Explaining the audit pricing model: Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Siavash Mahdipoor Roshan 1
احمد یعقوب نژاد 2
امیر رضا کیقبادی 2
Azita Jahanshad 2
1 Ph.D Student, Department of Accounting, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 گروه حسابداری، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
10.22034/jmaak.2025.78066.4428
Abstract
The audit effort has a direct relationship with the audit fee, so that fees less than the standard limit can lead to the reduction of the audit budget, lack of proper and sufficient implementation of audit tests, and ultimately low audit quality. The purpose of this research is to explain the audit pricing model: Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange. In line with the purpose of the research, information was collected from the financial statements of companies admitted to the Tehran Stock Exchange. For the statistical analysis of the data, multivariate regression analysis with panel data was used. The findings of the research show that the tenure of the CEO, delay in the audit report, institutional shareholders, management ability, financial leverage, business strategy, growth opportunity, competition in the product market have a significant effect on the audit fee.
The findings of the research show that the tenure of the CEO, delay in the audit report, institutional shareholders, management ability, financial leverage, business strategy, growth opportunity, competition in the product market have a significant effect on the audit fee.
Keywords
Audit Fees
Audit Report Delays
Audit Pricing

  1. 1.      بزرگ اصل، موسی (1389). کیفیت حسابرسی و حق الزحمه حسابرسی، مجله دنیای اقتصاد، دوره فروردین، ص ص: 18 – 17.

    2.      زلقی، حسن؛ سالار سیفی، لاله؛ مینایی تبریزی، فاطمه سادات (1399). تأثیر توانایی مدیریت و ساز و کارهای حاکمیت شرکتی بر رابطه بین بیش اعتمادی مدیریتی و حق الزحمه حسابرسی، دانش حسابداری مالی، 7 (3)، 110 – 85.

    3.      صدرائی، غزل السادات؛ محمدرضایی، فخرالدین؛ غلامی جمکرانی، رضا؛ فرجی، امید (1400). تدوین الگوی حق الزحمه حسابرسی در ایران: شواهدی اولیه مبتنی بر روند ترتیبی روش ترکیبی، پیشرفت های حسابداری، 13 (1)، 224 – 191.

    4.      محمدرضایی، فخرالدین؛ فرجی، امید (1398). معمای سنجش کیفیت حسابرسی در پژوهش های آرشیوی: نقد و ارایه پیشنهادهایی برای محیط پژوهشی ایران، بررسی های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 26 (1)، 122 – 87.

    5.      نیکبخت، محمدرضا؛ تنانی، محسن (1389). آزمون عوامل موثر بر حق الزحمه حسابرسی صورت های مالی، پژوهش های حسابداری مالی، شماره 4، ص ص: 24 – 13.

     

    1. Balsam, S., Krishnan, J., & Yang, J. S. (2003). Auditor industry specialization and earnings quality. Auditing: A journal of practice & Theory, 22(2), 71-97.
    2. Benjamin, S., Ramachandran, J., Marathamuthu, S., & Mohamed, Z. (2015). Cash holdings and their impact on audit fees. Available at SSRN 2723236.
    3. Bierstaker, J. L., & Wright, A. (2001). The effects of fee pressure and partner pressure on audit planning decisions. Advances in Accounting, 18, 25-46.
    4. Bills, K. L., Lisic, L. L., & Seidel, T. A. (2017). Do CEO succession and succession planning affect stakeholders' perceptions of financial reporting risk? Evidence from audit fees. The Accounting Review, 92(4), 27-52.
    5. Chen, Y., Eshleman, J. D., & Soileau, J. S. (2017). Business strategy and auditor reporting. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36(2), 63-86.
    6. DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of accounting and economics, 3(3), 183-199.
    7. Eierle, B., Hartlieb, S., Hay, D., Niemi, L., & Ojala, H. (2021). External environment and the pricing of audit services: A systematic review of archival literature (March 31, 2021). AvailableatSSRN: https://ssrn. com/abstract= 3816385or http://dx. doi. org/10.2139/ssrn, 3816385.
    8. Funchal, B., Galdi, F. C., & Lopes, A. B. (2008). Interactions between corporate governance, bankruptcy law and firms' debt financing: the Brazilian case. BAR-Brazilian Administration Review, 5, 245-259.
    9. Fich, E. M., & Slezak, S. L. (2008). Can corporate governance save distressed firms from bankruptcy? An empirical analysis. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 30, 225-251.
    10. Hay, D. (2013). Further evidence from meta‐analysis of audit fee research. International Journal of Auditing, 17(2), 162-176.
    11. Hay, D. C., Knechel, W. R., & Wong, N. (2006). Audit fees: A meta‐analysis of the effect of supply and demand attributes. Contemporary accounting research, 23(1), 141-191.
    12. Khan, A. R., Hossain, D. M., & Siddiqui, J. (2011). Corporate ownership concentration and audit fees: The case of an emerging economy. Advances in Accounting, 27(1), 125-131.
    13. Krishnan, G. V., Pevzner, M., & Sengupta, P. (2012). How do auditors view managers’ voluntary disclosure strategy? The effect of earnings guidance on audit fees. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 31(5), 492-515.
    14. Lennox, C. S., & Kausar, A. (2017). Estimation risk and auditor conservatism. Review of Accounting Studies, 22, 185-216.
    15. Modugu, P. K., Eragbhe, E., & Ikhatua, O. J. (2012). Determinants of audit delay in Nigerian companies: Empirical evidence. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 3(6), 46-54.
    16. Leventis, S., Weetman, P., & Caramanis, C. (2005). Determinants of audit report lag: Some evidence from the Athens Stock Exchange. International journal of auditing, 9(1), 45-58.
    17. Simunic, D. A. (1980). The pricing of audit services: Theory and evidence. Journal of accounting research, 161-190.
    18. Sonu, C. H. (2014). The Effect of Conditional Conservatism on Audit Fees. 회계학연구, 39(2), 313-359.