《【精品文档】254关于地方政府审计有关 的外文文献翻译成品：地方政府审计市场中审计师的专业化和对审计质量的感知审计满意度和审计费用（中英文双语对照）》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《【精品文档】254关于地方政府审计有关 的外文文献翻译成品：地方政府审计市场中审计师的专业化和对审计质量的感知审计满意度和审计费用（中英文双语对照）（35页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、此文档是毕业设计外文翻译成品（ 含英文原文+中文翻译），无需调整复杂的格式！下载之后直接可用，方便快捷！本文价格不贵,也就几十块钱！一辈子也就一次的事！外文标题：AUDITOR SPECIALIZATION AND PERCEIVED AUDIT QUALITY, AUDITEE SATISFACTION AND AUDIT FEES IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUDIT MARKET外文作者：Suzanne Lowensohn，Laurence E. Johnson，Randal J. Elder文献出处: SSRN Electronic Journal,2018,14
2、(4):257-268(如觉得年份太老，可改为近2年，毕竟很多毕业生都这样做)英文5896单词，38802字符(字符就是印刷符)，中文10139汉字。AUDITOR SPECIALIZATION AND PERCEIVED AUDIT QUALITY, AUDITEE SATISFACTION AND AUDIT FEES IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUDIT MARKETABSTRACT: Recent changes to government audit procurement practices in Florida have been associated wi
3、th reduced audit fees (Jensen and Payne 2005b) and coincide with improved audit quality and an increased presence of specialized audit providers (Lowensohn and Reck 2004) in the Florida government audit market. We examine auditor specialization in the Florida government audit market and study the ef
4、fect of specialization on perceived governmental audit quality, finance director satisfaction with their auditors, and audit fees. We survey 286 finance directors of local Florida governments and find that non-Big 5 specialists are associated with higher audit quality and higher levels of auditee sa
5、tisfaction, but do not receive higher audit fees. In contrast, Big 5 auditors charge higher audit fees but are associated with lower perceived audit quality and lower auditee satisfaction. Our findings indicate that engagement of non-Big 5 specialist auditors may be preferable for many local governm
6、ents from a policy standpoint.INTRODUCTIONGovernmental audit quality has been an important issue since the 1980s, when a Government Accountability Office (GAO) study (GAO 1986) revealed that a third of audits examined were substandard.1 Since that time, there has been considerable debate about the r
7、elation between audit procurement and audit quality in the governmental sector. While the Treadway Commission (1987) and AICPA (1986) raised concerns about the effects of competition on audit quality, the GAO (1987) recommended competitive bidding to improve audit quality. Despite evidence of improv
8、ed government audit quality over time (Lowensohn and Reck 2004), the quality of governmental audits is again under scrutiny (Emerson 2002; Broadus 2004) and worthy of further examination. Substantial change to audit procurement practices in the State of Florida provides the opportunity to examine go
9、vernmental audit issues. In 1993 the Florida Supreme Court overruled a state statute restricting the use of competitive bidding by prospective audit providers. Hackenbrack et al. (2000) find that the bidding restriction lead to higher audit fees and greater demand for Big 6 auditors.3 Jensen and Pay
10、ne (2005b) report that, subsequent to the elimination of the bidding restriction, audit fees declined and Big 6 auditors were displaced by audit firms having expertise in government auditing. During the same time period, Lowensohn and Reck (2004) observe improvement in governmental audit quality in
11、Florida and increased market concentration for firms specializing in governmental audits. The contemporary Florida government audit market thus provides the opportunity to investigate the comparative levels of audit quality and auditee satisfaction associated with Big 5 firms and non-Big 5 specialis
12、t firms.We focus on audit firm industry specialization within the Florida government audit market using three different measures of specialization based on audit market share. We surveyed 286 finance directors of Florida local governments regarding their perceptions of the quality of the audit their
13、 government received and their degree of satisfaction with the audit firm. We also obtained data on audit fees and other fee-related control variable data. We find that non-Big 5 government specialist auditors are a significant predictor of perceived audit quality and auditee satisfaction, but do no
14、t receive premium audit fees. In contrast, Big 5 auditors are associated with lower perceived audit quality and auditee satisfaction, yet charge premium audit fees. Our results are consistent with Copleys suggestion (1991) that the largest firms are not the only auditors providing high-quality servi
15、ce in the public sector and substantiate Jensen and Paynes observation (2005b) that specialists can provide high-quality audits at reduced fee levels. Our findings also provide support for the argument by Copley and Doucet (1993) that competition in the auditor procurement process improves, rather t
16、han detracts from, audit quality. The policy implications of our study are that competition in audit procurement is beneficial to auditees and that governments may be best served by retaining a non-Big 5 specialist audit firm. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. The next two sections provide the background for the study and research model development, while the fourth section addresses the research method. The paper concludes with results and a d
