Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Audit market structure, fees and choice in a pe...
View graph of relations

Audit market structure, fees and choice in a period of structural change: evidence from the UK – 1998–2003

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Audit market structure, fees and choice in a period of structural change: evidence from the UK – 1998–2003. / Abidin, Shamharir; Beattie, Vivien; Goodacre, Alan.
In: British Accounting Review, Vol. 42, No. 3, 09.2010, p. 187-206.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Abidin S, Beattie V, Goodacre A. Audit market structure, fees and choice in a period of structural change: evidence from the UK – 1998–2003. British Accounting Review. 2010 Sept;42(3):187-206. doi: 10.1016/j.bar.2010.04.002

Author

Abidin, Shamharir ; Beattie, Vivien ; Goodacre, Alan. / Audit market structure, fees and choice in a period of structural change : evidence from the UK – 1998–2003. In: British Accounting Review. 2010 ; Vol. 42, No. 3. pp. 187-206.

Bibtex

@article{ef27f3115f3f44348d4ed128275ade0f,
title = "Audit market structure, fees and choice in a period of structural change: evidence from the UK – 1998–2003",
abstract = "This paper presents evidence on audit market concentration and auditor fee levels in the UK market in the crucial period of structural change following the PricewaterhouseCoopers{\textquoteright} (PwC) merger and encompassing Andersen{\textquoteright}s demise (1998–2003). Given the current interest in auditor choice, analysis is also undertaken at the individual audit firm level and by industry sector. There is evidence of significant upward pressure on audit fees since 2001 but only for smaller auditees. Audit fee income for top tier auditors (Big 5/4) did not change significantly while the number of auditees fell significantly, consistent with a move towards larger, less risky, clients. A decomposition analysis of the aggregate Big 5/4 concentration ratio changes over the period identifies the impact of four distinct consumer-based reasons for change: leavers; net joiners; non-par auditor switches; and (only for the audit fees measure) audit fee changes. Andersen{\textquoteright}s demise markedly reduced the level of inequality among the top tier firms but PwC retained its position as a {\textquoteleft}dominant firm{\textquoteright}. On switching to the new auditor, former Andersen clients experienced an initial audit fee rise broadly in line with inflation, with no evidence of fee premia or discounting. They also reported significantly lower NAS fees, consistent with audit firms and auditees responding to public concerns about perceptions of auditor independence. There is no general evidence of knowledge spillover effects or cross-subsidisation of the audit fee by NAS. The combined findings provide no evidence to indicate that recent structural changes have resulted in anticompetitive pricing; the key concerns remain the lack of audit firm choice and issues concerning the governance and accountability of audit firms",
keywords = "Arthur Andersen, Audit market, Audit fees , Concentration , Big 4 , Industry specialism , Competition , Low-balling",
author = "Shamharir Abidin and Vivien Beattie and Alan Goodacre",
year = "2010",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1016/j.bar.2010.04.002",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "187--206",
journal = "British Accounting Review",
issn = "0890-8389",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Audit market structure, fees and choice in a period of structural change

T2 - evidence from the UK – 1998–2003

AU - Abidin, Shamharir

AU - Beattie, Vivien

AU - Goodacre, Alan

PY - 2010/9

Y1 - 2010/9

N2 - This paper presents evidence on audit market concentration and auditor fee levels in the UK market in the crucial period of structural change following the PricewaterhouseCoopers’ (PwC) merger and encompassing Andersen’s demise (1998–2003). Given the current interest in auditor choice, analysis is also undertaken at the individual audit firm level and by industry sector. There is evidence of significant upward pressure on audit fees since 2001 but only for smaller auditees. Audit fee income for top tier auditors (Big 5/4) did not change significantly while the number of auditees fell significantly, consistent with a move towards larger, less risky, clients. A decomposition analysis of the aggregate Big 5/4 concentration ratio changes over the period identifies the impact of four distinct consumer-based reasons for change: leavers; net joiners; non-par auditor switches; and (only for the audit fees measure) audit fee changes. Andersen’s demise markedly reduced the level of inequality among the top tier firms but PwC retained its position as a ‘dominant firm’. On switching to the new auditor, former Andersen clients experienced an initial audit fee rise broadly in line with inflation, with no evidence of fee premia or discounting. They also reported significantly lower NAS fees, consistent with audit firms and auditees responding to public concerns about perceptions of auditor independence. There is no general evidence of knowledge spillover effects or cross-subsidisation of the audit fee by NAS. The combined findings provide no evidence to indicate that recent structural changes have resulted in anticompetitive pricing; the key concerns remain the lack of audit firm choice and issues concerning the governance and accountability of audit firms

AB - This paper presents evidence on audit market concentration and auditor fee levels in the UK market in the crucial period of structural change following the PricewaterhouseCoopers’ (PwC) merger and encompassing Andersen’s demise (1998–2003). Given the current interest in auditor choice, analysis is also undertaken at the individual audit firm level and by industry sector. There is evidence of significant upward pressure on audit fees since 2001 but only for smaller auditees. Audit fee income for top tier auditors (Big 5/4) did not change significantly while the number of auditees fell significantly, consistent with a move towards larger, less risky, clients. A decomposition analysis of the aggregate Big 5/4 concentration ratio changes over the period identifies the impact of four distinct consumer-based reasons for change: leavers; net joiners; non-par auditor switches; and (only for the audit fees measure) audit fee changes. Andersen’s demise markedly reduced the level of inequality among the top tier firms but PwC retained its position as a ‘dominant firm’. On switching to the new auditor, former Andersen clients experienced an initial audit fee rise broadly in line with inflation, with no evidence of fee premia or discounting. They also reported significantly lower NAS fees, consistent with audit firms and auditees responding to public concerns about perceptions of auditor independence. There is no general evidence of knowledge spillover effects or cross-subsidisation of the audit fee by NAS. The combined findings provide no evidence to indicate that recent structural changes have resulted in anticompetitive pricing; the key concerns remain the lack of audit firm choice and issues concerning the governance and accountability of audit firms

KW - Arthur Andersen

KW - Audit market

KW - Audit fees

KW - Concentration

KW - Big 4

KW - Industry specialism

KW - Competition

KW - Low-balling

U2 - 10.1016/j.bar.2010.04.002

DO - 10.1016/j.bar.2010.04.002

M3 - Journal article

VL - 42

SP - 187

EP - 206

JO - British Accounting Review

JF - British Accounting Review

SN - 0890-8389

IS - 3

ER -