study of the effect of size, rotation and fee of auditing ...tendency to maintain and observe...
Post on 19-Jan-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Jurnal Fikrah Jilid 8, Special Issue 1, 108-122, 2017
Available at : www.jurnalfikrah.org ISSN 1511-1113
© 2017 Pusat Pemikiran dan Kefahaman Islam (CITU)
108
Study of the Effect of Size, Rotation and Fee of
Auditing - On Audit Quality in Tehran Stock
Exchange
Allah Karam Salehi
Department of Accounting, Masjed-soleiman Branch, Islamic Azad University
Masjed-soleiman, Iran
Ahmad Kaab Omeir
Department of Accounting, Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad University Ahvaz, Iran
Habib Alah Rasooli
Department of Accounting, Abadan Branch, Islamic Azad University Abadan,
Iran
Mahdi Hashemian
Department of Accounting, Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad University Ahvaz, Iran
ABSTRACT
Considering situation and role of auditing report and financial statements in
making decision by users, the quality of work of audit office is taken for as key
factors in preparing audit report. For this reason, different solutions have been
presented by professional authorities and experts to increase quality of work and
maintain independency of audit office, those, orderly evolution of audit office and
charge of auditing are their recommending suggestions by them, so the purpose
of this study is investigating the effect of value, evolution and charge of auditing
on quality of auditing in Tehran stock exchange in period during 2009-2013.
Considering limitations of this study, a sample including 49 firms is chosen.
Theories of this study had been tested by data panel regression by software named
Audit Quality in Stock Exchange
901
Eviews. Results show that of value and charge of audit office have a positive and
significant effect on quality of auditing; but evolution of audit office doesn’t have
a significant effect on quality of auditing .
Keywords: quality of auditing, audit office size, evolution of audit office, charge
of auditing.
Issue statement
The conflict of interests would be created between managers and stakeholders by
separating ownership and management in stock companies. Since this conflict of
interests would be with coincidence of information, prepared reports should be
auditing by independent and qualification persons by management to decreasing
costs of agency. In simple terms, there should be some other person or persons
(including juridical or nature persons) except information suppliers and
information users to improve the assurance in financial statements. These days by
increasing number of audit office, the competition also have been increased
between them. Users of these financial statements to make appropriate and helpful
decision are the client of this market. In every competing market surmounting
requirement information users, those are the correct and reliable financial
statements, are in priority. Financial statements are correct and reliable when are
audited and the audited that is done have requirement quality. Bankruptcy of some
firms like Enron, Worldcom, Parmalat and bankruptcy of some large banks in
recent like Lehman brothers, Northern rock and … caused pointing accusing
fingers at accounting and financial reporting specially accountants. In this case
necessities of audit offices to changing the employers in predicts was concerned
as a solution to maintain independency. Because most of them specially
legislators believed that long relation between accountant and employer would
decrease supervisory power of auditor and quality of auditing. After these events
legislators and formulators of accounting standards have tried to in formulating
some rules to improve auditor independency and audit quality. Meanwhile we can
note approval the rule of Sabnes Oxley. In a part of this rule obligates audit offices
to change their mangers and partners after working auditing in 5 years
successively for an employer. This rule also like other rules had its proponents
and opponents. Proponents with obligatory changing the auditor believe that
auditors after working with an employer for a long time have more incentive to
keep employer and accepting his prospects and desires because of economic
dependences that this is the case that distort the independency. They believe that
Jurnal Fikrah
990
long time being in charge would cause some sort of emotional relation to the
extent that make some kinds of fealty and loyalty feelings in auditors and thus put
their independency in dangerous. Opponents of obligatory changing maybe
approve this prospect but they believe cost of accomplishing and dispensing this
rule is more than its profits. On the other hand, they argued that there some
another factors like requirement to keep their reliability and honor and fear of sue
against them that make auditors to keep their independency. In this case
necessities of audit offices to changing the employers in predicts was concerned
as a solution to maintain independency. Because most of them specially
legislators believed that long relation between accountant and employer would
decrease supervisory power of auditor and quality of auditing. Quality of auditing
shows the ability and efficiency of an auditor and shows that this auditor has
quality in his audit but audit quality shows the qualitative of every audit project.
