透過您的圖書館登入
IP:34.239.154.201
  • Journals

取消審計公費下限與審計品質

Abolishment of Audit Fee Floor and Audit Quality

Abstracts


1998年,我國會計師公會配合公平交易委員會之要求,取消審計公費下限之機制。過去的文獻指出,我國取消審計公費下限之後,導致審計市場更加競爭,而且具品牌聲譽會計師事務所提高了市場占有率。本研究進一步探討取消審計公費下限與審計品質之關聯性,並觀察此關聯性是否受品牌聲譽或更換會計師影響。本研究發現,我國取消審計公費下限之後,會計師的整體審計品質有顯著提高。此結論支持了我國廢止審計公費下限之政策。此外,具品牌聲譽之會計師提高審計品質的幅度,低於不具品牌聲譽的會計師。顯示只是提高審計品質,並無法提高其市場占有率;換言之,無法單靠提高審計品質而成為具品牌聲譽的會計師。

Parallel abstracts


In 1998, the Certified Public Accountant of Republic of China (ROCCPA), in response to a request by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), abolished the audit fee floor in Taiwan. Past literature has pointed out that the audit market would become more competitive, and accounting firms with brand name reputation would get more market share after abolishing the audit fee floor. In this paper, we investigate the association between the abolishment of audit fee floor and audit quality. We also examine the effects of brand name reputation and auditor switch on such association. We discovered that the overall audit quality has increased after abolishing the audit fee floor, a conclusion that supports the original decision of abolishment. We also found that the audit quality of accounting firms with brand name reputation increased less than that of non-brand name accounting firms. This demonstrates that improving audit quality alone does not lead to a bigger market share, and a non-brand name firm cannot become a brand-name firm solely by increasing audit quality.

References


王貞靜、張瑪珊與林凱薰,2012,審計品質與資訊不對稱之關聯性,中華會計學刊, 8卷(1期):頁89-135。
李建然與陳政芳,2004,審計客戶重要性與盈餘管理:以五大事務所組別為觀察標的, 會計評論,38期:頁59-80。
李建然與林秀鳳,2013,大型會計師事務所之審計品質真的比非大型會計師事務所好嗎?從抑制盈餘管理的角度探討一控制自我選擇偏誤的重要性,中華會計學刊,9卷(1期):頁77-110。
吳清在與曾玉琦,2008,會計師事務所合併對審計獨立性之影響,會計評論,47期: 頁 29-60。
吳淑敏,2002,取消審計公費下限之研究,元智大學管理研究所未出版碩士論文。

Cited by


張謙恆(2020)。供應鏈會計師與裁決性應計數會計評論(70),43-95。https://doi.org/10.6552/JOAR.202001_(70).0002

Read-around