Nonlitigation Risk and Pricing Audit Services
Nonlitigation Risk and Pricing Audit Services
复制标题
DOI：
10.2308/aud.2005.24.1.37
复制
发表时间：
2005-05
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
R. Houston;Michael F. Peters;J. Pratt
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Houston;Michael F. Peters;J. Pratt
在这项研究中，我们扩展了由Simunic（1980）引入并由Houston等人（1999）扩展的审计费用模型，增加了第三个因素，非诉讼风险，这是指超出诉讼风险或审计行为的一般业务风险和/或机会（例如，未来审计和非审计收入的机会，与客户打交道对审计师声誉的潜在损害）。在一个实验中，我们要求审计合伙人和管理人员评估各种风险，并在审查了四种增加风险的审计业务之一后制定审计计划-发现错误，发现GAAP不一致，客户收购（其中经审计的财务报表用于确定交易价格），以及失去主要客户。我们发现，在错误和收购的情况下，审计费用的增加只能解释由审计投资的计划增加，在GAAP不一致的情况下，审计费用的增加部分地解释由计划的增加。
In this study we expand the audit fee model introduced by Simunic (1980) and extended by Houston et al. (1999) by adding a third factor, nonlitigation risk, which refers to general business risks and/or opportunities that extend beyond litigation risk or the conduct of the audit (e.g., opportunities for future audit and nonaudit revenues, potential damage to the auditor's reputation from involvement with a client). In an experiment, we ask audit partners and managers to assess various risks and develop an audit plan after reviewing one of four risk‐increasing audit scenarios—the discovery of an error, the discovery of a GAAP inconsistency, a client buyout where the audited financial statements are used in the determination of the exchange price, and the loss of a major client customer. We find that, in the error and buyout cases, audit fee increases are explained only by the planned increase in audit investment; in the GAAP inconsistency case, the audit fee increase is explained in part by the planned inc...