Audit fees via an indirect payment channel and professional skepticism

Author:

Kim Sanghun,Kim Taewoo,Pae Sujin,Kim Sangphill

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to examine the merit of an indirect payment system for audit fees, a system where an intermediary collects fees from the auditee and then pays this audit fee to the auditor. Design/methodology/approach Big 4 auditors and professional analysts in South Korea participated in an experiment and survey to investigate whether the change in the payment channel (from direct to indirect) of audit fees positively impacts auditors’ decision-making. Findings The authors find evidence that the indirect payment of audit fees is positively associated with professional skepticism. Research limitations/implications This paper, by highlighting the potential for alternate auditor payment channels to improve the quality of auditor judgments, motivates future research in this area. Practical implications Qualified by the need for further research, the potential merit in an indirect payment system may have implications for audit regulators. Social implications An indirect payment channel has the potential to improve public perceptions of the audit function, thereby elevating society’s confidence in auditor opinions and improving the effectiveness and efficiency with which scarce resources are distributed within society. Originality/value This study is one of the first that looks into a systematic change in audit fee payment channel and how an indirect payment system of audit fees impacts professional skepticism.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Accounting,General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,General Business, Management and Accounting

Reference37 articles.

1. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) (1978), “Commission on Auditors’ Responsibilities (The Cohen Report)”, Report, conclusions and recommendations, AICPA, New York.

2. Optimal contracts with a utility maximizing auditor;Journal of Accounting Research,1987

3. Auditor fees and auditor independence: evidence from going concern reporting decisions;Contemporary Accounting Research,2013

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3