Title :
Audit Quality and Cost of Equity Capital: Evidence of Iran
Author : Zohreh Hajihan
Neda Sobhani
Year :
2012
INTRODUCTION
Today, transparency and quality of financial information, which are the base of the economical
decision-making of investors, creditors, and other users, are very crucial (Alavi
Tabari et al, 2009).
Auditing reduces information
asymmetries that exist between managers and firm stakeholders by allowing outsiders
to verify the validity of financial statements (Becker
et al, 1998). Therefore, by growth of competition
in audit profession,
audit firms have understood necessity of quality
of their services in capital market. In
this line, audit quality
is one of the most significant topics in the auditing profession. A higher audit quality
is reliant, as part of
its mandate, on an ability to reduce existing anomalies and failures.
Prior studies show that “audit with higher quality”
improves accuracy of
information and makes opportunity for
users and investors
to analyze performance of company
(Peecher et al, 2007). Audit
quality depends on auditor’s technical capabilities and independence (De
Angelo, 1981;Vanstraelen,2000; Mostafa
Mohamed, 2010). Without auditing, outsiders would be skeptical of the information provided by managers
and would therefore either
refuse to invest capital or demand an extremely high rate of return to compensate them for the risk of potential expropriation of their capital by managers (Ahmed et al
(2008)). Many researchers including
Fernando (2007), Ahmed et al
(2008), Li et al (2009) and Fernando
et al (2010) suggested that high
audit quality decreased cost of capital of client firms. Chen et al. (2010), state
that if high audit quality
reduces information risk,
which is invisible, it should translate to
a tangible benefit in the form of
lower cost of equity capital. In this
study, investigate the effect of
audit quality on the firm’s
cost of equity capital.
PREVIOUS
RESEARCH
The accounting
literature has firmly
established that auditor quality
is very important (fallatah, 2006). The
demand for auditing in capital market can be analyzed
from three different perspectives (i.e. auditing roles); a monitoring
role, an information role and an insurance role (Wallace
1980). Fernando (2007), shows that the monitoring role of the audit is effective
in mitigating the agency problem arising out of the separation of ownership and control
of
the
firm. The perceived effectiveness of the monitoring role of auditing would be
reflected in the client’s cost of
capital. Leuz and Verrecchia (2005) shows that better information will lead
to lower cost of capital
due to alignment between the firm’s investment
opportunities and its investment
choices. The insurance role indicates that the more financial resources the auditor has, the lower the cost
of capital of the client firm the three roles of auditing
specified by Wallace(1980) would all have a role
in reducing the cost of capital of firms(Fernando,2007).
In
this research, study the effect of three measures of audit firm size, auditor industry specialization, and audit tenure on cost of equity capital. Therefore will investigate the importance
of each measure and develop
research hypotheses.
HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
Hypothesis 1 :
Audit
firm size has a significant relationship
with cost of equity capital.
Hypothesis 2 : Auditor industry specialization has a significant relationship with cost of equity
capital.
Hypothesis 3 : Audit tenure has a significant
relationship with cost of equity
capital.
SAMPLE SELECTIION
The statistical
population
of
this
research
is
91 manufacturing companies listed
in
Tehran
Stock
Exchange. A systematic random sampling was used.
Time
period of this research is 7
years since 2004 to 2010.
REGRESSION
MODEL
Use regression model (2) to examine
Hypotheses 1, 2 and 3.
IndEPj,t=β0+β1Growthj,t+β2Leveragej,t+β3Betaj,t+β4Sizej,t+β5EQj,t+β6AQIRj,t+εj,t (2)
An
industry- adjusted earning-price ratio (IndEP) as the cost of
equity capital measure.
IndEP equal to firm j’s earnings-to-price ratio less the median earnings-to-price ratio of its industry classified. Independent
variables consist of audit firm sizem auditor industry specialization and audit
tenure. The model includes controls
for Growth, Leverage, Beta, and Size Consistent with Francis
et al. (2005), Li et al. (2009). Also EQ is control variable in
this model.
RESULT OF HYPOTHESES TESTING
The result of test of hypothesis 1 showed that there was a reverse and significant relationship between audit firm size
and cost of equity capital. This means that companies
which use large an audit firm (in case of Iran, Audit Organization), have lower cost of equity capital
than those which do not, because
larger audit firms desire
to get more fame in the market. These firms offer their services well because of having access to more sources and facilities to
train
their auditors and do tests. This result complies with those of Khurana & Raman (2004), Mansi et al (2004), and Pittman
& Fortin (2004), Fernando et al (2010), but does not comply
with
those
of
Azinfar
&
Hassas Yeganeh (2010) as prior
research in audit environment of Iran.
The results of test
of hypothesis 2 showed that there was a reverse
and significant relationship
between auditor industry
specialization and cost of equity
capital. This means that companies which
use expert industry auditors have lower cost of equity capital than those which do not. Auditor with
industry expertise are viewed to provide
better quality audits because they have better knowledge of the industry and could also audit more efficiently through
specialization to develop economies of
scales. In addition, the more the audit firm is expert
in a
special industry,
the more desire it has to offer
higher quality services. This result also complies
with those of Li et al (2009), Ahmed
et al (2008) and Fernando et al (2010) in international results.
The result of test of hypothesis
3 indicated that there was
a positive significant relationship between auditor tenure and cost of equity capital. This means that auditor tenure promote audit quality
in Iran. Thus, companies that maintain their relation with an audit firm for 4 sequential
years, have less cost of equity capital. This result
complies with those of Lim & Tan
(2009), Fernando et al (2010), Mostafa Mohamed (2010), and does not comply with those of Jackson et al (2007), and Cameran et al (2005). Generally,
the results of the research hypotheses show that cost of equity capital
of companies listed in Tehran Stock Exchange
will decrease by increment of audit quality, as Li et al (2009) obtained the same result by other proxies for audit
quality (city level industry specialist auditor and unexpected
audit fees). Fernando et al (2010), show
that Auditor size, industry specialization, tenure are negatively
related to the cost of
capital. These finding indicate that
higher audit quality reduce information asymmetries between investors and managers and so leads to lower client’s cost of equity capital.