Existence of clear and reliable financial information that is from an appropriate
and comprehensive reporting system, is one of the pillars of evaluating
performance statue of a firm and making decision about published interchanging
stock exchange from that system. In professional societies of these days, from
user’s prospects, information is reliable when an independent organization
administers reporting process of firms and gravity center of these process i.e.
financial statements. Audit offices are a sample of these kinds of independent
organizations that mostly in business units administer and consider structure of
internal control of reporting unit and final output of this internal control system
means financial statements. Based on what have been noted this study investigate
the effect of audit evolution and cost of audit offices on audit quality. Indeed, this
study is an answer to this question that, do audit evolution and costs of audit
offices have effect on audit quality?
Literature and history of study
Audit quality
Up to now, various tries have been accomplished for definition of quality in
auditing, yet none of them cause an acceptable definition or being accepted by
professional congresses and accountant communities or recognition by
international community. Because quality in fact it’s not a one sided concept but
is an extent and polyhedral concept and different factors either directional and in
directional effects on audit quality. In pervious researches, different definitions
are stated about audit quality that some of important ones are noted:
Audit Quality in Stock Exchange
999
De Angelo (1981), defined audit quality contains two probabilities: first auditor
find accounting system errors and in second step reports them. Finding errors
evaluating audit quality in form of auditor knowledge and ability, while reporting
them depends on audit incentive to expose (Arab Salehi, et.al,1930; 127-147).
Palmrose(1988) defined auditing in form of value of accreditation, because
financial statement accreditation is the purpose of audit. Thus, audit quality is the
probability of lack of important incorrect statements in financial statements
(Aghaee and Ardakani, 2012; 4-17).
Seize of audit office
From auditor’s perspective, Seize of audit office is one of the particularities that
effects on audit quality. De Angelo (1981) believes that larger audit offices would
represent more qualified audit services, because they’re interested in being well
known in market and due to they have a lot of clients, they’re not worry about
losing them. Assumption is that such offices represent more qualified audit
services because of their accession to sources and having more facilities for
training their auditors and taking different examinations (Mojtahed zadeh and
Aghaee, 2004; 53-76).
Auditor evolution
Attendance of auditor with employer for a long time causes some kind of
tendency to maintain and observe opinion of employer, the situation that would
tarnish his independency and disinterest (Rajabi, 2006; 53-62). Being in charge
for a long time with personnel of audit office and employer would lead to more
familiarization between them and would entail increasing concerning about
auditors independency. There are two mechanisms for this concern. On the one
hand, changing auditor leads to decrease trust of investors to financial statement
reliability, and thus audit credit would decrease, on the other hand, costs of
auditing would be increased either for auditor or employer. Concerning history,
there are two basic points about obligatory changing auditors:
A) Being in charge for a long time for auditor may lead to auditing faintness or
tarnish auditor independency in term time.
B) New auditor may have new perspective about potential evolution. While most
of the initial studies have emphasized on the first point, a few empirical study
examine next point directly (Rahimian and Jan Fada, 2014; 39-64).
Charge of audit
Audit economic profits supply of fees that is from contract with employer.
Auditors use different factors for pricing audit services. Base of determination fee
audit is period of auditors operations that is count based on work progressing.
Jurnal Fikrah
991
Rate of fee for an hour for every auditor based on their skill and experience and
thus their responsibility is different. Given research, auditing fees contain charge
of direct work hours, other direct costs (like costs of outdoor missions and going
and returning traffic), assignable handicap would be estimate totally (Mousavi
and Darogheh Hazrati, 2011; 173-141). In economic literature, size of audit
offices and offices dignity may effect on audit fee and office quality (Vaez et al.,
2013; 92-114).
