accounting firms in order to better safeguard audit quality. Practical implications – Consulting clients may be more confident to hire both audit and NAS with the same firm and can make a case before the general Shareholders’ meeting. By providing both audit and NAS, consulting firms obtain knowledge spillovers and synergies while appealing highly qualified professionals. Originality/value – The use of simultaneous equations (SURE-regression) to establish the auditor-client relation allows us to better model theoretical relations between audit fees, non-audit fees, and abnormal accruals. Likewise, joint modeling takes account of correlations between the error terms of the individual models, yielding more efficient estimates than ordinary least squares. Performing this analysis in a non-Anglo-American country with low litigation risk is also a valuable contribution to extant literature.

scholarly journals The Effect of Auditor Ethics, Auditor Experience, Audit Fees and Auditor Motivation on Audit Quality

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 203
Author(s):  
Yeni Kuntari ◽  
Anis Chariri ◽  
Nurdhiana Nurdhiana
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Certified Public Accountants ◽  
Significant Positive Effect ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Accounting Firm ◽  
One Year ◽  
Positive Effect

This study aimed to determine the effect of auditor ethics, auditor experience, audit fees, and auditor motivation on audit quality of public accounting firm in Semarang. The populations in this study were auditors who work on public accounting firm in Semarang. The total population of public accounting firm in Semarang according to Indonesian Institute of Certified Public Accountants in 2016 was 98 respondents from 14 public accounting firms. Questionnaires were distributed to auditors in all those public accounting firm. This study used purposive sampling judgement with criteria of sample were they have worked and experienced in public accounting firm for one year. A total sample of this study is 30 respondents. Using multiple linier regression analysis the results show that auditor ethics had a significant positive effect on audit quality; auditor experience had a significant positive effect on audit quality; audit fees had a significant positive effect on audit quality; and auditor motivation had a significant positive effect on audit quality. Ethics, experience, fees and motivation of auditor had a significant positive effect on audit quality.

scholarly journals The Effect of Auditor Ethics, Auditor Experience, Audit Fees and Auditor Motivation on Audit Quality

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yeni Kuntari ◽  
Anis Chariri ◽  
Nurdhiana Nurdhiana
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Certified Public Accountants ◽  
Significant Positive Effect ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Accounting Firm ◽  
One Year ◽  
Positive Effect

This study aimed to determine the effect of auditor ethics, auditor experience, audit fees, and auditor motivation on audit quality of public accounting firm in Semarang. The populations in this study were auditors who work on public accounting firm in Semarang. The total population of public accounting firm in Semarang according to Indonesian Institute of Certified Public Accountants in 2016 was 98 respondents from 14 public accounting firms. Questionnaires were distributed to auditors in all those public accounting firm. This study used purposive sampling judgement with criteria of sample were they have worked and experienced in public accounting firm for one year. A total sample of this study is 30 respondents. Using multiple linier regression analysis the results show that auditor ethics had a significant positive effect on audit quality; auditor experience had a significant positive effect on audit quality; audit fees had a significant positive effect on audit quality; and auditor motivation had a significant positive effect on audit quality. Ethics, experience, fees and motivation of auditor had a significant positive effect on audit quality.

scholarly journals The Effect of Auditor Independence and Ethics on Audit Quality with Audit Fee as a Moderating Variable in Public Accounting Firms in Medan

2021 ◽  
Vol 04 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Qing Yixin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Auditor Independence ◽  
Partial Least Square ◽  
Least Square ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Coefficient Of Determination ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Public Accounting Firms

This study discusses the effect of auditor independence and ethics on audit quality with audit fees as a moderating variable. This analysis used two independent variables: independence and auditor ethics. Audit quality was the dependent variable, while audit fees were the moderating variable. This research was conducted in 4 Public Accounting Firms (KAP) in the Medan City area, using 70 auditors from 21 Public Accounting Firms (KAP). A quantitative method was employed in this research. The sampling technique used was simple random sampling. In this study, data was collected by surveys or the distribution of questionnaires. Primary data was used as a source. The statistical method employed Partial Least Square Analysis with partial statistical test hypothesis testing (t) in the coefficient of determination (R2 ). SmartPls program was used in this research. The results of this study indicate that independence has a significant effect on audit quality, partially. Meanwhile, auditor ethics has no significant effect on audit quality, and audit fees cannot be a moderating variable on the effect of independence and auditor ethics on audit quality.

Auditor Characteristics, Audit Tenure, Audit Fee and Audit Quality

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 94-99
Author(s):  
Melya Senjaya ◽  
Friska Firnanti
Keyword(s):  
Work Experience ◽  
Audit Quality ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Audit Fees ◽  
Jel Classification ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Audit Fee ◽  
Public Accounting Firms ◽  
One Year

Objective - The purpose of this research is to obtain empirical evidence about the factors that affect audit quality for auditors working in Public Accounting Firms in DKI Jakarta. Methodology/Technique - The independent variables used in this research are: independence, work experience, competency, accountability, audit tenure, and audit fee. The object of this research consists of 25 Public Accounting Firms located in DKI Jakarta. There are 164 respondents used as samples in this study. The sample was selected based on a convenience sampling method with criteria including auditors working at public accounting firms located in DKI Jakarta, with a minimum of one year work duration. This research used statistical tests of multiple regression. Findings - The result shows that independence, accountability, and audit tenure have an effect on audit quality. Meanwhile, work experience, competency, and audit fees have no influence on audit quality. Novelty - The study suggests that to improve audit quality, Public Accounting Firms should pay attention to the independence and accountability of its auditors. Type of Paper: Empirical Keywords: Audit Quality; Independence; Work Experience; Competency; Accountability; Audit Tenure; Audit Fee. JEL Classification: M41, M42.

Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on the PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 31: PCAOB Release No. 2010-005, Application of the “Failure to Supervise” Provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Solicitation of Comment on Rulemaking Concepts

2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. C11-C15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Brazel ◽  
James Bierstaker ◽  
Paul Caster ◽  
Brad Reed
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Exposure Period ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Accounting Firm ◽  
The Public ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Public Company ◽  
Auditing Standards ◽  
Supervision Practices

SUMMARY: Recently, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB” or “Board”) issued a release to address, in two ways, issues relating to the responsibilities of a registered public accounting firm and its supervisory personnel with respect to supervision. First, the release reminds registered firms and associated persons of, and highlights the scope of, Section 105(c)(6) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“the Act”), which authorizes the Board to impose sanctions on registered public accounting firms and their supervisory personnel for failing to supervise reasonably an associated person who has violated certain laws, rules, or standards. Second, the release discusses and seeks comment on conceptual approaches to rulemaking that might complement the application of Section 105(c)(6) and, through increased accountability, lead to improved supervision practices and, consequently, improved audit quality. The PCAOB provided for a 91-day exposure period (from August 5, 2010, to November 3, 2010) for interested parties to examine and provide comments on the conceptual approaches to rulemaking that might complement the application of Section 105(c)(6). The Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association provided the comments in the letter below to the PCAOB on the PCAOB Release No. 2010-005, Application of the “Failure to Supervise” Provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Solicitation of Comment on Rulemaking Concepts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document