DENETİM GÖRÜŞÜ VE ROTASYONUN DENETİM ÜCRETİNE ETKİSİ: BİST'TE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Yıl 2026, Sayı: 34, 198 - 211, 16.02.2026

Mehmet Günlük , Murat Özcan

https://doi.org/10.58348/denetisim.1662957

https://izlik.org/JA23YT84XN

Öz

Yirmi birinci yüzyılın başlarında önemli finansal bilgilerin gizlenmesi ile kar yönetimi davranışının sonucunda yaşanan muhasebe ve denetim skandalları, doğru ve güvenilir finansal raporların finansal bilgi kullanıcıları için en önemli bilgi kaynağı olduğunu ve denetim kalitesinin önemini göstermiştir. Literatür incelendiğinde denetim kalitesine yönelik birçok göstergenin yer aldığı ve bu göstergelerin bazılarının ise denetim görüşü, denetlenen şirketin büyüklüğü, denetim firması rotasyonu ve denetim ücreti gibi unsurlarından oluştuğu görülmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı Borsa İstanbul İmalat Sektöründe yer alan şirketlere ait bağımsız denetim raporlarında yer alan denetim görüşü ile denetim firması rotasyonunun denetim kalitesi göstergelerinden biri olan denetim ücreti üzerindeki etkilerini araştırmaktır. Çalışmada denetim ücreti bağımlı değişken; denetim görüşü ile denetim firması rotasyonu ise bağımsız değişkenler olarak kullanılmıştır. Analizlere kontrol değişkenleri olarak denetlenen şirketin büyüklüğü, şirket yaşı, kaldıraç oranı ve aktif karlılık oranı dahil edilmiştir. Çalışmanın analiz kısmında kullanılan ve 515 gözlemden oluşan veri seti Borsa İstanbul İmalat Sektöründe yer alan 129 şirketin 2020-2023 yılları arasındaki faaliyet ve finansal raporlarından elde edilmiştir. Yapılan panel veri analizi sonucunda denetim ücreti üzerinde mevcut denetim görüşü ile önceki denetim görüşünün istatistiki olarak anlamlı ve negatif yönde etkisi olduğu; denetim firması rotasyonunun etkisinin ise istatistiki olarak anlamlı olmadığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Çalışmanın bulguları ayrıca denetim ücreti üzerinde denetlenen şirket büyüklüğü ve aktif karlılık oranının (ROA) istatistiki olarak anlamlı ve pozitif yönde; kaldıraç oranı ve şirket yaşının ise istatistiki olarak anlamlı ve negatif yönde etkilerinin olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Denetim Görüşü , Denetim Firması Rotasyonu , Denetim Ücreti , BİST İmalat Sektörü

THE IMPACT OF AUDIT OPINION AND ROTATION ON AUDIT FEES: A STUDY ON BIST

https://izlik.org/JA23YT84XN

Öz

The accounting and auditing scandals in the early twenty-first century as a result of the concealment of important financial information and profit management behavior have shown that accurate and reliable financial reports are the most important source of information for financial information users and the importance of audit quality. A review of the literature reveals that there are many indicators of audit quality and some of these indicators include audit opinion, size of the audited company, audit firm rotation and audit fee. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of audit opinion and audit firm rotation in the audit reports of companies in the Borsa Istanbul Manufacturing Sector on audit fee, which is one of the audit quality indicators. In the study, audit fee is used as the dependent variable and audit opinions and audit firm rotation are used as independent variables. The size of the audited company, company age, leverage ratio and return on assets ratio are included in the analysis as control variables. The data set used in the analysis part of the study, consisting of 515 observations, was obtained from the annual and financial reports of 129 companies in the Borsa Istanbul Manufacturing Sector between years 2020 and 2023. As a result of the panel data analysis, it is concluded that current audit opinion and prior audit opinion have a statistically significant and negative effect on audit fees, while the effect of audit firm rotation is not statistically significant. The findings of the study also reveal that audited company size and return on assets (ROA) have statistically significant and positive effects on audit fees, while leverage and company age have statistically significant and negative effects on audit fees.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Audit opinion , audit firm rotation , audit fee , BİST manufacturing sector

