Hoofdstuk 1 - Faculteit Economie en Bedrijfskunde

Table 8: Regression models 3 and 4
LnNAudHon_Am = β0 + β1 ARInv_TA + β2 ROA + β3 Solvency + β4 Liquidity + β5 Losses +
β6 LnTA + ε
LnNAudHon_Am = β0 + β1 ARInv_TA + β2 ROA + β3 Solvency + β4 Liquidity + β5 Losses +
β6 LnSales + ε
Model 3 Model 4
Variables expected relation β p-value β p-value
Constant 0,006*** 0,419
ARInv_TA + -0,069 0,531 -0,332 0,006***
ROA - 0,165 0,131 0,040 0,723
Solvency + 0,084 0,471 0,006 0,962
Liquidity - -0,060 0,576 -0,033 0,772
Losses + 0,247 0,032** 0,096 0,410
LnTA + 0,520 0,000***
LnSales + 0,488 0,000***
Adjusted R² 0,253 0,162
F 5,628 3,643
Significance 0,000 0,003
*** p-value < 0,01
** p-value < 0,05
* p-value < 0,1
Again the variable ARInv_TA does not have the expected sign. In both models the sign is
negative, although not significant in Model 3. The other variables are not significant, except for
the size variables in both models and losses in Model 3.
Regression modes 5 & 6 Table 9 shows that the explanatory power of the models is higher when
audit fees are calculated on the basis of the European model, especially in the model that
estimates size on the basis of total assets. The variable ARInv_TA again has a sign opposite to
expectations. Contrary to the American model, the relation is moderately significant in the LnTA
model (p-value 0.012 < 0.05). If LnSales is included in the model, the results are similar to the
US model, with a highly significant relation (p-value 0.000 < 0.01). The results for Liquidity,
ROA and Losses.are similar to those obtained in the US Model.
Table 9: Regression models 5 and 6
LnAudHon_Eur = β0 + β1 ARInv_TA + β2 ROA + β3 Solvency + β4 Liquidity + β5 Losses +
β6 LnTA + ε
LnAudHon_Eur = β0 + β1 ARInv_TA + β2 ROA + β3 Solvency + β4 Liquidity + β5 Losses +
β6 LnSales + ε
16