Cristina Boţa-Avram
Adrian Groşanu
Paula Ramona Răchişan
Raluca Oana Ivan
Babeş-Bolyai University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Department of Accounting and Audit, Romania
Babeş-Bolyai University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Department of Accounting and Audit, Romania
Babeş-Bolyai University, Faculty of Business, Department of Business, Romania
University of Alba Iulia, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Economics and Business Administration, Romania

2nd International Scientific Conference on Recent Advances in Information Technology, Tourism, Economics, Management and Agriculture – ITEMA 2018 – Graz, Austria, November 8, 2018, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS published by the Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans, Belgrade, Serbia; ISBN 978-86-80194-13-4


In the field of audit pricing, there are a lot of previous research studies, but a significant part of them has focused on the US, New Zeeland and Australia markets and too less have been focused on the emerging markets. This study aims to elaborate an empirical analysis of various determinant factors on audit fees for an emerging market such as Romania. The purpose of this paper is to contribute at identifying some of the most relevant determinants of audit pricing, in the case of Romanian 55 public-interest entities (PIEs) listed at Bucharest Stock Exchange, for 2009-2011 period. In order to test the working hypotheses we have employed panel data methods. Two models were finally used in the analysis that proved to be the most consistent. The difference between the two models consists in the fact that shareholders equity is used once in its natural form (as scale variable) and once as a dummy variable, assessing only if the company has positive or negative shareholders equity. The use of both forms in the same models would have caused serious multicollinearity problems.  The outcomes of panel data analysis highlights that, regardless of the model specified, the same three variables are highly significant in both cases. The findings revealed that audit pricing for Romanian public-interest entities are  significantly influenced by the annual turnover of the company, the number of employees and the importance of the auditor (whether it is a Big4 auditor or not).

Key words
audit fee, Big 4 auditor, auditees’ size, public-interest entities, panel data analysis.

[1] Krishnan, G.V., Zhang, Y. (2014) Is there a relation between audit fee cuts during the global financial crisis and banks’ financial reporting quality, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 33(3), 279-300,

[2]   Sikka, P. (2009). Financial crisis and the silence of the auditors, Accounting, Organizations and Societies, 34(6-7), 868–873, 

[3]   Knechel, W. R., Krishnan G.V., Pevzner, M., Shefchik L.B. and Velury U. (2013). Audit quality: Insights from the academic literature. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(sp1), 385-421,  

[4]   Krauss P., Pronobis P., Zulch H. (2015), Abnormal audit fees and audit quality: initial evidence from the German audit market, Journal of Business Economics, 85(1), 45-84, 

[5]   Siddiqui, J., Zaman, M., Khan A. (2013). Do Big-Four affiliates earn audit fee premiums in emerging markets? Advances in Accounting, incorporating Advances in International Accounting, 29(2), 332-342, 

[6]   Al-Ajmi, J. (2009). Audit firm, corporate governance and audit quality: Evidence from Bahrain. Advances in Accounting, incorporating Advances in International Accounting, 25(1), 64-74,

[7]   Karim Waresul, A.K.M. and Moizer, P. (1996). Determinants of audit fees in Bangladesh. The International Journal of Accounting, 31 (4), 497-509, 

[8]   Hay D. C., Knechel W. R., Wong N., (2006). Audit fees: a meta-analysis of the effects of supply and demand attributes, Contemporary Accounting Research Journal, 1(23), 141-191, 

[9]   European Commission – EU (2010) Green paper. Audit policy: Lessons from the crises, accessible on-line at:

[10] Financial Executives Research Foundation – FERF (2016) Audit Fee Report, accessible on-line at

[11] De Villiers C., Hay, D., Zhang, Z.J., (2013). Audit fee stickiness, Managerial Auditing Journal, 29(1), 2 – 26,

[12] Taylor, M. E., and Baker, R. L. (1981). An analysis of the external audit fee. Accounting and Business Research, 12, 55-60, 

[13] Francis, J. R. (1984). The effect of audit firm size on audit prices: A study of the Australian market. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 6 (2), 133-151, 

[14] Low, L.C., Tan, P.H.N. and Koh, H.C. (1990). The determinants of audit fees: an analysis in the Singapore context. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 17 (2), 285-295, 

[15] Anderson, T., Zeghal, D. (1994). The pricing of audit services: Further evidence from the Canadian market. Accounting and Business Research, 24(95), 195-207,

[16] Gregory, A. and Collier, P. (1996). Audit fees and auditor change. An investigation of the persistence of fee reduction by type of change. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 23(1), 13–28, 

[17] Adams, M., Sherris, M. and Hossain, M. (1997). The determinants of external audit costs in the New Zealand life insurance industry. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 8 (1), 69-86, 

[18] Langendijk, H. (1997). The market for audit services in the Netherlands. European Accounting Review, 6 (2), 253-264, 

[19] Naser, K. and Nuseibeh, R. (2008). Determinants of audit fees: empirical evidence from an emerging economy. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 17 (3), 239-254, 

[20] Ellis, Y. and Booker, Q. L. (2011). Audit fee determinants in the nonprofit sector: A study of community action agencies, Columbia State University: Faculty Publications.

