The Changes of Audit Fees by Management Risk in firm

Author/s

Vihaan K. Mukherjee

Faculty of Management Department, ICFAI University Mizoram, Aizawl, Mizoram, India

Abstract

Audit cost greatly affects the freedom of review work and the nature of review report, which has excited numerous researchers’ exploration and discourse. Management Risk requires confirmed open bookkeepers to place endeavors in the current financial condition, investigate and assess the significance dimension of reviewing from different perspectives, for example, the industry circumstance, business exercises and inside control of undertakings, to decide the part with higher hazard dimension of examining and lead key evaluating. This article chooses A recorded organizations’ money related announcing information, building up review expenses and estimating business chance list of the relapse demonstrate, numerous relapse investigation. In the meantime, the impact of review expenses related file has carried on the experimental research. The exploration results show that: the advantage risk proportion and review expenses of recorded organizations are decidedly connected; money due turnover and net loan cost on deals are contrarily associated with review charges. What’s more, as indicated by the aftereffects of research and investigation, and recommendations.

Keywords

Audit cost, Accounting, Risk Management, and Risk level of auditing

To cite this article

Mukherjee, V. K. (2019). The Changes of Audit Fees by Management Risk in firm, International Journal of Management, and Social Sciences Review (IJMSSR). Vol. 3, No. 1, pp.13-18. Doi: 10.31219/osf.io/5angf

Copyright

Copyright © 2019 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

References

  1. Arndt, R. and Maguire, G. 1999. The risk identification and allocation project: A new frontier in understanding project risk allocation, Bench Mark, 5–7. Melbourne: Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance Newsletter. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bing, L., Tiong, R. L. K., Fan, W. W. and Chew, A. A. 1999. Risk management in international construction joint ventures. ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(4): 277–284. [Google Scholar]
  1. DeVellis, R. R. 2000. Scale Development – Theory and Practice, New Delhi: Sage ‘ Inc. [Google Scholar]
  2. Estache, A. and Strong, J. 2000. The rise, the fall and the emerging recovery of project finance in transport., World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2385 Washington, DC. [Google Scholar]
  3. Hair, J. F., Andersen, R. E., Tatham, R. L. and Black, W. C. 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis, New Jersey, , USA: Prentice-Hall International Inc. [Google Scholar]
  4. Indian Infrastructure. 1999. Policy impediments to financing: key concern of lenders, 1(7): 6–11. [Google Scholar]
  5. Kirkpatrick, L. A. and Feeney, B. C. 2001. A Simple Guide to SPSS for Windows, USA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. [Google Scholar]
  6. Levin, I. R. and Rubin, D. S. 1998. Data Analysis for Management, New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Pvt. Ltd. [Google Scholar]
  7. Raghuram, G., Jain, R., Sinha, S., Pangotra, P. and Morris, S. 1999. Infrastructure Development and Financing: Towards a Public Private Partnership, New Delhi: Macmillan India Limited. [Google Scholar]
  8. Salzmann, A. and Mohammed, S. 1999. Risk Identification Frameworks for International BOOT Project, Profitable Partnering in Construction Procurement, Edited by: Ogunlana, S. O. 475–486. London: E&F.N Spon Ltd. [Google Scholar]’
  9. Scott, W., Craig, D. P., Ian, U. and Don, O. Assessing risk attitude for improving visibility to project risk. Fourth European Project Management Conference. London: PMI Europe. [Google Scholar]
  10. Sharma, B. G. and Taunk, G. S. 1998. Construction of Udaipur bypass on Delhi-Jaipur-Udaipur-Ahmedabad N.H No.8 through private participation on BOT basis. Indian Road Congress Journal, 59(2): 193–222. [Google Scholar]
  11. Simon, P., Hillson, D. and Newland, K. 1997.  Risk Analysis and Management Guide, The Association of Project Management, UK: Norwich Norfolk. [Google Scholar]