Denetim Şirketi Rotasyonunda Optimal Sürenin Ampirik Tespiti: Borsa İstanbul’da İşlem Gören Şirketlerde Doğrusal Olmayan İlişkilerin İncelenmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışma, denetim şirketi rotasyon süresinin firma performansı üzerindeki etkisini Borsa İstanbul'da işlem gören şirketler örnekleminde incelemektedir. Denetim şirketi rotasyonu, denetim kalitesinin artırılması ve denetçi bağımsızlığının korunması amacıyla dünya genelinde uygulanan önemli bir düzenleyici mekanizmadır. Ancak rotasyonun optimal süresi konusunda hem akademik literatürde hem de düzenleyici uygulamalarda önemli farklılıklar bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışma, Türkiye örnekleminde optimal rotasyon süresini niceliksel olarak analiz ederek bu tartışmaya özgün bir katkı sunmaktadır. Çalışmada 2010-2023 dönemini kapsayan ve 113 şirketten oluşan 1.582 firma-yıl gözlemi kullanılmıştır. Rotasyon süresi ile aktif kârlılığı (ROA), özkaynak kârlılığı (ROE) ve Tobin's Q arasındaki ilişki üç farklı ekonometrik model ile analiz edilmiştir: (1) doğrusal model, (2) ikinci dereceden model ve (3) eşik model. Panel veri analizi yöntemleri kullanılarak sektör ve yıl sabit etkileri kontrol edilmiş, içsellik sorunlarına karşı dinamik GMM modelleri uygulanmıştır. Analiz sonuçları, denetim şirketi rotasyon süresi ile firma performansı arasında doğrusal olmayan, eşik değerlerine bağlı bir ilişki olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Hem çok kısa süreli rotasyonların başlangıç maliyetleri nedeniyle performansı olumsuz etkilediği hem de çok uzun süreli rotasyonların bağımsızlık zayıflaması nedeniyle faydaları azalttığı tespit edilmiştir. Orta-uzun vadeli rotasyon uygulayan firmalar, muhasebe temelli performans ölçütlerinde daha üstün sonuçlar sergilemiştir. Bulgular, öğrenme etkisi teorisi ile bağımsızlık zayıflaması teorisini desteklemekte ve optimal denetim şirketi rotasyonunun denetçi öğrenmesi ile bağımsızlığın korunması arasında denge kurduğunu göstermektedir. Türkiye'deki mevcut 7 yıllık zorunlu rotasyon süresinin, bulgularımızın işaret ettiği optimal performans penceresinden daha uzun olması, düzenleyici politikaların yeniden değerlendirilmesi gerektiğini önermektedir. KGK ve SPK'nın rotasyon süresini daha ılımlı bir seviyeye indirmesi, denetim kalitesini artırarak firma performansına olumlu katkı sağlayabilir.

Keywords

• Denetim Şirketi Rotasyonu
• Firma Performansı
• Panel Veri Analizi
• Denetim Kalitesi
• Kurumsal Yönetim.

Empirical Determination of Optimal Audit Firm Tenure: An Examination of Non-Linear Relationships in Listed Companies in Borsa İstanbul

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between audit firm tenure and firm performance using a comprehensive panel dataset of listed companies in Borsa İstanbul. Utilizing 1,582 firm-year observations from 113 companies over the period 2010-2023, the relationship between rotation tenure and return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE), and Tobin's Q is analyzed through three distinct econometric specifications: linear, quadratic, and threshold models. The empirical estimations control for industry and year fixed effects, and dynamic GMM models are employed to address potential endogeneity concerns. The findings reveal a non-linear, threshold-dependent relationship between audit firm tenure and firm performance. The results indicate that very short rotation periods negatively impact performance due to initial adaptation frictions, while excessively long rotation periods neutralize learning benefits due to the emergence of familiarity threats. Firms maintaining medium-to-long-term audit engagements exhibit superior accounting-based performance. The results provide strong empirical support for both learning effect theory and independence impairment theory, suggesting that optimal audit firm tenure balances the benefits of auditor learning with the preservation of independence. Given that the current 7-years mandatory rotation period in Türkiye exceeds the optimal performance window identified in this study, the findings suggest a need to reevaluate regulatory policies. Moderating the maximum tenure limit could enhance audit quality and positively contribute to firm performance.

Keywords

• Audit Firm Tenure
• Firm Performance
• Panel Data Analysis
• Audit Quality
• Corporate Governance

Supporting Institution

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Ethical Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with ethical guidelines for research involving publicly available corporate data. No human subjects were involved in this research. All data used in this study were obtained from publicly available sources including corporate annual reports, SEC filings, and established financial databases

References

1. Abrahams, T. and Phesa, M. (2025). Analysing the Factors Contributing to the Decline of Auditors Globally and Avenue for Future Research: A Scoping Review. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 18(7), 363. Doi: 10.3390/jrfm18070363
2. Alabdullah, T. T. Y., Nor, M. I., Ahmed, E. R., and Yahya, S. (2018). The determination of firm performance in emerging nations: Do board size and firm size matter, International Academic Journal of Accounting and Financial Management, 5(3), 57-66. Doi: 10.9756/IAJAFM/V5I2/1810017
3. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading/Addison-Wesley.
4. Ararat, M. and Ugur, M. (2003). Corporate governance in Turkey: an overview and some policy recommendations. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 3(1), 58-75. Doi: 10.1108/14720700310459863
5. Arioglu, E. and Tuan, K. (2015). Auditor rotation at Borsa İstanbul firms: an event study. Journal of Economics Finance and Accounting, 2(3). Doi: 10.17261/Pressacademia.2015312962
6. Bamber, E. M. and Iyer, V. M. (2007). Auditors' identification with their clients and its effect on auditors' objectivity. Auditing: A journal of practice & theory, 26(2), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2007.26.2.1
7. Boone, J. P., Khurana, I. K., and Raman, K. K. (2008). Audit firm tenure and the equity risk premium. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 23(1), 115-140. doi: 10.1177/0148558X0802300107
8. Brooks, L. Z., Cheng, C. S. A., Johnston, J. A., and Reichelt, K. J. (2017). Estimates of optimal audit firm tenure across different legal regimes. The Accounting Review, 92(3), 1-19. doi: 10.1177/0148558X16641864

9. Cameran, M., Prencipe, A., and Trombetta, M. (2016). Mandatory audit firm rotation and audit quality. European Accounting Review, 25(1), 35-58. doi: 10.1080/09638180.2014.921446
10. Cameran, M., Negri, G., and Pettinicchio, A. (2015). The audit firm rotation rule: A review of the literature. SDA Bocconi Research Paper. Doi: 10.2139/ssrn.825404
11. Can, G. (2018). A Descriptive Research on Turkish Listed Manufacturing Companies’ Independent Audit Characteristics. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 20(3), 650-678. Doi: 10.31460/mbdd.397173
12. Carey, P. and Simnett, R. (2006). Audit partner tenure and audit quality. The Accounting Review, 81(3), 653-676. doi: 10.2308/accr.2006.81.3.653
13. Che, L., Hope, O.-K., and Langli, J. C. (2020). How Big-4 firms improve audit quality. Management Science, 66(10), 4552–4572. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3370
14. Chi, W., Huang, H., Liao, Y., and Xie, H. (2009). Mandatory audit partner rotation, audit quality, and market perception: Evidence from Taiwan. Contemporary Accounting Research, 26(2), 359-391. doi: 10.1506/car.26.2.2
15. DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3(3), 183-199. doi: 10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1
16. Dechow, P. M., Sloan, R. G., and Sweeney, A. P. (1995). Detecting earnings management. Accounting review, 70(2), 193-225.
17. Dewi, S. V. and Iskandar, D. (2024). The Effect of Audit Tenure, Firm Reputation, and Audit Fees on Audit Quality with Audit Committee As A Moderating Variable. Inquısitive: International Journal of Economic, 4(2), 72-82. doi: 10.35814/inquisitive.v4i2.6245
18. Doyle, J. T., Ge, W., and McVay, S. (2007). Accruals quality and internal control over financial reporting. The accounting review, 82(5), 1141-1170. Doi: 10.2308/accr.2007.82.5.1141
19. Duru, A., Iyengar, R. J., and Zampelli, E. M. (2016). The dynamic relationship between CEO duality and firm performance: The moderating role of board independence. Journal of business research, 69(10), 4269-4277. Doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.001
20. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative science quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
21. Ewelt-Knauer, C., Gold, A., and Pott, C. (2012). What do we know about mandatory audit firm rotation. Institute of Chartered Accountants in Scotland (ICAS), Edinburgh. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5329dbc1ed915d0e5d0000c1/icas_mafr_report.pdf (accessed 2 June 2025).
22. Firth, M., Rui, O. M., and Wu, X. (2012). How do various forms of auditor rotation affect audit quality? Evidence from China. The International Journal of Accounting, 47(1), 109-138. doi: 10.1016/j.intacc.2011.12.006.
23. Florio, C. (2024). A structured literature review of empirical research on mandatory auditor rotation. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 55, 100623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intaccaudtax.2024.100623
24. Ghosh, A. and Moon, D. (2005). Auditor tenure and perceptions of audit quality. The Accounting Review, 80(2), 585-612. doi: 10.2308/accr.2005.80.2.585
25. Gissel, J. L. and Johnstone, K. M. (2017). Information sharing during auditors' fraud brainstorming: Effects of psychological safety and auditor knowledge. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36(2), 87-110. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-51519
26. Goh, C. F., Rasli, A., and Khan, S. U. R. (2014). CEO duality, board independence, corporate governance and firm performance in family firms: Evidence from the manufacturing industry in Malaysia. Asian Business & Management, 13(4), 333-357. Doi: 10.1057/abm.2014.4
27. Griffith, E., Li, D., and Zhou, Y. (2025). Psychological Safety, AI-Enabled Anonymous Communication, and Speaking Up in Audit Teams. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.2308/AJPT-2024-148
28. Gul, F. A., Wu, D., and Yang, Z. (2013). Do individual auditors affect audit quality? Evidence from archival data. The Accounting Review, 88(6), 1993-2023. doi: 10.2308/accr-50536
29. Gunawan, D. and Lestari, M. A. (2025). Impact of auditor independence, professionalism, and skepticism on audit quality. Advances in Accounting Innovation, 1(2), 178-187. https://doi.org/10.69725/aai.v1i2.193
30. Hansen, B. E. (1999). Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference. Journal of Econometrics, 93(2), 345-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(99)00025-1
31. Jackson, A. B., Moldrich, M., and Roebuck, P. (2008). Mandatory audit firm rotation and audit quality. Managerial Auditing Journal, 23(5), 420-437. doi: 10.1108/02686900810875271
32. Jensen, M. C. and Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
33. Johnson, V. E., Khurana, I. K., and Reynolds, J. K. (2002). Audit‐firm tenure and the quality of financial reports. Contemporary Accounting Research, 19(4), 637-660. doi: 10.1506/LLTH-JXQV-8CEW-8MXD
34. Judge, S., Goodson, B. M., and Stefaniak, C. M. (2024). Audit firm tenure disclosure and nonprofessional investors' perceptions of auditor independence: The mitigating effect of partner rotation disclosure. Contemporary Accounting Research, 41(2), 1284-1310. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12936
35. Kalbuana, N., Suryati, A., and Pertiwi, C. P. A. (2022). Effect of company age, audit quality, leverage and profitability on earnings management. International Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting Research (IJEBAR), 6(1), 305-315. Doi: 10.29040/ijebar.v6i1.4796
36. Kamarudin, K. A., Wan Ismail, W. A., Harymawan, I., and Mohamad Ariff, A. (2025). Audit firm tenure and corporate tax avoidance: evidence spanning COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Financial Crime, 32(1), 98-116. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-12-2023-0329
37. Karaibrahimoğlu, Y. Z. (2013). Is corporate governance a determinant of auditor choice?-Evidence from Turkey. Ege Academic Review, 13(2), 273-284.
38. Khan, A., Mihret, D. G., and Muttakin, M. B. (2016). Corporate political connections, agency costs and audit quality. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 24(4), 357-374. Doi: 10.1108/IJAIM-05-2016-0061
39. Kothari, U. (2005). Authority and expertise: The professionalisation of international development and the ordering of dissent. Antipode, 37(3), 425-446. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0066-4812.2005.00505.x
