期刊文献+

Big4具有审计费用差异吗?——基于中国市场的初步证据 被引量:3

Do the Big 4 Accounting Firms Charge the Same Audit Fees?Audit Pricing Evidence from China
原文传递
导出
摘要 本文以我国2007~2018年A股上市公司为样本,从个体会计师事务所的角度分析国际"四大"会计师事务所(简称Big4)的审计费用溢价及其差异。研究发现,Big4在我国收取了显著的审计费用溢价,而毕马威(KPMG)的审计费用溢价最高。进一步检验发现,毕马威的高溢价来源于大客户资源优势,以及凭借审计少量大规模客户而形成的行业专长。研究结果表明,在我国审计市场上,Big4审计定价并不是同质的,而毕马威的溢价优势可以为我国内资会计师事务所做强做大提供有益借鉴。 Using a sample of A-share listed companies from 2007 to 2018,we examine the audit fee premia charged by the Big 4 international accounting firms in China.We find that KPMG consistently charge above-average audit fee premia relative to the other Big 4 firms.Additional analysis shows that KPMG’s audit fee premia can be attributed to its advantage in industry specialization,which KPMG acquires by focusing on a few large clients in the same industry.Based on the characteristics of the Big 4 firms and those of the audit market in China,this paper sheds new light on audit pricing differences for listed firms in China across the Big 4 accounting firms and highlights the improvements that domestic accounting firms in China can make to be better prepared to compete with the Big 4 firms.
作者 李青原 唐浩程 Qingyuan Li;Haocheng Tang(School of Economics and Management,Wuhan University Wuhan,Hubei,China 430072)
出处 《当代会计评论》 2020年第3期37-70,共34页 Contemporary Accounting Review
基金 国家社会科学基金重大项目“政府职能转变的制度红利研究”(18ZDA113)的资助
关键词 国际“四大” 审计费用 溢价差异 行业专长 audit fees premium Big 4 auditors customers’Types auditor industry specialization
  • 相关文献

参考文献27

共引文献1372

同被引文献23

引证文献3

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部