Kaynakça

• Abad, D., Sánchez-Ballesta, J.P., & Yagüe, J. (2017). Audit opinions and information asymmetry in the stock market. Accounting & Finance, 57(2), 1–16.
• Abadi, K., Purba, D.M., & Fauzia, Q. (2019). The impact of liquidity ratio, leverage ratio, company size and audit quality on going concern audit opinion. Jurnal Akuntansi Trisakti, 6(1), 69–82.
• Abbott, L.J., Parker, S., Peters, G.F. & Raghunandan, K. (2003). The association between audit committee characteristics and audit fees. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 22(2), 17–32.
• Abdoli, M., & Pourkazemi, A. (2014). Effect of executive board and family control on audit opinion. African Journal of Business Management, 8(18), 810–815.
• Abdul-Rahman, O.A., Benjamin, A.O., & Olayinka, O. (2017). Effect of audit fees on audit quality: Evidence from cement manufacturing companies in Nigeria. European Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance Research, 5(1), 6–17.
• Adelopo, I., Jallow, K., & Scott, P. (2012). Multiple large ownership structure, audit committee activity and audit fees: Evidence from the UK. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 13(2), 100–121.
• Al Farooque, O., Hamıd, A. & Abou Taleb, M. (2019). Perceived accounting quality, extent of disclosure and corruption perception index: Evidence from MENA countries. 27th International Conference "Large Projects in Light of Development Strategy 2030- Reality and Ambition (LPDS)" organized by the Faculty of Commerce, Mansoura University, Ain Sokhna, Egypt, on the 17th and 18th March 2019At: Ain Sokhna, Egypt
• Ali, Faizan - Rasoolimanesh, S. Mostofa - Sarstedt, Marko - Ringle, Christian M. - Ryu, Ki Sang. (2018). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in hospitality research. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(1) 514–538.
• Anderson, T., & Zéghal, D. (1994). The pricing of audit services: Further evidence from the Canadian market. Accounting and Business Research, 24(95), 195–207.
• Arens, A.A., Elder, R.J., & Beasley, M.S. (2012). Auditing and Assurance Service, An Integrated Approach, 14th Edition. England: Perason Education Limited.
• Averio, T. (2021). The analysis of influencing factors on the going concern audit opinion – A study in manufacturing firms in Indonesia. Asian Journal of Accounting Research, 6(2), 152–164.
• Bağımsız Denetim Standardı (BDS) 700: Finansal Tablolara İlişkin Görüş Oluşturma ve Raporlama, 18/03/2014 tarihli ve 28945 sayılı Resmi Gazete (Güncel versiyonu için bakınız www.kgk.gov.tr)
• Bo, X.H. & Wu, L.S. (2011). Earnings management, information risk and audit opinion. Audit Research, 1, 90–97.
• Cahyono, D. (2014). Effect of prior audit opinion, audit quality, and factors of its audit opinion going concern. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 5(24), 2222–2847.
• Carcello, J.V., Hermanson, D.R., Neal, T.L., & Riley, R.A. (2002). Board characteristics and audit fees. Contemporary Accounting Research, 19(3), 365–385.
• Chen, C.J.P., Su, X., & Wu. X. (2005). Abnormal audit fees and the improvement of unfavourable audit opinion. China Accounting and Finance Review, 7, 1–28.
• Choi, J., Kim, C., Kim, J., & Zang, Y. (2010). Audit office size, audit quality, and audit pricing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 29(1), 73–97.
• Conger, J. A., Finegold, D., & Lawler, E. E. (1998). Appraising boardroom performance. Harvard Business Review, 76, 136–164.
• Corbella, S., Florio, C., Gotti, G. & Mastrolia, S.A. (2015). Audit firm rotation, audit fees and audit quality: The experience of Italian public companies. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 25, 46–66.
• Datar, S.M., Feltham, G.A., & Hughes, J.S. (1991). The role of audits and audit quality in valuing new issues. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 14(1), 3–49.
• Daugherty, B.E., Dickins, D., Hatfield, R.C., & Higgs, J.L. (2012). An examination of partner perceptions of partner rotation: Direct and indirect consequences to audit quality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 31(1), 97–114.
• DeAngelo, L.E. (1981a). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3, 183–199.
• DeAngelo, L.E. (1981b). Auditor independence, “Low Balling”, and disclosure regulation. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3 (August), 113–127.
