Review of Accounting Studies

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 210–241 | Cite as

Fair value and audit fees

  • Igor Goncharov
  • Edward J. Riedl
  • Thorsten Sellhorn
Article

Abstract

This paper investigates the effect of fair value reporting and its attributes on audit fees. We use as our primary sample the European real estate industry around mandatory IFRS adoption (under which reporting of property fair values becomes compulsory), due to its unique operating and reporting characteristics. We document lower audit fees for firms reporting property assets at fair value relative to those employing depreciated cost—a difference that appears driven, in part, by impairment tests that occur only under depreciated cost. We further find that audit fees are decreasing in firms’ exposure to fair value and increasing both in the complexity of the fair value estimation and for recognition (versus only disclosure) of fair values. We corroborate our findings in two alternative settings: contrasting UK and US real estate firms and using UK investment trusts. Overall, the results suggest that fair values can lead to lower monitoring costs; however, any reductions in audit fees will vary with salient characteristics of the fair value reporting, including the difficulty to measure and the treatment within the financial statements.

Keywords

Fair value Audit fees Audit pricing Real estate industry IFRS 

JEL Classification

M41 M42 L85 

References

  1. André, P., Broye, G., Pong, C., & Schatt, A. (2011). Audit fees, big four premium and institutional settings: the devil is in the details! Working paper, ESSEC Business School, Paris.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, R., Jayaraman, S., & Shivakumar, L. (2012). Mark-to-market accounting and information asymmetry in banks. Working paper, University of Chicago, Washington University, and London Business School.Google Scholar
  3. Barth, M. E. (1994). Fair value accounting: Evidence from investment securities and the market valuation of banks. The Accounting Review, 69, 1–25.Google Scholar
  4. Barth, M. E., Landsman, W. R., & Wahlen, J. M. (1995). Fair value accounting: Effects on banks’ earnings volatility, regulatory capital, and value of contractual cash flows. Journal of Banking & Finance, 19, 577–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benston, G. J. (2006). Fair-value accounting: A cautionary tale from Enron. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 25, 465–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, S., Hillegeist, S. A., & Lo, K. (2005). Management forecasts and litigation risk. Working paper, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  7. Chaney, P. K., Jeter, D. C., & Shivakumar, L. (2004). Self-selection of auditors and audit pricing in private firms. The Accounting Review, 79, 51–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cotter, J., & Richardson, S. (2002). Reliability of asset revaluations: The impact of appraiser independence. Review of Accounting Studies, 7, 435–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Djankov, S., La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2008). The law and economics of self-dealing. Journal of Financial Economics, 88, 430–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Easton, P. D., Eddey, P. H., & Harris, T. S. (1993). An investigation of revaluations of tangible longlived assets. Journal of Accounting Research, 31, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eccher, E. A., Ramesh, K., & Thiagarajan, S. R. (1996). Fair value disclosures by bank holding companies. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 22, 79–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Financial Accounting Standards Board. (2006). Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157, Fair value measurements. FASB, Stamford, CT.Google Scholar
  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, 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Francis, J. R., & Wang, D. (2008). The joint effect of investor protection and big 4 audits on earnings quality around the world. Contemporary Accounting Research, 25, 157–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gow, I. D., Ormazabal, G., & Taylor, D. J. (2010). Correcting for cross-sectional and time-series dependence in accounting research. The Accounting Review, 85, 483–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hackenbrack, K., & Knechel, W. R. (1997). Resource allocation decisions in audit engagements. Contemporary Accounting Research, 14, 481–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hay, D. C., Knechel, W. R., & Wong, N. (2006). Audit fees: A meta-analysis of the effect of supply and demand attributes. Contemporary Accounting Research, 23, 141–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hogan, C. E., & Jeter, D. C. (1998). Industry specialization by auditors. Working paper, Owen Graduate School of Management.Google Scholar
