Effects of foreign subsidiaries’ complexity and reliability on the audit effort of group auditors: Evidence from Korea
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/afc.07(2).2026.08
-
Article InfoVolume 7 2026, Issue #2, pp. 123-139
- 30 Views
-
2 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Type of the article: Research Article
Foreign subsidiaries operate in legal and institutional environments different from those of the parent company, which raises the complexity and risk of group audits. This study examines the effect of the complexity arising from foreign subsidiaries on the audit effort of group auditors and the moderating role of the institutional reliability of the subsidiaries’ host countries, proxied by the World Bank Rule of Law indicator. Regressions of audit hours and audit fees are estimated on 1,667 firm-year observations of non-financial firms listed on the Korea Composite Stock Price Index in 2014–2017, the last years before Korea’s standard audit hours regime took effect, where engagement-level audit hours are publicly disclosed. Complexity is positively associated with audit effort (coefficient 0.127, t = 4.48 for audit hours; 0.138, t = 4.21 for audit fees), and the result is robust to firm-clustered standard errors. The interaction between complexity and host-country institutional reliability is negative for audit hours (–0.136, t = –2.21): the simple slope of complexity declines from 0.168 when no subsidiary is located in a country with a stronger rule of law than Korea to an insignificant 0.032 when all subsidiaries are. This attenuation is concentrated among groups whose foreign subsidiaries are financially significant (interaction –0.415, t = –3.13), where it is robust to firm clustering and differs significantly from the low-significance group. Because subsidiary structures vary little within firms over the sample window, the evidence is cross-sectional in nature. Overall, group auditors calibrate their effort to both the complexity of foreign subsidiaries and the institutional quality of their host countries.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M42, F23, M41
-
References47
-
Tables8
-
Figures1
-
- Figure 1. Predicted audit hours (ln ah) as a function of complexity at four levels of host-country institutional reliability
-
- Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the variables (1,667 firm-year observations, 2014–2017)
- Table 2. Pearson correlations among the variables
- Table 3. Regression of audit hours (AH) and audit fees (AF) on the complexity of foreign subsidiaries (Equation 3)
- Table 4. Moderating effect of host-country institutional reliability on the relation between complexity and audit effort (Equation 4)
- Table 5. Simple slopes of complexity on audit hours (ah) at selected levels of host-country institutional reliability
- Table 6. Effect of complexity on audit effort in subsamples split by the financial significance of foreign subsidiaries (Equation 3)
- Table 7. Moderating effect of host-country institutional reliability in subsamples split by the financial significance of foreign subsidiaries (Equation 4)
- Table 8. Robustness of the moderation model (Equation 4) to firm-clustered standard errors and firm fixed effects
-
- Ashraf, M., Michas, P. N., & Russomanno, D. (2020). The impact of audit committee information technology expertise on the reliability and timeliness of financial reporting. The Accounting Review, 95(5), 23-56.
- Beuselinck, C., Cascino, S., Deloof, M., & Vanstraelen, A. (2019). Earnings management within multinational corporations. The Accounting Review, 94(4), 45-76.
- Brown, P., Preiato, J., & Tarca, A. (2014). Measuring country differences in enforcement of accounting standards: An audit and enforcement proxy. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 41(1-2), 1-52.
- Campbell, D. J. (1988). Task complexity: A review and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 40-52.
- Caramanis, C., & Lennox, C. (2008). Audit effort and earnings management. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 45(1), 116-138
- Carson, E., Simnett, R., Thürheimer, U., & Vanstraelen, A. (2022). Involvement of component auditors in multinational group audits: Determinants, audit quality, and audit fees. Journal of Accounting Research, 60(4), 1419-1462.
- Chambers, D., & Payne, J. (2011). Audit quality and accrual persistence: Evidence from the pre- and post-Sarbanes-Oxley periods. Managerial Auditing Journal, 26(5), 437-456.
- Denis, D. J., Denis, D. K., & Yost, K. (2002). Global diversification, industrial diversification, and firm value. The Journal of Finance, 57(5), 1951-1979.
- Downey, D. H., & Bedard, J. C. (2019). Coordination and communication challenges in global group audits. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 38(1), 123-147.
- Downey, D. H., & Westermann, K. D. (2021). Challenging global group audits: The perspective of US group audit leads. Contemporary Accounting Research, 38(2), 1395-1433.
- Durnev, A., Li, T., & Magnan, M. (2017). Beyond tax avoidance: Offshore firms’ institutional environment and financial reporting quality. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 44(5-6), 646-696.
- Dyreng, S. D., Hanlon, M., & Maydew, E. L. (2012). Where do firms manage earnings? Review of Accounting Studies, 17(3), 649-687.
- Ewert, R., & Wagenhofer, A. (2019). Effects of increasing enforcement on financial reporting quality and audit quality. Journal of Accounting Research, 57(1), 121-168.