• DeFond, M.L. & Zhang, J. (2014). A review of archival auditing research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 58(2-3), 275–326.
• DeFond, M.L. (1992). The association between changes in client firm agency costs and auditor switching. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 11(1), 16–31.
• DeFond, M.L., Lim, C.Y., & Zang, Y. (2016). Conservatism and auditor-client contracting. The Accounting Review, 91(1), 69–98.
• Driscoll, J.C., & Kraay, A.C. (1998). Consistent covariance matrix estimation with spatially dependent panel data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 121, 549–560.
• Durand, G. (2019). The determinants of audit report lag: a meta-analysis. Managerial Auditing Journal, 34(1), 44–75.
• Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. The Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.
• El-Gammal, W. (2012). Determinants of audit fees: Evidence from Lebanon. International Business Research. 5(11), 136–145.
• Erdoğan, S. (2015). Bağımsız denetim mesleğinin doğal sınırlamaları. Namık Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5, 1–12.
• Eshleman, J.D. & Guo, P. (2014). Abnormal audit fees and audit quality: The importance of considering managerial incentives in tests of earnings management. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 33(1), 117–138.
• Fang, J.X., Hong, J.Q. (2008). Abnormal audit fees and their damage to audit quality. China Accounting Review, 6, 425–442.
• Feltham, G.A., Hughes, J.S., & Simunic, D.A. (1991). Empirical assessment of the ımpact of auditor quality on the valuation of new issues. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 14, 375–399.
• Francis, J.R. (1984). The effect of audit firm size on audit prices: A study of the Australian market. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 6(2), 133–151.
• Francis, J.R., & Wilson, E.R. (1988). Auditor Changes: A joint test of theories relating to agency costs and auditor differentiation. Accounting Review, 63, 663–682.
• Francis, J.R., Maydew, L.E., & Sparks, H.C. (1999). The role of big 6 auditors in the credible reporting of accruals. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 18(2), 17–34.
• Gallizo, J. L., & Saladrigues, R. (2016). An analysis of determinants of going concern audit opinion: Evidence from Spain Stock Exchange. Intangible Capital, 12(1), 1–16.
• Geçici, E. (2025). Denetim raporu gecikmesi üzerinde denetçi görüşünün, denetçi ve denetim şirketi değişiminin etkisi: BIST’te bir uygulama. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, 105, 75–96.
• Gonthier‐Besacier, N., & Schatt, A. (2007). Determinants of audit fees for French quoted firms. Managerial Auditing Journal, 22(2), 139–160.
• Goodwin-Stewart, J., & Kent, P. (2006). Relation between external audit fees, audit committee characteristics, and internal audit. Accounting & Finance, 46(3), 387–404.
• Gull, A.A., Atif, M., Issa, A., Usman, M., & Siddique, M.A. (2021). Female CEO succession and audit fees: Evidence from China. Managerial Auditing Journal, 36(3), 485–509.
• Günlük, M. (2023). Makyavelist eğilimler ve işlevsel olmayan denetim davranışı arasındaki ilişkide kuralsızlık davranışının aracı değişken etkisi: Bağımsız denetçiler üzerinde bir araştırma. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 15 (3), 2111–2127.
• Özer, G., Günlük, M. & Okutan, K. (2018). İç ve bağımsız denetçiler arasındaki ilişkilerin, üst yönetim desteğinin ve iç denetimin bağımsızlığının iç denetimin etkinliği üzerindeki etkileri. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 20 (Özel Sayı), 590-613.
• Güredin, E. (2014). Denetim ve Güvence Hizmetleri SMMM ve YMM’lere Yönelik İlkeler ve Teknikler. Türkmen Kitabevi, 14. Baskı.
• Habib, A. (2013). A meta-analysis of the determinants of modified audit opinion decisions. Managerial Auditing Journal, 28(3), 184–216.
• Hair, J.F.- R., Christian, M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–150.
• Hay, D. (2013). Further evidence from meta-analysis of audit fee research. International Journal of Auditing, 17(2), 162–176.
• Hoechle, D. (2007). Robust standard errors for panel regressions with cross-sectional dependence. The Stata Journal, 7(3), 281–312.
• Hoitash, R., Markelevich, A., & Barragato, C.A. (2007). Auditor fees and audit quality. Managerial Auditing Journal, 22(8), 761–786.
• Hoyle, J. (1978). Mandatory auditor rotation: The arguments and an alternative. Journal of Accountancy, 145(5), 69–78.
• Imen, F., & Anis, J. (2021). The moderating role of audit quality on the relationship between auditor reporting and earnings management: empirical evidence from Tunisia. EuroMed Journal of Business, 16(4), 416–430.
• Ittonen, K., & Peni, E. (2012). Auditor’s gender and audit fees. International Journal of Auditing, 16, 1–18.
• 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.
• Johnstone, K.M., & Bedard, J.C. (2001). Engagement planning, bid pricing, and client response in the market for initial attest engagements. The Accounting Review, 76(2), 199–220.
• Kinney, W.R. Jr., & Libby, R. (2002). The relation between auditors' fees for nonaudit services and earnings management: Discussion. The Accounting Review, 77 (Supplement: Quality of Earnings Conference (2002), 107–114.
• Kuntari, Y., Chariri, A., & Nurdhiana, N. (2017). The effect of auditor ethics, auditor experience, audit fees and auditor motivation on audit quality. Sriwijaya International Journal of Dynamic Economics and Business, 1(2), 203–218.
• Kwon, S.Y., Lim, Y.D., Simnett, R. (2010). Mandatory audit firm rotation and audit quality: Evidence from the Korean Audit Market. Unpublished paper, Korea University, 1–61.
• Lai, K.-W. (2009). Audit opinion and disclosure of audit fees. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 24(1), 91–114.
• Laitinen, E.K., & Laitinen, T. (2015). A probability tree model of audit quality. European Journal of Operational Research, 243, 665–677.
• Li, C. (2009). Does client importance affect auditor independence at the office level? Empirical evidence from going‐concern opinions. Contemporary Accounting Research, 26(1), 201–230.
• Manita, R. & Elommal, N. (2010). The Quality of Audit Process: An empirical study with audit committees. Internatıonal Journal of Busıness,15(1), 87–99.
• Martínez, M.C.P., & Meca, E.G. (2014). Institutional directors and the quality of information: The role of directors appointed by banks. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22(4), 347–363.
• Mitra, S., Hossain, M., & Deis, D.R. (2007). The empirical relationship between ownership characteristics and audit fees. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 28(3), 257–285.
• Myers, J.N., Myers, L.A., & Omer, T.C. (2003). Exploring the term of the auditor‐client relationship and the quality of earnings: A case for mandatory auditor rotation?. The Accounting Review, 78(3), 779–799.
• Nagy, A. (2005). Mandatory audit firm turnover, financial reporting quality, and client bargaining power: The Case of Arthur Andersen. Accounting Horizons, 19(2), 51–68.
• Nelson, S.P., & Rusdi, N.F.M. (2015). Ownership structures influence on audit fee. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 5(4), 457–478.
• Nikkinen, J., & Sahlström, P. (2003). Do auditors assess the systematic market risk in their audit pricing decisions? International evidence. Advances in Accounting, 20, 233–244
• O’Sullivan, N. (1999). Board characteristics and audit pricing post-Cadbury: A research note. European Accounting Review, 8(2), 253–263.
• O'Keefe, T.B., Simunic, D.A., & Stein, M.T. (1994). The production of audit services: Evidence from a major public accounting firm. Journal of Accounting Research, 32, 241–261.
• Otley, D.T., & Pierce, B.J. (1996). Auditor time budget pressure: Consequences and antecedents. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 9(1), 31–58.
• Özcan, A. (2016). Determining factors affecting audit opinion: Evidence from Turkey. International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, 6(2), 45–62.
• Pamungkas, B., Ibtida, R., & Avrian, C. (2018). Factors influencing audit opinion of the Indonesian municipal governments’ financial statements. Cogent Business & Management, 5(1), 1540256.
• Pratt, J., & Stice, J.D. (1994).The effects of client characteristics on auditor litigation risk judgments, required audit evidence, and recommended audit fees. The Accounting Review, 69(October), 639–656.
• Raiborn, C., Schorg, C.A., Massoud, M. (2006). Should auditor rotation be mandatory?. Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, 17(4), 37–49.
• Salehi, M., Tarighi, H., & Rezanezhad, M. (2019). Empirical study on the effective factors of social responsibility disclosure of Iranian companies. Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies, 26, 34–55.
• Salehi, M., Zimon, G., Tarighi, H., & Gholamzadeh, J. (2022). The effect of mandatory audit firm rotation on earnings management and audit fees: Evidence from Iran. Journal of Risk and Financial Management 15(102), 1–20.
• Selimoğlu, S. K., Özbirecikli, M., & Uzay, Ş. (2019). Bağımsız Denetim-Türkiye Denetim Standartlarıyla Uyumlaştırılmış, Geliştirilmiş 3. Basım, Ankara, Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
• Sharma, D.S., Tanyi, P.N., & Litt, B.A. (2017). Costs of mandatory periodic audit partner rotation: Evidence from audit fees and audit timeliness. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 36(1), 129–149.
• Silva, A.S.V.C., Inácio, H.C., & Vieira, E., (2020). Determinants of audit fees for Portugal and Spain. Contaduríay Administració, 65(4), 1–24.
• Simunic, D. (1980). The pricing of audit services: Theory and evidence. Journal of Accounting Research, 18, 161–190.
• Simunic, D. A., & Stein, M. T. (1996). Impact of litigation risk on audit pricing: A review of the economics and the evidence. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 15, 119–134.
• Sultanoğlu, B., Mugan, C.Ş., Şekerdağ, U., & Oran, A. (2018). The auditor’s opinion modifications around domestic and global financial crises. Meditari Accountancy Research, 26(4), 622–639.
• Suryandari, D., & Mulyadi, H.D. (2021). The effect of audit tenure, audit rotation and client's company size on audit quality with audit fee as moderating variable. Accounting and Finance Studies, 1(3), 232–246.
• Suwaidan, M. (2010). Some determinants of audit fees: An empirical examination of companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange. Journal of King Abdulaziz University-Economics and Administration, 24(1): 49–86.
• Şen Kıymetli, İ., & Terzi, S. (2023). Denetçi cinsiyeti ile denetim ücreti arasındaki ilişki: Türkiye örneği. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 21(2), 129–140.
• Şenyiğit, Y.B., & Zeytinoğlu, E. (2014). Zorunlu denetçi rotasyonunun denetim kalitesi üzerindeki etkileri. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi İşletme İktisadı Enstitüsü Yönetim Dergisi, 25(77), 79–98.
• Tarighi, H., Salehi, M., Moradi, M., & Zimon, G. (2022). Social capital, intellectual capital, and audit fee: Conflicting evidence from Iran. Economies, 10(2), 1–42.
• Tsipouridou, M., & Spathis, C. (2014). Audit opinion and earnings management: Evidence from Greece. Accounting Forum, 38(1), 38–54.
• Tuan, K., Besen, R., & Saygı, A. (2019). Bağımsız denetimde kalite göstergeleri: Literatür incelemesi. Çukurova Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(2), 211–227.
• Uzay, Ş., & Köylü, Ç. (2018). Kilit denetim konuları: Borsa İstanbul üzerine bir araştırma. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 52, 47–70.
• Vafeas, N. (1999). Board meeting frequency and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 53(1), 113–142.
• Whisenant, S., Sankaraguruswamy, S., & Raghunandan, K. (2003). Evidence on the joint determination of audit and non-audit fees. Journal of Accounting Research, 41(4), 721–744.
• Wijaya, J.R.T., & Herwiyanti, E. (2023). A study of information asymmetryin financial research. The Indonesian Accounting Review, 13(1), 79–89.
• Wu, C.Y.H., Hsu, H.H., & Haslam, J. (2016). Audit committees, non-audit services, and auditor reporting decisions prior to failure. British Accounting Review, 48(2), 240–256.
• Xie, Z., Chun, C., & Jianming, Y. (2010). Abnormal audit fees and audit opinion- further evidence from China's capital market. China Journal of Accounting Research, 3, 51–70.
• Yatim, P., Kent, P., & Clarkson, P. (2006). Governance structures, ethnicity, and audit fees of Malaysian listed firms. Managerial Auditing Journal, 21(7), 757–782. Zhang, J.H. (2018). Accounting comparability, audit effort, and audit outcomes. Contemporary Accounting Research, 35(1), 245–276. Zhang, Y., Hay, D., & Holm, C. (2016). Non-audit services and auditor independence: Norwegian evidence. Cogent Business & Management, 3(1), 1215223.