History of study
Rahimian and Jan Fada (2014) studied the effect of obligatory and voluntary
changing audit offices on quality of auditing reports of accepted companies in
Tehran stock exchange. In this research, financial information of accepted
companies in Tehran stock exchange has been studied that had obligatory and
voluntary changing. This research has investigated 330 accepted companies in
Tehran stock exchange in period during 2006- 2012. Results showed that
obligatory and voluntary changing audit offices have no effect on audit quality.
Vaez et al. (2014) investigated the effect of audit quality on auditing fee. In this
research audit office size, auditor proficiency in industry and audit selection
continues are considered as audit quality factors. For this purpose, data related to
72 accepted companies in stock exchange have been investigated in period during
2007-2011. Findings showed that there is negative and significant relation
between audit offices proficiency and auditing fee. And also audit selection
continues and audit office size has positive and significant relation with auditing
fee. Kraub et al. (2015) worked on relation between unusual pricing of audit fee
and audit quality. They used a sample contains 2334 companies during 2005-
2010. Results showed audit manual costs have negative relation with audit
quality. Ilaboya and Okoye (2015) worked on examination relation between audit
office size, none audit services and audit quality. Their statistical society was
containing accepted commercial banks in Nigeria stock exchange and for this
purpose 200questionnaires were distributed to responders. Results showed that
there is positive and significant relation between audit office size, none audit
services. Audit term time and independency auditing have positive relation but
doesn’t have significant relation to each other's. And also there is negative relation
between audit costs and audit quality. Eventually, they found that audit office size
leads to increasing quality audit.
Audit Quality in Stock Exchange
991
Research methodology
Type of this research based on purpose is operational and based on nature and
method is type of correlation. Toward gathering information related to research
data and variables, firms financial statements and also from information banks
Tadbir pardaz, Rah avard Novin and Kedal and also websites belongs to stock
exchange organization have been used. Analyzing data of this research and
examine theories is accomplished by Excel and Eviews software. Thus that
gathered information by data bases, first classified in Excel software then
transferred to Eviews software in order to be examined by statistical tests.
Statistical society in this research was accepted commercial banks in Tehran stock
exchange from early 2009 until late 2013 for 5years. To achieve reliable results,
companies those entered to the stock exchange after2009 and those exited during
research period have not been in statistical sample. Moreover, to achieve
appropriate statistical sample systematical removal method is used. So, statistical
sample is adjusted by below situations and limitations:
1- Sample doesn’t contain financial supplier, investor or insurance companies.
2- Sample companies should be part of stock exchange entire period of
examination.
3- Sample companies should have fiscal year to the end of Esfand29th.
4- Research variables data should be available for considering companies.
5- Sample companies have been audited and audit shouldn’t be rejected.
Considering above limitations 49 Sample companies gained.
Research theories
1. There is significant relation between audit office and quality audit.
2. There is significant relation between changing auditor and audit quality.
3. There is significant relation between audit yearly fee and audit quality.
Variables and model of research
The dependent variable
The dependent variable in this research is quality audit that in this research for
evaluating quality audit of selected companies, extended model from Kotari et el.
(2005) is used that is taken from Jones performance model, which this model
would be calculated as below:
𝑇𝐴𝑖𝑡 = 𝛼0 + 𝛼1(∆𝑆𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑡 − ∆𝐴𝑅𝑖,𝑡) + 𝛼𝑃𝑃𝐸𝑖,𝑡 + 𝛼3𝑅𝑜𝑎𝑖,𝑡 + 𝜀𝑖,𝑡
Jurnal Fikrah
991
𝑇𝐴𝑖= Total accruals that is equal with net profit minus operating net cash flow in
year ,t, for company i
∆𝑆𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑡= (sales changes) sales of this year minus sales of last year in year t and
for company i
∆𝐴𝑅𝑖,𝑡= (changes in receivable accounts) receivable accounts of this year minus
last year receivable accounts in year t for company i
𝑃𝑃𝐸𝑖,𝑡= gross value of properties, machines and equipment ( those are
standardized by last year total assets) in year t for company i
𝑅𝑜𝑎𝑖,𝑡= efficiency of this year assets in year t for company i
𝜀𝑖,𝑡= Random error
Independent variables
1. Size that is Dummy variable that way if audit office is audit organization,
number is 1, otherwise is equal with zero.
2. Length of term audit contract is Ternur that if audit office be selected again
number is one, otherwise is equal with zero.
3. Yearly audit office is Fee that is equal with natural logarithm of total audit fee.
Control variables
1. Total assets (TA) that is calculated by natural logarithm of firm total assets as
a firm size.
2. Age of audit office (age) that is extractable base on history of audit office.
In order to exanimate the relation between researches variables, data panel
regression is used which model of research is as below:
𝐴𝑄 = 𝛼 + 𝛽1𝑆𝑖𝑧𝑒 + 𝛽2𝑇𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑢𝑟 + 𝛽3𝐹𝑒𝑒 + 𝛽4𝑇𝐴 + 𝛽5𝐴𝑔𝑒 + 𝜖(1)
AQ: Audit quality
Size: Audit office size
Ternur: changing auditor
Fee: Auditor fee
TA: Total assets
Age: Audit office age
Audit Quality in Stock Exchange
991
Research results
Descriptive statistics
Table 1: Descriptive statistics Average Medial Maximum Minimum Standard deviation Extension Skidding
Age 19.15 19 42 2 9.40 -0.016 1.747
AQ -77.11 3658.22 1734786 -2765178 250021.6 -4.039 71.89
Fee 2.69 2.54 3.19 2.300 0.31 0.447 1.856
Size 0.24 0 1 0 0.43 1.160 2.347
TA 947360.2 533540 11545895 22725 1501952 4.350 24.90
Ternur 0.816 1 1 0 0.38 -1.633 3.669
According to above table the most Standard deviation belongs to total assets and
less belongs to auditor fee. And also the most extension and skidding respectively
are belongs to total assets and Audit quality and the less ones are belongs to audit
office age.
Being normal test of waste sentences
One of the theories that is exanimated in the regression method is being normal
distribution remaining estimates. In this research, we used Jarque-Bera test to
exanimate remains for being normal. Below diagram represent waste remaining
Histogram test and statistic Jarque-Bera for being normal, and some simple
descriptive statistics of waste sentences.
H0= remains are normal
H1= remains aren’t normal
Diagram 1: Jarque-Bera
Since significant level of Jarque-Bera test is more than 0.05, so result would be
assumed as 0 and remains are normal.
Jurnal Fikrah
991
Stability test
In usual methods of econometric doing every estimate is limited to making sure
about variables stability. In this research, we used Levin, Lin and Chaw test.
Theories of H0 and H1 are as below:
H0= variable is not stable
H1= variable is stable
Table 2: Variables stability test Variable Type of test Statistic 1 Significant level Result
Audit office age
Level 04.2772 0.9999 Unstable
First time difference 5.975.9 0.9999 Unstable
Second time difference ..09274- 0.0000 Second time
difference stability
Audit quality Level 9.49.25- 0.0000 Stability in level
Fee audit Level 09.29.9- 0.0000 Stability in level
Audit office size Level 2.59.54- 0.2697 Unstable
First time difference 7.92470- 0.0000 First time difference stability
Total assets Level 9.0.909 0.8909 Unstable
First time difference 9.59042- 0.0254 First time
difference stability
Changing auditor Level 7.29.9.- 0.0000 Stability in level
Since value of significant level for variables of audit quality, audit fee and audit
rotation is obtained less than 0.05, so theory of zero would be rejected and above
variables are in stable level; but variables of auditor age, auditor size and total
assets weren’t stable in all data of levels and stability test had been repeated for
them by differences which eventually audit office age variable with second time
difference and auditor size and total assets with first time difference have been
stable.
Heterogeneity variance
One of the most important issues we face with in econometric is Heterogeneity
variance. Heterogeneity variance means in estimation of regression model values
of errors sentences are unequal variance. When the data panel test is using,
expression ratio test can be used. Assumption of H0 and H1 in test is as below:
H0=No Heterogeneity variance
H1= present of Heterogeneity variance
Table 3: Heterogeneity variance test Heterogeneity variance test Result Significant level Statistic
970.0. 0.0000 Present of Heterogeneity
variance
Audit Quality in Stock Exchange
991
Considering value of significant level obtained less than 0.005, so theory of zero
would be rejected and considered model contains heterogeneity variance. In this
case, generalized panel should be used.
Multiple linear test
Before doing multiple linear regression tests, considering that number of
independent variables are a lot, it should be make sure that independent variables
don’t have any effect on each other. If this relation be between independent
variables, regression model that contains multiple linear and its result are not
reliable, because calculated beta coefficient would be contains diagonal; and it
may be have high credit by having high R2. For this purpose, Pearson correlation
test has been used, if the correlation coefficient be less than 0.5 it shows lack of
coincidence between variables. If the correlation coefficient be between 0.5 and
0.8 it shows incomplete linearity and finally if the correlation coefficient be more
than 0.8 it shows the complete linearity and should try to appease it.
Table 4: Result of multiple linear test Audit firm age Auditor fee Audit office size Total assets
Audit office age 1
Auditor fee 0.026956 1
Audit office size 0.493682 -0.01334 1
Total assets 0.161401 0.074986 0.278976 1
Auditor rotation 0.09452 0.150439 0.126857 0.056779
As it can be seen in above table, correlation coefficient between independent
variables is so weak. So there is no problem of linear between independent
variables.
Limer F test
For selecting heterogeneity of units, Limer F can be useful. If heterogeneity of
units be approved, pattern would be estimate by panel data, otherwise would be
estimate by usual OSL method.
Assumption of H0 and H1 in test is as below:
H0= using ordinary least squares method
H1= using data panel
Table 5: Result of Limer F test Limer F test Statistic Significant level
1.854238 0.0056
Result of table suggests rejection of zero assumption and existence of none
harmonic sections and suggests that panel data method is appropriate.
Jurnal Fikrah
991
Hausman test
After approving that there is none harmonic in sections and individual differences
are considerable, and combined data method is suitable for estimating, it should
be determined that estimate error is because of changing in sections or it happens
during the time. In the way of considering such errors we face two steady effect
and random effect. For determining steady effect and random effect Huasman
Test is used. Assumption of H0 and H1 in test is as below:
H0= Existence of random effect
H1= Existence of steady effect
Table 6: Result of Haunsman test Haunsman test statistic Significant level Result
5.176167 0.3948 random effects
Result of Huansman test above shows that value of significant level is more than
0.05, so assumption of zero about suitably of random effects can be accepted. So
in assurance of 95 percent random effects model is priority.
Since above items are determined, now regression panel data can be used.
Table 7: Regression Independent variables Regression
coefficient
Statistic t Significant level Result
Audit age AG 0.007452 0.128905 0.8976 None significant
Auditor fee FEE 0.128113 4.037855 0.0001 significant
Audit office size SIZE 0.653237 2.348278 0.0202 significant
Total assets TA 0.595123 2.249093 0.0261 significant
Auditor rotation TERNUR -0.209659 1.298109 0.1964 None significant
Constant C 0.320816 2.039148 0.0433 significant
Coefficient of determination 0.164685 Statistic F 5.559727
Adjusted Coefficient of determination 0.135064 Significant level F
0.000 Watson camera statistics 1.909406
* Independent variables: Audit quality
Analyzing table: to decide about being significant or none significant of the
effect of every independent variable on dependent variables would be judge base
on significant level. When significant level is less than 0.05 it can be concluded
that considering independent variable doesn’t have any significant effect on
dependent variable. Base on above table, the effect of variables fee auditor, audit
office size and total assets on audit quality is significant. Considering the
regression coefficient it can be said that fee auditor, audit office size and total
Audit Quality in Stock Exchange
991
assets have a positive effect on audit quality; but audit office age and auditor don’t
have a significant effect on audit quality.