- Gold, A., & Trotman, A. J. (2026). Challenges in global group audits: Evidence from component audit leaders. Accounting Horizons, 40(1), 37-47.
- Graham, L., Bedard, J. C., & Dutta, S. (2018). Managing group audit risk in a multicomponent audit setting. International Journal of Auditing, 22(1), 40-54.
- Gul, F. A., Hsu, A. W.-h., & Liu, S. H.-T. (2018). Parent-subsidiary investment layers and audit fees. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 33(4), 555-579.
- Gunn, J. L., & Michas, P. N. (2018). Auditor multinational expertise and audit quality. The Accounting Review, 93(4), 203-224.
- Gunny, K. A., Mao, J., & Zhang, J. (2025). Group audit risk and component auditor use: A difference-in-differences analysis. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 44(1), 73-103.
- Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.
- Hanes, D. R. (2013). Geographically distributed audit work: Theoretical considerations and future directions. Journal of Accounting Literature, 32(1), 1-29.
- 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(1), 141-191.
- Hoitash, R., & Hoitash, U. (2018). Measuring accounting reporting complexity with XBRL. The Accounting Review, 93(1), 259-287.
- International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2009). International Standard on Auditing (ISA) 600, Special considerations—Audits of group financial statements (including the work of component auditors). New York, NY: International Federation of Accountants.
- International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2012). International Standard on Auditing (ISA) 315 (Revised), Identifying and assessing the risks of material misstatement through understanding the entity and its environment. New York, NY: International Federation of Accountants.
- International Federation of Accountants (IFAC). (2015). Invitation to comment: Enhancing audit quality in the public interest: A focus on professional skepticism, quality control and group audits. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board.
- International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR). (2017). Report on 2016 survey of inspection findings.
- Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
- Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2010). The worldwide governance indicators: Methodology and analytical issues (Policy Research Working Paper No. 5430). World Bank.
- Knowles, R. L., & Pacheco Paredes, A. A. (2023). International culture and audit deficiencies: Evidence from inspection reports of non-US companies listed in the US. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 51, Article 100542.
- Korea Legislation Research Institute (KLRI). (2018). Act on External Audit of Stock Companies. Republic of Korea.
- Korean Institute of Certified Public Accountants (KICPA). (2018). Korean Standards on Auditing (KSA) 600, Special considerations—Audits of group financial statements (including the work of component auditors). Seoul: KICPA.
- Kornish, L. J., & Levine, C. B. (2004). Discipline with common agency: The case of audit and nonaudit services. The Accounting Review, 79(1), 173-200.
- Kothari, S. P., Leone, A. J., & Wasley, C. E. (2005). Performance matched discretionary accrual measures. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39(1), 163-197.
- Krishnan, G. V., Mao, J., & Zhang, J. (2023). Component auditor use and lenders’ perception of audit quality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 42(4), 45-80.
- Krishnan, J., & Li, M. (2023). Are referred-to auditors associated with lower audit quality and efficiency? Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 42(1), 101-124.
- Leuz, C., Nanda, D., & Wysocki, P. D. (2003). Earnings management and investor protection: An international comparison. Journal of Financial Economics, 69(3), 505-527.
- Mayer, T., & Zignago, S. (2011). Notes on CEPII’s distances measures: The GeoDist database (CEPII Working Paper No. 2011-25). CEPII.
- Petersen, M. A. (2009). Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. The Review of Financial Studies, 22(1), 435-480.
- Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). (2010). Identifying and assessing risks of material misstatement (Auditing Standard No. 12; reorganized as AS 2110, effective December 31, 2016). Washington, DC: PCAOB.
- Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). (2016). Proposed amendments relating to the supervision of audits involving other auditors and proposed auditing standard—Dividing responsibility for the audit with another accounting firm (PCAOB Release No. 2016-002).
- Saiewitz, A., & Wang, E. (2020). Using cultural mindsets to reduce cross-national auditor judgment differences. Contemporary Accounting Research, 37(3), 1854-1881.
- Simunic, D. A. (1980). The pricing of audit services: Theory and evidence. Journal of Accounting Research, 18(1), 161-190.
- Srinivasan, S., Wahid, A. S., & Yu, G. (2015). Admitting mistakes: Home country effect on the reliability of restatement reporting. The Accounting Review, 90(3), 1201-1240.
- Statistics Korea. (2019). Preliminary results of the 2018 survey of business activities [Press release].
- Sunderland, D., & Trompeter, G. M. (2017). Multinational group audits: Problems faced in practice and opportunities for research. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36(3), 159-183.
- White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48(4), 817-838.
- Zhu, S., & Phang, S. Y. (2024). How do lead auditor instructions influence component auditors’ evidence collection decisions? The joint influence of construal interpretations and responsibility. Contemporary Accounting Research, 41(1), 591-619.


