[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jbfnac/v30y2003i7-8p1141-1164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cointegration Analysis of Audit Pricing Model: A Panel Unit Root Test Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Win Lin Chou
  • Dominica Suk‐Yee Lee
Abstract
In this study, we provide evidence on the stationarity of real audit fees and the major explanatory variables frequently used in the audit pricing models from a pooled data set, using panel unit root tests developed by Im et al. (1997). The panel unit root test supports the hypothesis of non‐stationarity of audit fees and their major determinants. We demonstrate that variables in the audit pricing model that were previously found to have impact on audit fees may turn out to be useless when more powerful tests like panel tests are applied to these variables. Our evidence implies that failing to employ appropriate procedure to test cointegration and to specify the appropriate model for audit fees and their determinants would generate results that may have exaggerated the effects of some variables on audit fees.

Suggested Citation

  • Win Lin Chou & Dominica Suk‐Yee Lee, 2003. "Cointegration Analysis of Audit Pricing Model: A Panel Unit Root Test Approach," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7‐8), pages 1141-1164, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jbfnac:v:30:y:2003:i:7-8:p:1141-1164
    DOI: 10.1111/1468-5957.05370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5957.05370
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1468-5957.05370?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. Peter C.B. Phillips & Sam Ouliaris & Joon Y. Park, 1988. "Testing for a Unit Root in the Presence of a Maintained Trend," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 880, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    2. Francis, Jr & Stokes, Dj, 1986. "Audit Prices, Product Differentiation, And Scale Economies - Further Evidence From The Australian Market," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 383-393.
    3. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    4. Dickey, David A & Fuller, Wayne A, 1981. "Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(4), pages 1057-1072, June.
    5. Dennis Y. Chung & W. Daryl Lindsay, 1988. "The pricing of audit services: The Canadian perspective," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), pages 19-46, September.
    6. Taylor, Mark P. & Sarno, Lucio, 1998. "The behavior of real exchange rates during the post-Bretton Woods period," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 281-312, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Canzoneri, Matthew B. & Cumby, Robert E. & Diba, Behzad, 1999. "Relative labor productivity and the real exchange rate in the long run: evidence for a panel of OECD countries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 245-266, April.
    9. Granger, C. W. J., 1981. "Some properties of time series data and their use in econometric model specification," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 121-130, May.
    10. Granger, C. W. J. & Newbold, P., 1974. "Spurious regressions in econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 111-120, July.
    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. Sarantis, Nicholas & Stewart, Chris, 1999. "Is the consumption-income ratio stationary? Evidence from panel unit root tests," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 309-314, September.
    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. Laurence Kranich & Andrés Perea & Hans Peters, 2005. "Core Concepts For Dynamic Tu Games," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 43-61.
    2. Herings, P.J.J. & Kubler, F., 2000. "Computing equilibria in finance economies," Research Memorandum 022, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. 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).
    7. Win Chou & Dominica Lee, 2005. "Panel Cointegration Analysis of Audit Pricing Model," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 423-439, June.
    8. James Ross Booth & Lena Chua Booth & Daniel Deli, 2012. "Managerial Incentives and Audit Fees: Evidence from the Mutual Fund Industry," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 1(1), pages 1-76, May.
    9. Bliss, Mark A. & Gul, Ferdinand A. & Majid, Abdul, 2011. "Do political connections affect the role of independent audit committees and CEO Duality? Some evidence from Malaysian audit pricing," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 82-98.
    10. 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.
    11. Chen, Charles J.P. & Su, Xijia & Wu, Xi, 2007. "Market competitiveness and Big 5 pricing: Evidence from China's binary market," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-24.
    12. 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.
    13. Ilias G. Basioudis, 2007. "Auditor's Engagement Risk and Audit Fees: The Role of Audit Firm Alumni," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(9‐10), pages 1393-1422, November.
    14. Jürgen Wolters & Uwe Hassler, 2006. "Unit Root Testing," Springer Books, in: Olaf Hübler & Jachim Frohn (ed.), Modern Econometric Analysis, chapter 4, pages 41-56, Springer.
    15. Elizabeth Carson & Neil Fargher, 2007. "Note on audit fee premiums to client size and industry specialization," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 47(3), pages 423-446, September.
    16. Andrew Ferguson & Donald Stokes, 2002. "Brand Name Audit Pricing, Industry Specialization, and Leadership Premiums post†Big 8 and Big 6 Mergers," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 77-110, March.
    17. Andrew McLennan & In-Uck Park, 2016. "The market for liars: Reputation and auditor honesty," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 12(1), pages 49-66, March.
    18. Kim, Oksana, 2021. "The impact of economic sanctions on audit pricing," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    19. Taylor, Mark H. & Simon, Daniel T., 1999. "Determinants of audit fees: the importance of litigation, disclosure, and regulatory burdens in audit engagements in 20 countries," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 375-388, August.
    20. Jane Hamilton & Yang Li & Donald Stokes, 2008. "Is the audit services market competitive following Arthur Andersen's collapse?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 48(2), pages 233-258, June.

    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:bla:jbfnac:v:30:y:2003:i:7-8:p:1141-1164. 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: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0306-686X .

    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.