Audit Fee

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0268-6902.htm Past control risk and current audit fees

Past control risk

Thomas G. Calderon, Li Wang and Thomas Klenotic
George W. Daverio School of Accountancy, The University of Akron,
Akron, Ohio, USA

693

Abstract
Purpose – The authors posit that audit fees are driven by historical risk factors and risk encountered in the current period. The purpose of this paper is to focus on historical risk by examining the incremental effect of material weakness in internal control (MW) identified in prior periods on current audit fees, after current risk factors are controlled for.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper uses multiple regression as the main research method, where the authors regress current audit fees on MW in prior periods, current MW, and a vector of other contemporaneous variables as proxies for current risk factors.
Findings – The authors find that past MW incrementally affects current audit fees beyond MW and other risk factors identified in the current period. The effect of past MW on audit fees generally last at least for three years. In addition, companies with persistent past MW incurred substantially higher audit fees. The paper also finds that past MW continues to be positively and significantly associated with current audit fees even after the MW is remediated and there are no subsequent reports of MW.
Moreover, the number of MW dominates existence of MW in explaining audit fees in the current and the previous year.
Research limitations/implications – This study does not attempt to distinguish between fee adjustments that are attributable to audit effort and adjustments that are attributable to risk premiums. Nonetheless, it is clear that organizations can expect to incur significant incremental costs over multiple years whenever they fail to maintain effective internal control systems.
Originality/value – The findings of

References: AICPA (1983), Audit Risk and Materiality in Conducting an Audit. Statement on Auditing Standards No AICPA (1996), Statement on Auditing Standards No. 78: Consideration of Internal Control in a Financial Statement Audit: An Amendment to SAS-55, American Institute of Certified Ashbaugh-Skaife, H., Collins, D., Kinney, W. and LaFond, R. (2007), “The effect of internal control deficiencies on firm risk and cost of equity capital”, working paper, University of Ashbaugh-Skaife, H., Collins, D., Kinney, W. and LaFond, R. (2008), “The effect of SOX internal control deficiencies and their remediation on accrual quality”, The Accounting Review, Bedard, J. (1989), “An archival survey of audit program planning”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol Bedard, J. and Johnstone, K. (2006), “A longitudinal comparison of auditors’ response to client risk in the Sarbanes-Oxley era”, working paper, Bentley College, Waltham, MA. Bedard, J., Hoitash, U. and Hoitash, R. (2008), “Audit pricing and internal control disclosures among non-accelerated filers”, Research in Accounting Regulation, Vol Bell, T.B., Landsman, W. and Shackelford, D.A. (2001), “Auditors’ perceived business risk and audit fees: analysis and evidence”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol Beneish, M.D., Billings, M.B. and Hodder, L.D. (2007), “Internal control weaknesses and information uncertainty”, working paper, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN. Doyle, J., Ge, W. and McVay, S. (2007), “Accruals quality and internal control over financial reporting”, The Accounting Review, Vol Felix, W., Gramling, A. and Maletta, M. (2001), “The contribution of internal audit as a determinant of external audit fees and factors influencing this contribution”, Journal of Hackenbrack, K. and Knechel, W.R. (1997), “Resource allocation decisions in audit engagements”, Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol Hogan, C. and Wilkins, M. (2008), “Evidence on the audit risk model: do auditors increase audit fees in the presence of internal control deficiencies”, Contemporary Accounting Research, Hoitash, R., Hoitash, U. and Bedard, J. (2008), “Internal control quality and audit pricing under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol Huang, H.-W., Raghunadan, K. and Rama, D. (2009), “Audit fees for intial audit engagements before and after SOX”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol Krishnan, J., Rama, D. and Zhang, Y. (2008), “Costs to comply with SOX section 404”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol Mock, T.J. and Wright, A. (1993), “An exploratory study of auditors’ evidential planning judgments”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol Mock, T.J. and Wright, A. (1999), “Are audit program plans risk adjusted?”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol O’Keefe, T.B., Simunic, D.A. and Stein, M.T. (1994), “The production of audit services: evidence from a major public accounting firm”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol PCAOB (2004), An Audit of Internal Control over Financial Reporting Performed in Conjunction with an Audit of Financial Statements PCAOB (2008), An Audit of Internal Control over Financial Reporting that is Integrated with an Audit of Financial Statements PCAOB (2010a), Audit Evidence. Auditing Standard No. 15, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Washington, DC. PCAOB (2010b), Audit Planning. Auditing Standard 9, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Washington, DC. PCAOB (2010c), Audit Risk. Auditing Standard No. 8, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Washington, DC. PCAOB (2010d), Consideration of Materiality in Planning and Performing an Audit Auditing Standard No PCAOB (2010e), Evaluating Audit Results. Auditing Standard No. 14, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Washington, DC. PCAOB (2010f), Identifying and Assessing Risks of Material Misstatement. Auditing Standard No PCAOB (2010g), Supervision of the Audit Engagement. Auditing Standard No. 10, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Washington, DC. PCAOB (2010h), The Auditor’s Responses to the Risks of Material Misstatement. Auditing Standard No Raghunadan, K. and Rama, D. (2006), “SOX section 404 material weakness disclosures and audit fees”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol Simunic, D. (1980), “The pricing of audit services: theory and evidence”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol Stanley, J.D. and Todd DeZoort, F. (2007), “Audit firm tenure and financial restatements: an analysis of industry specialization and fee effects”, Journal of Accounting & Public Whisenant, S., Sankaragumswamy, S. and Raghunandan, K. (2003), “Evidence on the joint determination of audit and non-audit fees”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol Further reading AICPA (1989), Statement on Auditing Standards No AICPA (1997), Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. Statement on Auditing Standards No AICPA (2002), Audit Documentation. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 96, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, New York, NY.