  19. International Accounting Standards Board. (1999). International Accounting Standard 39, financial instruments: Recognition and measurement. London, UK: IASB.Google Scholar
  20. International Accounting Standards Board. (2000). International Accounting Standard 40, investment property. London, UK: IASB.Google Scholar
  21. International Accounting Standards Board. (2011). IFRS 13: Fair value measurement. London, UK: IASB.Google Scholar
  22. International Federation of Accountants. (2010). Handbook of international quality control, auditing, review, other assurance, and related services pronouncements (part I). New York, NY: IFAC.Google Scholar
  23. Ireland, J. C., & Lennox, C. S. (2002). The large audit firm fee premium: a case of selectivity bias? Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 17, 73–91.Google Scholar
  24. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kibel, P., & Kozyr, E. (2007). Key ratios for rating REITs and other commercial property firms. New York: Moody’s Investors Service.Google Scholar
  26. Kim, J.-B., Simunic, D. A., Stein, M. T., & Yi, C. H. (2011). Voluntary audits and the cost of debt capital for privately held firms: Korean evidence. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28, 585–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2006). What works in securities laws? Journal of Finance, 61, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liang, L., & Riedl, E. J. (2011). The effect of fair value versus historical cost reporting model on analyst forecast accuracy. Working paper, Syracuse University and Boston University.Google Scholar
  29. Libby, R., Nelson, M. W., & Hunton, J. E. (2006). Recognition v. disclosure, auditor tolerance for misstatement, and the reliability of stock-compensation and lease information. Journal of Accounting Research, 44, 533–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Muller, K. A., & Riedl, E. J. (2002). External monitoring of property appraisal estimates and information asymmetry. Journal of Accounting Research, 40, 865–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Muller, K. A., Riedl, E. J., & Sellhorn, T. (2011). Mandatory fair value accounting and information asymmetry: Evidence from the European real estate industry. Management Science, 57, 1138–1153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Neter, J., Wassermann, W., & Kutner, M. H. (1985). Applied linear statistical models. Homewood, IL: Irwin.Google Scholar
  33. Petersen, M. A. (2009). Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Review of Financial Studies, 22, 435–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Quagli, A., & Avallone, F. (2010). Fair value or cost model? Drivers of choice for IAS 40 in the real estate industry. European Accounting Review, 19, 461–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ramanna, K., & Watts, R. L. (2010). Evidence on the use of unverifiable estimates in required goodwill impairment. Working paper, MIT and Harvard Business School.Google Scholar
  36. Riedl, E. J., & Serafeim, G. (2011). Information risk and fair values: An examination of equity betas. Journal of Accounting Research, 49, 1083–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Riedl, E. J., & Srinivasan, S. (2010). Signaling firm performance through financial statement presentation: An analysis using special items. Contemporary Accounting Research, 27, 289–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Seetharaman, A., Gul, F. A., & Lynn, S. G. (2002). Litigation risk and audit fees: Evidence from UK firms cross-listed on US markets. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 33, 91–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shu, S. Z. (2000). Auditor resignations: Clientele effects and legal liability. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 29, 173–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Simunic, D. A. (1980). The pricing of audit services: Theory and evidence. Journal of Accounting Research, 18, 161–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Srinidhi, B. N., & Gul, F. A. (2006). The differential effects of auditors’ nonaudit and audit fees on accrual quality. Contemporary Accounting Research, 24, 595–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stice, J. D. (1991). Using financial and market information to identify pre-engagement factors associated with lawsuits against auditors. The Accounting Review, 66, 516–533.Google Scholar
  43. Watts, R. L. (2006). What has the invisible hand achieved? Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  44. Watts, R. L., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1986). Positive accounting theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  45. Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach (4th ed.). Mason: South-Western.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Igor Goncharov
    • 1
  • Edward J. Riedl
    • 2
  • Thorsten Sellhorn
    • 1
  1. 1.WHU – Otto Beisheim School of ManagementVallendarGermany
  2. 2.Boston UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations