انحصار بازار حسابرسی و کیفیت سود: شواهدی از انحصار دولتی و انحصار خصوصی

انحصار بازار حسابرسی و کیفیت سود: شواهدی از انحصار دولتی و انحصار خصوصی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

دانشگاه بین الملی امام رضا، استادیار، دکترای حسابداری

چکیده

بر اساس نظریه های علم اقتصاد، انحصار یا رقابت در بازار ارتباط تنگاتنگی با کیفیت محصول دارد. هدف از انجام این مطالعه بررسی رابطه انحصار بازار حسابرسی و کیفیت سود به عنوان محصول نظام گزارشگری مالی می‌باشد. از آنجاکه پیرامون نحوه تأثیر مثبت و منفی انحصار بازار حسابرسی بر کیفیت سود دو تحلیل رقیب وجود دارد پژوهش حاضر به مطالعه تجربی تأثیر انحصار بازار حسابرسی بر سه معیار کیفیت سود شامل "اقلام تعهدی اختیاری، کیفیت اقلام تعهدی و محافظه‌کاری" می‌پردازد. همچنین این پژوهش نقش انحصار دولتی و انحصار خصوصی را بر رابطه یادشده بررسی می‌کند. با بهره‌گیری از رگرسیون چند متغیره و بررسی90 شرکت در بازه زمانی 1389 تا 1394، نتایج نشان می‌دهد با افزایش انحصار، میزان اقلام تعهدی اختیاری کاهش و بالتبع مدیریت سود کاهش می‌یابد. همچنین با افزایش میزان انحصار، کیفیت اقلام تعهدی افزایش می‌یابد. البته شواهدی از وجود رابطه معنادار میان انحصار و محافظه کاری مشاهده نمی‌شود. بعلاوه، شواهد حاکی از آن است که نوع انحصار (دولتی یا خصوصی) نمی‌تواند تأثیر معنی‌داری بر رابطه بین انحصار بازار و اقلام تعهدی اختیاری و نیز رابطه بین انحصار بازار و کیفیت اقلام تعهدی داشته ‌باشد. درحالی‌که انحصار دولتی بطور معنی‌داری موجب کاهش محافظه کاری می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Audit Market Concentration and Earnings Quality: Evidence from Governmental Concentration and Private Concentration

نویسنده [English]

  • ameneh bazrafshan
چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between audit market concentration and earnings quality. Because of the effects of positive and negative audit market concentration on earnings quality, this research studies the impact of audit market concentration on three criteria quality of earnings including: discretionary accruals, accruals quality and conservatism. This study examines the role of governmental concentration and private concentration on the present relationship. Using multiple linear regression analysis and using a sample of 90 firms for a period of 2011 to 2016, the results show that as concentration increases, the amount of discretionary accruals reduces, consequently earnings management reduces. Moreover, as concentration, accruals quality increases. Of course, there is not a significant relationship between concentration and conservatism. In addition, evidence suggests that type of concentration (governmental concentration or private concentration) has not a significant impact on the relationship between the audit market concentration and discretionary accruals as well as the relationship between audit market concentration and accrual quality. While the state concentration occurs significantly, reduce conservatism.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Audit Market Concentration
  • Earnings Quality
  • Governmental Concentration
  • Private Concentration
  1. اورادی، جواد؛ نصیرزاده، فرزانه و حصارزاده، رضا. (1395).  "تاثیر رقابت در بازار حسابرسی بر کیفیت حسابرسی: نقش اندازه بازار حسابرسی"، همایش ملی حسابرسی و نظارت مالی ایران.
  2. سروش یار، افسانه؛  بنی مهد، بهمن؛ وکیلی فرد، حمیدرضا و امیری، هادی. (1393)." تأثیر رقابت در بازار حسابرسی بر استقلال حسابرس و کیفیت صورت های مالی شرکت های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران"، فصلنامه بورس اوراق بهادار، 28 ( 7)، صص 77-94.
    1. Asthana, S. C., and Boone. J. P. (2012). “Abnormal audit fee and audit quality”. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 31 (3), 1-22.
    2. Ball, R., and L. Shivakumar. (2005). The role of accruals in asymmetrically timely gain and loss recognition. Journal of Accounting Research, 44, No. 2, 207-242.
    3. Asthana, S., Rachana, K. and Raman, K. K. (2018). “Unintended Consequences of Big 4 Auditor Office-Level Industry Specialization”, International Journal of Accounting, Auditing, and Performance Evaluation. Vol. 14, Nos. 2/3, 254-289.
    4. Bell, T. B., Causholli, M. and Knechel, W. R. (2015). “Audit firm tenure, non-audit services and internal assessments of audit quality”, Journal of Accounting Research, 53(3), 461-509.
    5. Beattie,V., Goodacre, A., Fearnley, S. (2003). “And then there were four: A study of UK audit market concentration ‐ causes, consequences and the scope for market adjustment”, Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Vol. 11 (3), 250-265.
    6. Bertrand, J. (1883). "Book review of theorie mathematique de la richesse sociale and of recherches surles principles mathematiques de la theorie desrichesses", Journal de Savants, 67, 499–508.
    7. Boone J. P., I. K. Khurana, and Raman. K. K. (2012). “Audit market concentration and auditor tolerance for earnings management”. Contemporary Accounting Research, 29 (4), 1171-1203.

10. Bushman, R. M., Piotroski, J. D. (2006). “Financial reporting incentives for conservative accounting: The influence of legal and political institutions”. Journal of Accounting and Economics, Volume 42,(1–2), 107–148.

11. Cameran, M., Francis, J. R., Marra, A. and Pettinicchio, A. (2015). “Are there adverse consequences of mandatory auditor rotation? Evidence from the Italian experience”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 34(1), 1-24.

12. Choi, J. H., Kim, J.B., Lee, E. Y. and Sunwoo, H.Y. (2018). “Audit Market Concentration and Audit Fees: An International Investigation”, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2985877.

13. Clayton, M., B. Jorgansen, and K. Kavajecz. (2006). “On the presence and market-structure of exchanges around the world”. Journal of Financial Markets, 9, 27–48.

14. Craswell, A. Stokes, D. J. and Laughton, J. (2002). “Auditor independence and fee dependence”. Journal of Accounting and Economics. Vol  33, 253- 275.

15. Dechow, P. M., and I. D. Dichev. (2002). “The quality of accounting and earnings: The role of accrual estimation errors”. The Accounting Review, 77, 35-59.

16. Eshleman J. D. (2013). “The effect of audit market concentration on audit pricing and audit quality: the role of the size of the market”. PhD Dissertation. Louisiana State University.

17. Francis J. R., P. N. Michas, and S. E. Seavey. (2013). “Does audit market concentration harm the quality of audited earnings? Evidence from audit markets in 42 countries.” Contemporary Accounting Research, 30 (1), 325-355.

18. General Accounting Office. (2003). “Public accounting firms: Mandated study on consolidation and competition”. Washington, DC: GAO.

19. Government Accountability Office. (2008). “Audits of public companies: continued concentration in audit market for large public companies does not call for immediate action”. Washington, DC: GAO.

20. Huang T. H, chang H., chiou J. R. (2015). “Audit market concentration, audit fees, and audit quality: evidence from china”. AAA, 1-52

21. Kallapur S., S. Sankaraguruswamy, and Zang, Y. (2010). “Audit market concentration and audit quality”. Working paper, Indian School of Business, National University of Singapore, and Singapore Management University.

22. Kotharia, S. P., Leoneb, A. J.Charles E.  Wasley, C. H. (2005).  “Performance matched discretionary accrual measures”. Journal of Accounting and Economics. Vol. 39(1), 163–197.

23. Liuchuang, L. B., Gaoliang, T., and Guochang Z. (2017). “The Contagion Effect of Low-Quality Audits at the Level of Individual Auditors”. The Accounting Review, Vol. 92, No. 1, 137-163.

24. Martin, G. W., Thomas, W. B. and Diaz, J. (2017). “Financial Reporting Quality and Auditor Locality Contagion”. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2910537

25. Mas‐Colell, A. M. D. Whinston., and Green. J. R. (1995). Microeconomic Theory. Oxford University Press.

26. Newton, N. J., D. Wang, and Wilkins, M. S. (2013). “Does a Lack of Choice Lead to Lower Audit Quality? Evidence from Auditor Competition and Client Restatements”. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32 (3), 31-67.

27. Okaro S. C., Okafor, G. O. and Ofoegbu, G. N. (2018). "Mandating Joint Audits in Nigeria: Perspectives and Issues," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 8(3), 316-338.

28. Ohlsson, A., and Carlsson, K. (2018). “Audit market concentration and audit quality : A study of public-interest entities in Sweden between 2008-2016”. Independent thesis Advanced level., Jönköping University, Jönköping International Business School, JIBS, Business Administration.

29. Ramos, S.B. (2005). Competition and reforms on stock exchanges. In Stock exchanges, IPO’s and mutual funds. NewYork: Nova Science Publishers.

30. Ramos, S.B. (2009). “Competition and stock market development”. The European Journal of Finance. 15(2), 231-247.

31. Spence, A. (1975). “Monopoly, quality and regulation”. Bell Journal of Economics, 6, 407-414.

32. Sutton, J. (1991). Sunk costs and market structure, Cambridge: MIT Press.

33. United States Treasury. (2006). Remarks by Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson on the competitiveness of U.S. capital markets – Economic Club of New York, New York, NY.

34. United States Treasury. (2008). Advisory committee on the auditing profession: Final report.

35. Vives, X. (2000). Oligopoly Pricing. MIT press.