[21] Hassan, M.Y. and Naser, K. (2013). Determinants of Audit Fees: Evidence from an emerging economy. International Business Research, 6 (8), 13-25, 

[22] Eshleman, J.D., Guo, P. (2014) Abnormal Audit Fees and Audit Quality: The Importance of Considering Managerial Incentives in Tests of Earnings Management. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 33(1), 117-138, 

[23] Fleischer, R., Goettsche, M. (2012). Size effects and audit pricing: Evidence from Germany. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 21(2), 156-168, 

[24] Custodio, C., Metzger, D., (2014). Financial expert CEOs: CEO׳s work experience and firm’s financial policies, Journal of Financial Economics, 114(1), 125-154, 

[25] Kalelkar, R., S. Khan. (2016). CEO Financial Background and Audit Pricing. Accounting Horizons 30 (3): 325-339, 

[26] Joshi, P. and Al-Bastaki, H. (2000). Determinants of audit fees: evidence from the companies listed in Bahrain. International journal of auditing, 4(2), 129-138, 

[27] Jha, A., Chen, Y. (2015). Audit Fees and Social Capital. Accounting Review 90 (2), 611-639, 

[28] Ghoul, S. E., Guedhami, O. Pittman, J. A., Rizeanu, S. (2016). Cross-Country Evidence on the Importance of Auditor Choice to Corporate Debt Maturity. Contemporary Accounting Research 33 (2), 718–751, 

[29] Gonthier-Besacier, N. and Schatt, A. (2007). Determinants of audit fees for French quoted firms, Managerial Auditing Journal, 22(2), 139-160, 

[30] Hsu, W-Y, Troy, C. And Huang, Y. (2015). The determinants of auditor choice and audit pricing among property-liability insurers. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 34, 95-124, 

[31] Ettredge, M., Fuerherm, E.E. and Li C. (2014). Fee pressure and audit quality. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39, 247-263, 

[32] DeAngelo, L. (1981). Auditor size and auditor quality, Journal of Accounting and Economics. 3, 183–199, 

[33] Gul, F. A. (1999). Audit prices, product differentiation and economic equilibrium. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 18(1), 90–100, 

[34] Bigus, J. and Zimmermann, R. (2008) Non-Audit Fees, Market Leaders and Concentration in the German Audit Market: A Descriptive Analysis. International Journal of Auditing, 12, 159-179,

[35] Wang, K., Sewon, O., and Zahid, I. (2009). Audit pricing and auditor industry specialization in an emerging market: Evidence from China. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 18(1), 60-72,

[36] Carson, E., R. Simnett, B. S. Soo, Wright, A. M., (2012). Changes in Audit Market Competition and the Big N Premium. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory. 31(3), 47-73,

[37] Krishnan J., & Krishnan J. (1996). The role of economic trade-offs in the audit opinion decision: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 11(4), 565-586,×9601100403 

[38] Hope, O.K and Langli, J.C (2010) Auditor Independence in a Private Firm and Low Litigation Risk Setting. The Accounting Review: March 2010, 85 (2), 573-605, 

[39] Blay, A. D., Geiger, M. A., (2013). Auditor Fees and Auditor Independence: Evidence from Going Concern Reporting Decisions. Contemporary Accounting Research 30(2), 579-606,

[40] Reynolds, J. K., & Francis, J. R. (2001). Does size matter? The influence of large clients on office- level auditor reporting decisions. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 30(3), 375-400, 

[41] Francis, J. R., Yu, M. D., (2009) Big 4 Office Size and Audit Quality. The Accounting Review, 84 (5), 1521-1552, 

[42] Chi, W., Douthett, E. B., Jr., Lisic, L. L. (2012). Client importance and audit partner independence. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 31, 320-336, 

[43] Foster, P. And Shastri, T. (2016). Determinants of going concern opinions and audit fees for development stage enterprises. Advance in Accounting, Incorporating Advances in International Accounting, 33, 68-84, 

[44] Chen, P.F., He, S., Ma, Z. and Stice D. (2016). The information role of audit opinions in debt contracting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 61 (1), 121-144, 

[45] European Commission – EC (2014), Directive 2014/56/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 amending Directive 2006/43/EC on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts, accessible on-line at

[46]     European Commission – EC (2006),  Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts, amending Council Directives 78/ 660/EEC and 83/349/EEC and repealing Council Directive 84/253/EEC, accessible on-line at

Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans – UdEkoM Balkan
179 Ustanicka St, 11000 Belgrade, Republic of Serbia