Considering above table, value of Watson camera statistic indicates on lack of
problem of self-solidarity. Base on statistic F probability, generally regression
equation is significant. Adjusted determination coefficient of model is 0.135 that
shows 13.5 percent of dependent variable changes are according to independent
variable changes and rest of the dependent variable changes are caused by another
factor changes those are ignored here.
Checking research theories
* First theory: there is a significant relation between audit office size and audit
quality.
According to table (7) audit office size has significant effect on audit quality;
because significant level between them is less than 0.05. So it can be said that in
assurance level 95 percent audit office size has a significant effect on audit
quality. Since regression coefficient between them is positive, the effect of audit
office size on audit quality is positive. It means if audit office size is more and
more audit quality would be more and more.
* Second theory: there is a significant relation between auditor rotation and audit
quality.
According to table (7) auditor rotation doesn’t have a significant effect on audit
quality; because significant level between them is more than 0.05. So it can be
said that on assurance level 95 percent auditor rotation doesn’t have significant
effect on audit quality.
* Third theory: there is a significant relation between annual auditor fee and
audit quality.
According to the table (7) annual auditor fee has a significant effect on audit
quality; significant level between them is less than 0.05. So it can be said that on
assurance level 95 percent annual auditor fee has significant effect on audit
quality. Since regression coefficient between them is positive, the effect of annual
auditor fee on audit quality is positive, it means when annual auditor fee is a lot,
audit quality would be more.
Discussion
According to the obtained results audit office size has significant effect on audit
quality; because significant level between them is less than 0.05. So it can be said
that in assurance level 95 percent audit office size has a significant effect on audit
Jurnal Fikrah
910
quality. Since regression coefficient between them is positive, the effect of audit
office size on audit quality is positive. It means if audit office size is more and
more audit quality would be more and more. In auditor’s perspectives, larger audit
offices represent more qualified audit services; because they are more interested
in achieving a better dignity in market; because such offices represented more
qualified services because they have accession to more recourse and facilities for
training their auditors and taking difference tests. Indeed from auditor’s
perspectives audit size is one of features that have effect on audit quality. In Iran
also audit office is considered as large and credit establishment, thus audited firms
by audit offices are considered as firms that their financial statements items have
high credit and eventually have more qualified audit. Result of this theory are
correspond with researches by Ilaboya And Okoye (2015), Guo & Lai-lan Mo
(2014), Suprapto and Suwardi (2013), and they are not correspond with Nagy
(2005). Result of second theory showed that auditor rotation doesn’t have a
significant effect on audit quality; because significant level between them is more
than 0.05. So it can be said that on assurance level 95 percent auditor rotation
doesn’t have significant effect on audit quality. Rotation of auditor has its
proponents and opponents that all of them have reasons. Proponents believe that
auditors after working with an employer for a long time have more incentive to
keep employer and accepting his prospects and desires, the situation that distort
the independency. Being in charge for long time between auditors and employer
leads to their more familiarity and increasing concerning about auditor
independency. Opponents believe that auditors after a while achieve more
knowledge and experience and thus their ability in being appropriate or not about
auditing and reporting methods would be increased; so long relation between
auditor and employers may improve the quality of audit. They believe by
changing auditors , investors trust in reliability of financial statements would be
decreased and so credit of audit would decrease too, and on the other hand, audit
costs for auditors and employers would increase. As it said in this research,
auditor rotation had not significant effect on quality audit; so rotation or not
rotation can’t have a significant effect on audit quality. Results of this theory is
correspond with internal and external researches by Rahimian and Jan Fada
(2014), Hasas Yeganeh and Jafari (2010), Suprapto and Suwardi (2013), and they
are not correspond with researches by Imeokparia (2014), Onwuchekwa et el.
