隨著企業選擇雙邊掛牌時，公司將會面臨法律責任與執法環境的改變，進而影響到現存股東、會計師、其他與公司有利害關係者等等。過去已有文獻發現，公司在投資者保護較佳之境外雙邊掛牌導致其支付較高的審計公費。本研究主要目的為探討具有特殊審計市場背景的中國是否也能驗證出雙邊掛牌對審計公費的影響，故本研究以2001年至2010年中國上市公司所揭露的9,871筆境內審計公費資料，分析雙邊掛牌、會計師事務所規模品牌對境內審計公費的影響。 實證結果顯示，雙邊掛牌與境內審計公費呈顯著正相關。公司到投資者保護較佳之境外掛牌後，面臨到法律環境的轉變加上自身的融資需求，使公司願意支付較高的境內審計公費，取得較好的審計品質服務；另一方面，當客戶為雙邊掛牌公司時，境內會計師事務所面臨潛在的訴訟風險提升，亦會收取較高的審計公費。 本研究亦發現，Big4在中國可以取得較高的審計報酬，與先前文獻一致，但在雙邊掛牌樣本中，儘管Big4市占率高、具有品牌聲譽，相較於其它會計師事務所卻無法取得較高的境內審計報酬，進一步分析發現可能與雙邊掛牌公司必須遵循的雙重審計制度有關。Cross-listing typically causes a shift in the legal liability and enforcement regime, which, in turn, affects the interests of existing shareholders, auditors, and other stakeholders in the firm. Previous studies indicate that when firms are cross-listed in countries with stronger legal regimes will pay higher audit fee. However, how does cross-listing affect audit market in China? In this study, we use audit fee data from period 2001 to 2010 to research the relationship among cross-listing, audit size and audit fee. The empirical results show that china’s auditors charge higher domestic audit fee for firms that are cross-listed in countries with stronger legal regimes than they do for non-cross-listed firms. And then, we also find Big4 can charge higher audit fees than other accounting firms in China. This evidence proves the same finding as previous studies. But when the client is a cross-listed firm, Big4 can’t earn a significant audit fee premium. We further analysis find the reason may be is the policy of dual audit.