40. Kwon, S. Y., Lim, Y., and Simnett, R. (2014). The effect of mandatory audit firm rotation on audit quality and audit fees: Empirical evidence from the Korean audit market. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 33(4), 167-195. doi: 10.2308/ajpt-50814
41. Le, B. and Moore, P. H. (2023). The impact of audit quality on earnings management and cost of equity capital: evidence from a developing market. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 21(3), 695-728. Doi: 0.1108/JFRA-09-2021-0284
42. Lennox, C. (2000). Do companies successfully engage in opinion-shopping? Evidence from the UK. Journal of accounting and economics, 29(3), 321-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(00)00025-2
43. Lennox, C. S., Wu, X., and Zhang, T. (2014). Does mandatory rotation of audit partners improve audit quality? The Accounting Review, 89(5), 1775-1803. doi: 10.2308/accr-50800
44. Mansi, S. A., Maxwell, W. F., and Miller, D. P. (2004). Does auditor quality and tenure matter to investors? Evidence from the bond market. Journal of Accounting Research, 42(4), 755-793. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-679X.2004.00156.x
45. Mautz, R. K. and Sharaf, H. A. (1961). The Philosophy of Auditing. American Accounting Association.
46. McGregor, D. J. and Malambe, L. X. (2025). Empirical evidence of the effect of mandatory audit firm rotation on market concentration in South Africa. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 28(1), 5808. Doi: 10.4102/sajems.v28i1.5808
47. Myers, J. N., Myers, L. A., and Omer, T. C. (2003). Exploring the term of the auditor‐client relationship and the quality of earnings. The Accounting Review, 78(3), 779-799. doi: 10.2308/accr.2003.78.3.779
48. Nguyen, Q. M. and Nguyen, C. V. (2024). Corporate governance, audit quality and firm performance–an empirical evidence. Cogent Economics & Finance, 12(1), 2334128. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2024.2334128
49. Ocak, M. (2024). Does audit firm governance matter to audit quality? Evidence from Turkey. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 22(3), 453-479. Doi: 10.1108/JFRA-09-2021-0274
50. Ogundele, O. S., Ifunanya, N. L., Innocent, M. K., and Muhammad, S. (2024, June). Moderating Role of Audit Tenure in the Relationship Between Audit Fees and Financial Performance: Evidence from the Nigerian Banking Sector. In International Conference of Accounting & Business (pp. 573-589). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. Doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-84885-8_31
51. Pettigrew, T. F. and Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90(5), 751. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751
52. Pusparani, A. D., Syarbini Ikhsan, R. K., Espa, V., and Rusmita, S. The Effect of Audit Fee, Audit Tenure, Audit Rotation and Company Size on Audit Report Lag in Banking Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) in 2019-2024, 11(4), 13-25. Doi: 10.56805/grrbe
53. Rahman, M. M., Meah, M. R., and Chaudhory, N. U. (2019). The impact of audit characteristics on firm performance: An empirical study from an emerging economy. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 6(1), 59-69. doi:10.13106/jafeb.2019.vol6.no1.59
54. Regulation on Independent Auditing. (2012, December 26). Official Gazette (No. 28509).
55. Santos Jaén, J. M., Martín de Almagro Vázquez, G., and Valls Martínez, M. D. C. (2023). Is earnings management impacted by audit fees and auditor tenure? An analysis of the Big Four audit firms in the US market. Oeconomia Copernicana 14: 899–934.
56. Santos-Jaén, J. M., Martínez, M. D. C. V., de Almagro Vázquez, G. M., and León-Gómez, A. (2025). The impact of audit fees and auditor tenure on company valuation: An analysis of large US audit firms. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 102467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.najef.2025.102467
57. Siregar, S. V., Amarullah, F., Wibowo, A., and Anggraita, V. (2012). Audit tenure, auditor rotation, and audit quality: The case of Indonesia. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 5(1), 55-74.
58. Spathis, C. T. (2003). Audit qualification, firm litigation, and financial information: an empirical analysis in Greece. International journal of auditing, 7(1), 71-85. https://doi.org/10.1111/1099-1123.00006
59. Stefaniak, C. M., Robertson, J. C., and Houston, R. W. (2009). The causes and consequences of auditor switching: A review of the literature. Journal of Accounting Literature, 28, 47-121.
60. Svanberg, J. and Öhman, P. (2015). Auditors' identification with their clients: Effects on audit quality. The British accounting review, 47(4), 395-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2014.08.003
61. Şeker, Y. and Türel, A. (2023). Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation: Evidence from Turkish Auditors’perceptions. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 13(1), 41-52. Doi: 10.30783/nevsosbilen.1065187
62. Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1985). The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behaviour. In: Worchel, S. and Austin, W.G., Eds., Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 2nd Edition, Nelson Hall, Chicago, 7-24.
63. Triani, N. N. A. and Yanthi, M. D. (2020, June). The effect of audit firms size, leverage, going concern opinion, audit tenure, on audit quality in Indonesia. In 23rd Asian Forum of Business Education (AFBE 2019) (pp. 261-265). Atlantis Press. Doi: 10.2991/aebmr.k.200606.044
64. Turkish Commercial Code. (2011, February 14). Law No. 6102. Official Gazette (No. 27846).
65. Türel, A., Taş, N., Genç, M., and Özden, B. (2017). Audit Firm Tenure and Audit Quality Implied by Discretionary Accruals and Modified Opinions: Evidence from Turkey. Acta Universitatis Danubius: Œconomica, 13(1), 187-196
66. Wang, P. and Liang, S. (2025). Enhancement of audit quality and optimization of risk management: Dual engines for corporate value growth analysis. International Review of Economics & Finance, 104339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2025.104339
67. Visedsun, N., Haekerd, K., Kwanmuang, P., and Aujirapongpan, S. (2025). Does audit quality enhance the value relevance of earnings and book value on the market price of common Shares? Evidence from Thailand. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 18(10), 547. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm18100547
68. Zhou, Y., Weber, D. P., and Wen, C. (2024). Selection bias in audit firm tenure research. Review of Accounting Studies, 29(4), 3085-3129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-023-09787-4