(2012), Arrunada and Paz-Ares (2004), Carcello and Nagy (2004). Result of third
theory showed that annual auditor fee has a significant effect on audit quality;
significant level between them is less than 0.05. So it can be said that on assurance
Audit Quality in Stock Exchange
919
level 95 percent annual auditor fee has significant effect on audit quality. Since
regression coefficient between them is positive, the effect of annual auditor fee
on audit quality is positive, it means when annual auditor fee is a lot, audit quality
would be more. Paid costs to auditors can have effect on audit quality in two ways;
paying high fees can increase auditor effort, so quality of audit would increase.
Another way, paying high fees to auditors, especially about not auditing services,
would make them dependent to their clients in economic part. Paying high fees
can be paid by audit offices to supply all costs of audit process and extending
auditing ways, but generally there are difference evidences about the relation
between fee and audit quality. Some researchers believe that paying high fee to
auditors is a kind encouragement them to make more effort in auditing. On the
other hand, paying high fee may lead to more dependency between auditor and
client and make auditor not to have tendency to expose; but result of this research
shows that paying more fee make auditors encourage to make more effort in
auditing and so it leads to increasing audit quality. Results of this theory are
corresponding with researches by Suprapto and Suwardi (2013), Choi et el.
(2010), Yu (2007). According to the results of search below suggestions are
represented:
1. According to the obtained results of this research, audit office rotation has not
effect on audit quality; means having along relation with auditors or not doesn’t
have any effects on audit quality; so it is suggested to firms, investors and users
of this research not to attend on changing auditors as an effective factor on audit
quality and if they are looking for increasing quality look for another factors.
2. According to obtained results from this research audit office size has positive
effect on audit quality; it is suggested to select larger establishments; because
these establishments are interested in keeping their dignity in market and have
more accession to recourse and facilities they present more qualified audit
services. 3. According to the obtained results of this research auditor fee has a
positive effect on audit quality; so it is suggested to stock firms and users of this
research pay the fees on the suitable level; because if fee be suitable increase
auditors efforts and also leads to improving auditing process and extending
auditing methods that lease to high qualified auditing.
Jurnal Fikrah
911
REFERENCES
Aqaei, MohammadAli and Ardakani, Mehdi Nazemi (2012). Audit proficiency in
industry and optional accrual items management, Audit knowledge, 12th
year, N 46, p4-17.
Guo, Y &Lai-lan Mo, P. (2014), Audit Office Size and Audit Quality: The
Influence of City-Level Industry Specialists and Audit Firm Tenure, Nanjing
University.
Ilaboya, O. J. And Okoye, F. A. (2015), Relationship between Audit Firm Size,
Non-Audit Services and Audit Quality, DBA Africa Management Review,
Vol 5 No.1, Pp 1-10 1
Imeokparia. L, (2014).audit firm rotation and the quality of audit work: an
emprical study of Nigeria, Canadian Open Finance and Accounting Journal
Vol. 1, No. 1, October, pp. 1 – 12
Kraub, P., Pronobis, P & Zu¨lch, H. (2015), abnormal audit fees and audit quality:
initial evidence from the German audit market, J Bus Econ, 85:45–84.
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/255967166
Rahimiyan, Nezam Aldin and Jan Fada, Reza (2014). Investigating the effect of
obligatory and voluntary changing on audit quality, audit magazine, theory
and action, first year, N1, p 39-64.
Rahimiyan, Nezam Aldin and Shokri, Mina(2013). Roll of auditors rotation in
increasing audit office quality; review on last researches, Audit magazines,
N 64.
Rashidi Baqi, Mohsen (2014). Investigating adherence of audit fee, investigating
audit and auditors, year2.
Suprapto, E and Suwardi,E. (2013), The Effect of Audit Partner Rotation and
Audit Firm’s Fee on Audit Quality, Proceedings of 8th Annual London
Business Research Conference Imperial College, London, UK, 8 - 9 July.
Vaez, Sir Ali; Ahmadi, Mohammad Ramezan and Rashidi Baqi, Mohsen (2014).
The effects of audit quality on firms audit fee, accounting knowledge of
good, N1, p 87-107.
top related