Search results

The various factors influencing audit fees are still unclear, which may undermine the possibility of attaining fair audit pricing. Against this concern, this study aims to investigate the relationship between the auditee’s corporate characteristics and audit fees. In addition, it reveals if accounting comparability, as a proxy for financial reporting quality, mediates such a relationship by bringing evidence from an emerging market.

This study depends on data from nonfinancial companies listed on the Egyptian stock exchange from 2016 to 2019. It adopts multiple regression models to test the impact of corporate characteristics and accounting comparability on audit fees and uses path analysis to test the indirect effect of the audit clients’ characteristics on audit fees through accounting comparability.

The authors found a significant positive (negative) effect of firm profitability on audit fees (accounting comparability). Further, accounting comparability has a significant negative effect on audit fees. The authors also found that accounting comparability partially mediates the significant relationship between profitability and audit fees. However, the authors found no significant association between leverage and audit fees. Finally, the authors found that accounting comparability does not mediate the relationship between leverage and audit fees.

This study’s findings can benefit audit practitioners in Egypt by showing the main factors affecting audit fees, especially audit clients’ attributes. The current findings also guide professional bodies responsible for issuing accounting and audit standards regarding the importance of financial reporting quality for audit pricing decisions.

This study contributes to the literature by examining the mediating effect of accounting comparability concerning the corporate characteristics-audit fees relationship in developing African countries such as Egypt. This study’s findings can benefit audit practitioners in Egypt by showing the main factors affecting audit fees, especially audit clients’ attributes. The current findings also guide professional bodies responsible for issuing accounting and audit standards regarding the importance of financial reporting quality for audit pricing decisions.

This study assesses the perception of academics and practitioners of ramifications that may have impacted audit evidence quality during COVID-19 in Egypt.

A questionnaire was collected and designed regarding the factors affecting the quality of audit evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic using a five-point Likert scale, and detailed descriptive statistics and regression analyses were conducted.

The study finds that there is no significant association between social distancing (SD), changing in the economic environment (CEE), time constraint (TC) and stress on audit personnel (SAP) as repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic with the quality of audit evidence (QAE). The disruption in operational results (DOR), changes in the internal control (CIC) and the stress on client personnel (SCP) significantly affect the quality of audit evidence. Moreover, there is a significant difference between Big and non-Big Four audit firms in terms of changes in economic conditions, internal controls, disruption of operational results and time-constraint variables. The latter has significantly affected the audit evidence quality for both academics and professionals.

Due to the implementation of SD and work-from-home policies, audit firms are highly recommended to invest more in digital programs and to be more adaptable to work-from-home, which policy and enhances the effectiveness and flexibility of communication between auditors and their clients.

This paper is one of the foremost papers that provides empirical evidence for the antecedents or variables that may affect audit quality evidence due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The objective of this study is to present novel evidence regarding the impact of the Key Audit Matters (KAM) disclosure requirements of International Standard on Auditing – 701 (ISA) on the auditing profession concerning reimbursement costs in underdeveloped nations, Jordan.

A year-industry fixed-effects OLS regression model has been employed to test the developed hypotheses. The regression analysis of the period from 2005 to 2022 tests the presence of KAM disclosures in Jordanian finance business, while the regression analysis of the period from 2017 to 2022 tests the actual impact of KAM disclosure following the first implementation of ISA-701 in Jordan.

The analysis has verified that the presence and the proportions of KAM disclosures outlined in ISA-701 resulted to significant auditing compensatory expenses. The findings confirmed that KAM disclosures increase auditor workload, responsibility, complexity, and risk, consequently resulting in higher reimbursement expenses.

The findings of this study have the potential to serve as a basis for the development of a novel financial regulatory legislation or a regulated framework for disclosing significant occurrences. This paper provides new empirical evidence to standard-setters and policymakers regarding the requirement of ISA-701 for external auditors to disclose KAM. This study is advantageous for stakeholders, regulatory agencies, standard-setters, and audit report readers who are interested in KAM disclosures and the implementation of ISA-701. The results could inspire the academic community to obtain fresh data from emerging markets to ascertain the impact of KAM disclosure on audit practices.

To the author's knowledge, this study is one of the few empirical investigations into the impact of current additional disclosure rules on the audit profession concerning reimbursement costs. It provides preliminary evidence linking ISA regulations to corporate productivity in Jordan, a developing nation. Little is known about how developing nation auditors react to KAM disclosures' role in stakeholder protection and how their expanded reporting obligations influence them. This study examines audit behaviour in a weak legal setting, unlike most prior studies, which have been done in highly regulated systems.

This study examines the moderating role of female directors on the relationship between the firms’ characteristics and tax avoidance in an emerging economy.

This study employs the second-generation unit root test and the generalised method of moments (GMM) techniques. The Kao residual cointegration test corroborates a long-run cointegration among variables.

Female directors demonstrate mixed and unusual findings. No significant impact of female directors on tax avoidance is found. In addition, the presence of female directors does not show any negative or significant moderating impacts on the relationship between leverage, firm age, board size and tax avoidance. However, having more female directors can negatively and significantly moderate the relationship between more profitable firms, larger firms and tax avoidance. These findings show that the board of directors could use the presence of female directors to maximise their opportunistic behaviour, such as to avoid tax.

Research limitations – The study is limited by considering only 62 listed firms. The scope could be extended to include non-listed firms.

Research implications – There is increasing pressure for female directors on boards from diverse stakeholders, such as the European Commission, national governments, politicians, employer lobby groups, shareholders, and Fortune and Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) rankings. This study provides input to decision-makers putting gender quota laws into practice. Our findings can help policy-makers adopt regulatory reforms to control tax avoidance practices and enhance organisational legitimacy. Policymakers can change their policy to include female directors up to the threshold suggested by the critical mass theory.

This is the first attempt in Bangladesh to explore the role of female directors in the relationship between the firms' characteristics and tax avoidance. The current study has significant ramifications for bringing gender diversity into practice as a component of good corporate governance.